IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/vjerxx/v108y2015i6p492-503.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting Proficiency on Statewide Assessments: A Comparison of Curriculum-Based Measures in Middle School

Author

Listed:
  • Nathan A. Stevenson

Abstract

A key tool in multitiered systems of support is the use of curriculum-based measures to predict which students are at risk for academic failure. However, there are few studies that examine which measures are most suitable for students in middle school. The authors examine the reliability of predicting outcomes on state assessments for 3 commonly used curriculum-based measures at the middle school level. Data were collected from a middle school in the Midwest that regularly administers 3 different curriculum-based measures. Reading Curriculum-Based Measure (R-CBM), Maze, and Multiple-Choice Reading Comprehension (MCRC) were given to students in Grades 7 ( n = 238) and 8 ( n = 256). Logistic regression was used to examine each measure in predicting outcomes on the Michigan Education Assessment Program Reading assessment. Results indicated that MCRC more accurately predicted outcomes than R-CBM or maze (Grade 7 e-super- β = 1.75, Grade 8 e-super- β = 1.68). Limitations and recommendations for future research are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Nathan A. Stevenson, 2015. "Predicting Proficiency on Statewide Assessments: A Comparison of Curriculum-Based Measures in Middle School," The Journal of Educational Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 108(6), pages 492-503, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:vjerxx:v:108:y:2015:i:6:p:492-503
    DOI: 10.1080/00220671.2014.910161
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00220671.2014.910161
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00220671.2014.910161?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:vjerxx:v:108:y:2015:i:6:p:492-503. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/vjer20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.