Supporting valid decision making: Uses and misuses of assessment data within the context of RTI

Ball, Carrie R.; Christ, Theodore J.

doi:10.1002/pits.21592

Cited by 41 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Guidelines for academic progress monitoring are largely restricted to curriculum‐based measures (e.g., oral reading fluency; Ball & Christ, ). More recently, computer adaptive tests (CATs) have emerged as a potential tool for monitoring students’ response to academic support.…”

Section: Methods To Monitor Student Progress In Mathmentioning

confidence: 99%

Progress Monitoring With Computer Adaptive Assessments: The Impact of Data Collection Schedule on Growth Estimates

Nelson¹,

Norman

Klingbeil

et al. 2017

Psychol. Schs.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although extensive research exists on the use of curriculum‐based measures for progress monitoring, little is known about using computer adaptive tests (CATs) for progress‐monitoring purposes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of the frequency of data collection on individual and group growth estimates using a CAT. Data were available for 278 fourth‐ and fifth‐grade students. Growth estimates were obtained when five, three, and two data collections were available across 18 weeks. Data were analyzed by grade to evaluate any observed differences in growth. Further, root mean square error values were obtained to evaluate differences in individual student growth estimates across data collection schedules. Group‐level estimates of growth did not differ across data collection schedules; however, growth estimates for individual students varied across the different schedules of data collection. Implications for using CATs to monitor student progress at the individual or group level are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Methods To Monitor Student Progress In Mathmentioning

confidence: 99%

Progress Monitoring With Computer Adaptive Assessments: The Impact of Data Collection Schedule on Growth Estimates

Nelson¹,

Norman

Klingbeil

et al. 2017

Psychol. Schs.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Universal screening represents the primary way for identifying such students (Glover and Albers 2007). Universal screening results in data and, within the RTI framework, data-based decision making is essential (Ball and Christ 2012).…”

Section: Universal Screeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning Disabilities/Special Education

Hosp

Huddle

Ford

et al. 2015

Handbook of Response to Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Special education has a long tradition of valuing a continuum of placements and services to meet individual students' needs (Deno 1970). The alignment with response to intervention (RTI) and the provision of evidence-based intervention is strong. In this chapter, we discuss the research base and characteristics of RTI as they relate to students with learning disabilities (LD) and special education services in general. We discuss RTI as both a system of educational service delivery as well as a method for determining eligibility for special education services as a student with LD. Both definitions and approaches are important to examining the intersection of RTI and special education and there is a good amount of overlap.The authors begin this chapter with definitions of some of the key terms that are important to the treatment of the topic throughout the rest of the chapter. Next, the research base in relation to some key components of RTI and how they link to the needs of students with LD and the provision of special education services are presented. These include (a) eligibility and exit determinations, (b) tiered delivery of services, (c) evidencebased practices (EBPs), (d) universal screening, and (e) progress monitoring. Finally, some directions for future research in this area that are derived from prior research and gaps therein as well as implications of the current research base for the implementation of RTI are provided. Definitions• Aptitude-achievement discrepancy: A method for identifying students with LD. It includes comparing a student's performance on a standardized, norm-referenced achievement test to a test of cognitive ability. A student is determined to have a LD if his/her achievement score is less than would be predicted given his/her cognitive ability. The RTI framework can be used as an alternative method for identifying students with LD.• Child Find: A federal mandate that requires school districts to locate, identify, and evaluate children with disabilities, from birth to age 21, to ensure provision of a free and appropriate public education through special education and/or related services.• Curriculum-based measurement (CBM): A measurement system which uses instruments and metrics highly associated with the curriculum a student is expected to learn. Thus, little inference is required regarding the determination of students' skill level.• Evidence-based practices (EBPs): Instructional practices that are supported by high-

show abstract

“…Students read a passage aloud for 1 min while an examiner records errors, utilizing the number of words read correctly per minute (WRCM) as the outcome score. Although researchers originally developed CBM-R more than 30 years ago to assist special education teachers in establishing individual education goals and evaluating individual students' progress toward their goals (Deno, 2003), it is now widely used in universal screening within RtI models (Ball & Christ, 2012). A primary benefit of CBM-R is that it is a general outcome measure; as such, it assesses global proficiency within a curriculum across the year, instead of assessing mastery of a set of hierarchically organized subskills (Fuchs & Deno, 1991).…”

Section: Cbm In Reading (Cbm-r)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Technical Adequacy and Acceptability of Curriculum-Based Measurement and the Measures of Academic Progress

January

Ardoin

2015

Assessment for Effective Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Curriculum-based measurement in reading (CBM-R) and the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) are assessment tools widely employed for universal screening in schools. Although a large body of research supports the validity of CBM-R, limited empirical evidence exists supporting the technical adequacy of MAP or the acceptability of either measure for universal screening. Purposes of the current study were to replicate and extend prior research by (a) examining the extent to which CBM-R performance measures more than word reading skills, (b) evaluating the concurrent validity of MAP with CBM-R, (c) determining the potential benefit of administering MAP with CBM-R for universal screening, and (d) examining teachers’ acceptability of MAP and CBM-R. Participants included 802 students in Grades 1 to 5 who were administered three CBM-R probes and the MAP during universal screening and 86 elementary teachers who completed a universal screening assessments survey. Results provide evidence of the concurrent validity of MAP with CBM-R and suggest both measures are acceptable to teachers. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

show abstract

Supporting valid decision making: Uses and misuses of assessment data within the context of RTI

Cited by 41 publications

References 36 publications

Progress Monitoring With Computer Adaptive Assessments: The Impact of Data Collection Schedule on Growth Estimates

Progress Monitoring With Computer Adaptive Assessments: The Impact of Data Collection Schedule on Growth Estimates

Learning Disabilities/Special Education

Technical Adequacy and Acceptability of Curriculum-Based Measurement and the Measures of Academic Progress

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About