Progress monitoring in oral reading fluency within the context of RTI.

Abstract

Selecting appropriate measures to make decisions about child response to intervention is a key concern. The most commonly used assessment tool in response to intervention (RTI) models is curriculum-based measurement (CBM). However, an issue related to the use of CBM is the identification of measures that are of similar difficulty. To the degree that variation in performance across measurement occasions can be attributed to anything other than student learning, errors in judgment about student RTI may be made. The purpose of this study was to examine the accuracy and efficiency of using a single CBM passage for progress monitoring at key intervals during individual reading intervention compared to using several passages that had been individually equated. Results indicated that decisions made based on a standard passage did not differ from decisions made based on scores obtained on the individually equated passages but were much more cost efficient.

The efficiency of behavior rating scales to assess inattentive–overactive and oppositional–defiant behaviors: Applying generalizability theory to streamline assessment

“…In this manner, an intervention requiring the fewest number of instructional minutes per unit of change is considered to be most efficient. The concept of efficiency also has been applied to academic assessment (Griffiths, VanDerHeyden, Skokut, & Lilles, 2009) and behavioral assessment (Volpe et al, 2009; Volpe & Gadow, in press), wherein the psychometric properties of more time-intensive assessment approaches have been compared to less time-intensive approaches. Here, if a less time-intensive method reaches the threshold for reliability or validity, it can be chosen over the more time-intensive method.…”

Motivation and self‐regulation assessments: Professional practices and needs of school psychologists

“…Reading referrals were clearly the most frequent type of referral reported by school psychologists. This finding is consistent with the large volumes of research in school psychology devoted to reading assessments and evidence‐based reading interventions (Baker, Gersten, & Grossen, 2002; Griffiths, Vanderheyden, Skokut, & Lilles, 2009; Shinn, 2008). Despite the heightened attention placed on both reading‐ and math‐based interventions in recent years, approximately 20% of the psychologists sampled in the current study indicated that professional development training in academic skills interventions was their top priority or most important area of need (see Table 6).…”

An Independent Evaluation of the Technical Features of the Basic Reading Inventory

“…One third of the sessions were audio recorded and checked for procedural integrity and interscorer agreement (Griffiths et al, 2009). The PI used an integrity checklist to determine whether all of the required procedures were followed.…”