Comparing Slope Stability and Validity for General Outcome and Specific Subskill Mastery Measurement

Autor/inn/en	Filderman, Marissa J.; Barnard-Brak, Lucy
Titel	Comparing Slope Stability and Validity for General Outcome and Specific Subskill Mastery Measurement
Quelle	In: Journal of Applied School Psychology, 39 (2023) 1, S.71-90 (20 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1537-7903
DOI	10.1080/15377903.2021.2012863
Schlagwörter	Progress Monitoring; Outcome Measures; Curriculum Based Assessment; Mastery Learning; Data; Decision Making; Charter Schools; Reading Difficulties; Reading Improvement; Intervention; Psychometrics + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Daten; Decision-making; Entscheidungsfindung; Charter school; Charter-Schule; Reading difficulty; Leseschwierigkeit; Psychometry; Psychometrie
Abstract	Progress monitoring data are central to making informed decisions on intervention intensification for struggling learners. The general outcome measure (GOM) of curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency (CBM-R) has been found to correlate with high-stakes assessment; however, data are highly variable, resulting in decisions that must be made 15 weeks after implementation of intervention. Recent researchers have recommended the use of both GOM and specific subskill mastery measurement (SSMM) to overcome the challenges presented with the use of GOM alone, but research on the efficacy of this approach is limited. Using Bayesian and ordinary least squares regression, we compared the GOM of CBM-R with SSMM slopes for words read correctly per minute (wcpm) per week at 5, 7, and 12 weeks, and explored the relation of the respective slopes with subsequent standardized assessment tools for struggling upper elementary students receiving word reading intervention. We found that the SSMM had a similar slope to that noted in prior research (i.e., [beta] = 1.46 wcpm per week). This slope was significant and related to future standardized assessment outcomes across the various time points. The slope for CBM-R was not significant or related to future assessment outcomes. Implications for research and practice are discussed. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01