Predictive validity of curriculum-based measurement and teacher ratings of academic achievement

Kettler, Ryan J.; Albers, Craig A.

doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2013.02.004

Cited by 21 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such decisions require screening measures with strong psychometric properties. Screening data that do not lead to valid and appropriate decisions may waste scarce resources and reduce the effectiveness of the services provided to all students (Catts, Petscher, Schatschneider, Bridges, & Mendoza, ; Kettler & Albers, ). Numerous factors must be considered when selecting screening measures.…”

Section: Considerations For Universal Screeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Positive and negative predictive values were not included in Kilgus et al.’s () study. Positive predictive values ranged from .41 to .86, and negative predictive values ranged from .52 to .96 in studies using ORF to predict performance on state accountability tests (e.g., Kettler & Albers, ; Shapiro, Keller, Lutz, Santoro, & Hintze, ; Stage & Jacobsen, ).…”

Section: Types Of Screening Measures Of Reading Skillsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of Predictive Validity and Diagnostic Accuracy of Screening Measures of Reading Skills

Klingbeil

McComas

Burns

et al. 2015

Psychology in the Schools

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessment data must be valid for the purpose for which educators use them. Establishing evidence of validity is an ongoing process that must be shared by test developers and test users. This study examined the predictive validity and the diagnostic accuracy of universal screening measures in reading. Scores on three different universal screening tools were compared for nearly 500 second-and third-grade students attending four public schools in a large urban district. Hierarchical regression and receiver operating characteristic curves were used to examine the criterion-related validity and diagnostic accuracy of students' oral reading fluency (ORF), Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System (BAS) scores, and fall scores from the Measures of Academic Progress for reading (MAP). Results indicated that a combination of all three measures accounted for 65% of the variance in spring MAP scores, whereas a reduced model of ORF and MAP scores predicted 60%. ORF and BAS scores did not meet standards for diagnostic accuracy. Combining the measures improved diagnostic accuracy, depending on how criterion scores were calculated. Implications for practice and future research are discussed. C 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

Section: Considerations For Universal Screeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Types Of Screening Measures Of Reading Skillsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Predictive Validity and Diagnostic Accuracy of Screening Measures of Reading Skills

Klingbeil

McComas

Burns

et al. 2015

Psychology in the Schools

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Data‐collection methods should be judged by the usefulness of the data collected. Studies in K–12 show good predictive validity of trust‐the‐faculty methods (Kettler and Albers 2013), and my own experience over 15 years and four institutions has been positive. At the first institution where we used this method, a continuous five‐year history of ratings of student writing was good enough to plausibly distinguish the effect of a writing lab intervention over time.…”

Section: The Need For New Methodsmentioning

confidence: 91%

Reassessing the Elephant, Part 1

Eubanks¹

2019

Assessment Update

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Teacher ratings have been proposed as both an efficient and cost-effective method of achieving such assessment (Glover & Albers, 2007;Kettler & Albers, 2013). Formal reading instruction occupies more time than any other activity in the first, second and third grades (Perfetti & Curtis, 1986) and reading success is of the highest priority within the Canadian education system (Council of Ministers of Education, Canada [CMEC], have access to various kinds of information about their students' home backgrounds and classroom behaviours that may contribute to their assessments.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Factors Contributing to Teacher Predictions of Spelling Ability, and the Accuracy of Their Assessments

Kolne

Gonnerman

Marquis

et al. 2016

L & L

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, teachers of kindergarten and grade one French-speaking students indicated the likelihood their students would develop later spelling difficulties. Results showed that language measures, language background, the education levels of parents, and home literacy practices predicted whether children would be identified as at-risk. Moreover, children's oral language skills accounted for even more of the variance in teacher ratings than other variables. Spelling performance assessed 1-year later from a subset of children indicated that the teacher predictions were accurate. Thus, teachers appear to be an effective source for predicting children's future literacy performance.

show abstract

Predictive validity of curriculum-based measurement and teacher ratings of academic achievement

Cited by 21 publications

References 33 publications

Comparison of Predictive Validity and Diagnostic Accuracy of Screening Measures of Reading Skills

Comparison of Predictive Validity and Diagnostic Accuracy of Screening Measures of Reading Skills

Reassessing the Elephant, Part 1

The Factors Contributing to Teacher Predictions of Spelling Ability, and the Accuracy of Their Assessments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About