A Curricular-Sampling Approach to Progress Monitoring

Abstract

Progress monitoring is an important component of effective instructional practice. Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is a form of progress monitoring that has been the focus of rigorous research. Two approaches for formulating CBM systems exist. The first is to assess performance regularly on a task that serves as a global indicator of competence at the relevant grade level. The second approach is to systematically sample the year-long curriculum so that each skill is represented and receives the same emphasis on each alternate form. In this article, the systematic curriculum sampling approach is illustrated for monitoring progress in mathematics concepts and applications systems. A description of the system's components, background, and technical properties is provided. Then, a sample case explains how the CBM system can be used in a special education setting to monitor progress, plan instruction, and enhance communication.

Examining an Online Content General Outcome Measure

“…A curriculum sampling approach (Fuchs, 2004; Fuchs et al, 2008) was used to create parallel forms. Terms in each probe were randomly selected from the full body of science terms by content unit.…”

“…This practice is not applicable for tests such as those evaluated in this study because use of readability indices would likely result in inaccurate estimates of the grade level of the fifth-grade science academic language. Developers of content-focused general outcome measures have incorporated curriculum sampling (Fuchs, 2004; Fuchs et al, 2008) into the probe development process. That is, probes have been developed with content included from each of the units in a curriculum domain.…”

“…Sets of brief, timed, parallel tests (or probes) are developed that sample from the content domain and produce scores that are validated for their assessment purposes. In general outcome measurement, tests are developed by either identifying robust indicators of curricular proficiency (e.g., the read-aloud measure developed and validated as part of curriculum-based measurement [CBM]; Deno, 488794A EIXXX10.1177/1534508413488794Assessment for Effective InterventionMooney et al Mirkin, & Chiang, 1982) or systematically sampling from the skills that comprise the annual curriculum (e.g., mathematics concepts and applications; Fuchs, Fuchs, & Zumeta, 2008) so that each test represents an equivalent snapshot of the grade-level curriculum (Fuchs, 2004). No matter the probe development approach, ongoing assessment using parallel forms of the curriculum domain is hypothesized to document student performance at a moment in time (performance) and/or growth over time (progress), offering data that are sensitive to instruction across time and, thus, formative in both design and practice.…”

Development and Preliminary Evaluation of an Adaptation of Word Identification Fluency for Beginning Readers in New Zealand

“…This study’s purpose was to develop and begin to evaluate a WIF task for use with beginning NZ readers. To increase the likelihood that words were those introduced during instruction, we used a curricular-sampling approach to design a NZ adaptation of WIF, systematically sampling from the annual curriculum to develop equivalent alternate forms (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Zumeta, 2008). We administered NZWIF to children in their second year of school (Year 2, equivalent to first grade).…”

Conceptual Replications of the Critical Content Monitoring General Outcome Measure in Science Content

“…One method identifies robust (and stronger in magnitude) indicators of curricular proficiency (e.g., oral reading fluency, ORF; Deno, Mirkin, & Chiang, 1982). An alternate method systematically samples from the skills/knowledge that comprise an annual curriculum (e.g., mathematics concepts and applications; L. S. Fuchs, Fuchs, & Zumeta, 2008).…”