An Investigation of the Validity and Utility of Two Curriculum-Based Measurement Writing Tasks

Ritchey, Kristen D.; Coker, David L.

doi:10.1080/10573569.2013.741957

Cited by 43 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The limited variability in slope suggests that students stayed in the same position relative to each other across the year. This finding is consistent with the findings of Ritchey and Coker (2013) for growth across the spring se mester and has significant implications for the use of WE-CBM for progress monitoring, where one would expect growth to differ across students and based on initial level of perfor mance. In addition, comparison of the linear slope estimates in this study with the growth rates at the 50th percentile from AIMSweb (Pearson, 2014) indicates that this sample showed higher average growth at all grade lev els on TWW and CWS with the exception of CWS for second grade where average growth in this study (.38) was quite similar to AIMSweb (.33) and in fact, the linear model was the best fitting model for this indicator and grade level.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Measuring annual growth using written expression curriculum-based measurement: An examination of seasonal and gender differences.

Keller‐Margulis

Mercer

Payan

et al. 2015

School Psychology Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to examine annual growth patterns and gender differences in written expression curriculum-based measurement (WE-CBM) when used in the context of universal screening. Students in second through fifth grade (n = 672) from 2 elementary schools that used WE-CBM as a universal screener participated in the study. Student writing samples were scored for production-dependent, production-independent, and accurate-production indicators. Results of latent growth models indicate that for most WE-CBM outcome indicators across most grade levels, average growth was curvilinear, with increasing curvilinearity on all indicators as grade level increased. Evidence of gender differences was mixed with girls having higher initial scores on all WE-CBM indicators except for total words written (second and third grades), correct minus incorrect writing sequences (fourth grade only), and percent correct writing sequences (second-fourth grades) where differences were not statistically significant. Despite differences in initial level, there were few gender differences in growth and limited overall between-student variability in linear slope. The results of this study extend research on annual patterns of growth and gender differences in WE-CBM by analyzing all 3 types of WE-CBM indicators, including upper elementary grades, and assessing skills more frequently (i.e., 4 to 5 times in 1 year) than in prior research on annual growth. The findings have implications for universal screening in WE-CBM and for understanding gender differences in writing performance.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Measuring annual growth using written expression curriculum-based measurement: An examination of seasonal and gender differences.

Keller‐Margulis

Mercer

Payan

et al. 2015

School Psychology Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Picture Story Writing (Ritchey & Coker, ) is a CBM task for writing that was developed to be appropriate for students in first to third grades. The task includes a three‐picture sequence (e.g., a picture of a dog covered with mud, a picture of a dog getting a bath, and a picture of a clean dog), and students are asked to write about what happens in the story and are given up to 5 min.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similar to Sentence Writing, Picture Story was scored for production (WW, TCS, CWS), and scored using a qualitative score. For this qualitative score, a rubric scoring system (described in Ritchey & Coker, ) included criteria for (1) content of the response, (2) response quality, (3) descriptive words, (4) transition words, (5) grammatical structure, (6) mechanics, and (7) spelling. Each component earned zero to three points, for a total of 21 possible points.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying Writing Difficulties in First Grade: An Investigation of Writing and Reading Measures

Ritchey

Coker

2014

Learn Disabil Res Pract

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early identification of students who are at risk for writing difficulties is an important first step in improving writing performance. First grade students (N = 150) were administered a set of early writing measures and reading measures in January. Sentence Writing Quality and Oral Reading Fluency demonstrated strong classification accuracy when a Teacher Rating was used to identify which students had writing difficulties (AUC > .90), and the combined measures yielded sensitivity and specificity indices exceeding 0.90. The combined reading and writing measures yielded AUCs of a higher magnitude than those associated with individual measures when norm‐referenced writing subtests were used to identify which students had writing difficulties (AUC in .80 range). The findings suggest that it may be possible to accurately identify which students may be at risk for writing difficulties within first grade.

show abstract

“…Studies have indicated that tasks involving letter‐, word‐, and sentence‐level copying, dictation, and novel writing, where participants generate their own sentences instead of copying or taking dictation, are more reliable and valid for Kindergarten through third grade as compared with the late elementary grades (Coker & Ritchey, ; Lembke et al, ; McMaster & Campbell, ; McMaster et al, ; Ritchey, ; Ritchey & Coker, , ). Ritchey () found that letter writing, sound spelling, and word spelling were reliable ( r = 0.89–0.92) and valid ( r = 0.27–0.81) tasks to measure writing skills in Kindergarten at a single point in time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scoring measures of word dictation curriculum‐based measurement in writing: Effects of incremental administration

Poch

Allen

Lembke

2018

Psychology in the Schools

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spelling has been identified as a key transcription skill that emerges during the elementary years as students learn how to write and subsequently develop fluency with writing, making the assessment of spelling a critical component of evaluation systems within schools. This includes the use of curriculum‐based measures of writing (CBM‐W). This study examined the extent to which word dictation CBM‐W administered during the Fall, Winter, and Spring of an academic year maintained technical adequacy across 1‐min time intervals in grades 1–3. Results revealed moderate predictive and concurrent validity estimates with the Spelling subtest of the Weschler Individual Achievement Test‐III. Statistically significant differences existed between and within grade levels across each minute of administration and across Fall, Winter, and Spring time points for all scoring procedures.

show abstract

An Investigation of the Validity and Utility of Two Curriculum-Based Measurement Writing Tasks

Cited by 43 publications

References 32 publications

Measuring annual growth using written expression curriculum-based measurement: An examination of seasonal and gender differences.

Measuring annual growth using written expression curriculum-based measurement: An examination of seasonal and gender differences.

Identifying Writing Difficulties in First Grade: An Investigation of Writing and Reading Measures

Scoring measures of word dictation curriculum‐based measurement in writing: Effects of incremental administration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About