Estimates of the Standard Error of Measurement for Curriculum-Based Measures of Oral Reading Fluency

Christ, Theodore J.; Silberglitt, Benjamin

doi:10.1080/02796015.2007.12087956

Cited by 84 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As the current results suggest, it is plausible for the SEM to be high enough such that the FDR and/or FNR may render BEA invalid, regardless of implementation design. These results fit within a history of research highlighting the consequences of probe variability on decision making (Christ & Silberglitt, 2007; Christ et al, 2013; Poncy et al, 2005).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…These results again highlight the importance of the SEM when appraising CBMs (Christ & Silberglitt, 2007; Poncy et al, 2005). Simply put, the value of the SEM relative to the mean is what fueled these dramatic differences in error rates.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

“…The SEM is defined presently as S D 1 − r A F , where SD is the standard deviation of the sample and r A F is the measure’s alternate forms reliability. Logically, the greater the SEM relative to the mean, the more uncertainty there will be of the student’s true score (Christ & Silberglitt, 2007; coefficient of variation). The SEM of CBM, and therefore the accuracy of SPA, varies across grade level and CBM type (see Table 1).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Researchers have cautioned that there is considerable error in the point estimation of CBM, with estimates commonly ranging from eight to 11 words correct per minute (WCPM) in the case of oral reading fluency (ORF; Christ, Monaghen, Zopluoglu, & Van Norman, 2012; Christ & Silberglitt, 2007; Poncy, Skinner, & Axtell, 2005). For example, if a second-grade student scored 55 wcpm on a skill condition ORF probe, the 20% threshold would be 66 wcpm for decision-making with BEA.…”

Section: Effect Of Probe Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, based on an estimate of the SEM of such a probe (11.29 wcpm; Dynamic Measurement Group, 2013), an 80% confidence interval for this datum extends to 69 wcpm. Importantly, the SEM of CBM varies by grade, as well as by CBM (i.e., math or reading; Christ & Silberglitt, 2007; Christ, Zopluoglu, Monaghen, & Van Norman, 2013; Seethaler & Fuchs, 2011; Shapiro, Edwards, & Zigmond, 2005), suggesting there is no fixed precision that should be assumed across BEAs. Interventionists are likely unaware that such uncertainty exists, given that relevant graphs typically do not contain a visual depiction of this range.…”

Section: Effect Of Probe Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

False Discovery Rates When Engaging in Skill Versus Performance Deficit Analysis for Academic Instructional Planning

Solomon

Dawes

Duhon

et al. 2018

Assessment for Effective Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brief experimental analysis (BEA) is a well-researched approach to conducting problem analysis, where potential interventions are pilot tested using a single-subject alternating treatment design. However, its brevity may lead to a high frequency of decision-making errors, particularly in situations where one tested condition is rarely optimal for students (i.e., the base rate). The current study explored the accuracy of a specific variant of BEA, skill versus performance deficit analysis (SPA), across different variations of the basic BEA design, score difference thresholds, and reading and math curriculum-based measurements (CBMs). Findings indicate that the ABAB design provides a reasonable control of such error rates when using reading CBM, whereas subtraction CBM required the use of an ABABAB design. Such error rates could not be controlled, regardless of design, when using multiplication CBM. Implications for best practice in the use of BEA are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Effect Of Probe Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Effect Of Probe Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

False Discovery Rates When Engaging in Skill Versus Performance Deficit Analysis for Academic Instructional Planning

Solomon

Dawes

Duhon

et al. 2018

Assessment for Effective Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Teachers' judgments of students' early literacy skills measured by the Early Literacy Skills Assessment: Comparisons of teachers with and without assessment administration experience

Begeny

Buchanan

2010

Psychology in the Schools

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teacher judgments about students' academic abilities are important for several reasons, including their day‐to‐day instructional decision making. Not surprisingly, previous studies have investigated the accuracy of teachers' judgments about their students' reading abilities. Previous research, however, has not investigated teachers' judgments about students' early literacy skills, nor has previous research systematically examined how teachers' training and use of an objective assessment instrument impact their judgments of students' performance on that instrument. This exploratory study offers the first investigation of teachers' judgment accuracy of pre‐kindergarten students' early literacy skills, and compares the judgment accuracy of teachers with and without opportunities to administer the Early Literacy Skills Assessment (ELSA). Findings suggest that teachers with opportunities to administer the ELSA had a significantly higher percentage of accurate judgments across half of the ELSA subtests, but their judgment accuracy was still no better than 50%–60% on all but one ELSA subtest. Implications for school psychologist practitioners and researchers are presented. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

Improving Latino, English language learners' reading fluency: The effects of small‐group and one‐on‐one intervention

Ross

Begeny

2011

Psychology in the Schools

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reading fluency is a critical yet commonly neglected component of early reading instruction. For the large percentage of English language learners (ELLs) who are struggling with or at risk for reading difficulties, there is insufficient research available to help educators implement time‐efficient interventions with these students. Using an experimental design common in field‐based research, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the differential effects of a one‐on‐one (1/1) and small‐group (SG) reading fluency intervention, both implemented with Spanish‐speaking ELLs. Using three forms of data‐analytic strategies (visual analysis, standard error of measurement, and randomization tests), results showed that nearly all students benefitted from the 1/1 intervention, and two students clearly benefitted from the SG intervention. Standardized reading assessments also demonstrated the positive impact of students receiving the interventions. Implications of these findings are primarily discussed with respect to school‐based practice. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

Estimates of the Standard Error of Measurement for Curriculum-Based Measures of Oral Reading Fluency

Cited by 84 publications

References 0 publications

False Discovery Rates When Engaging in Skill Versus Performance Deficit Analysis for Academic Instructional Planning

False Discovery Rates When Engaging in Skill Versus Performance Deficit Analysis for Academic Instructional Planning

Teachers' judgments of students' early literacy skills measured by the Early Literacy Skills Assessment: Comparisons of teachers with and without assessment administration experience

Improving Latino, English language learners' reading fluency: The effects of small‐group and one‐on‐one intervention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About