Generalizability Theory Reliability of Written Expression Curriculum-Based Measurement in Universal Screening

Autor/inn/en	Keller-Margulis, Milena A.; Mercer, Sterett H.; Thomas, Erin L.
Titel	Generalizability Theory Reliability of Written Expression Curriculum-Based Measurement in Universal Screening
Quelle	In: School Psychology Quarterly, 31 (2016) 3, S.383-392 (10 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1045-3830
DOI	10.1037/spq0000126
Schlagwörter	Generalizability Theory; Reliability; Written Language; Curriculum Based Assessment; Screening Tests; Student Evaluation; Elementary School Students; Error of Measurement; Scores; Writing Evaluation; At Risk Students; Data Analysis; Scoring Rubrics; Benchmarking; Texas (Houston) + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Reliabilität; Geschriebene Sprache; Screening-Verfahren; Schulnote; Studentische Bewertung; Messfehler; Auswertung; Scoring formulas; Auswertungsbogen
Abstract	The purpose of this study was to examine the reliability of written expression curriculum-based measurement (WE-CBM) in the context of universal screening from a generalizability theory framework. Students in second through fifth grade (n = 145) participated in the study. The sample included 54% female students, 49% White students, 23% African American students, 17% Hispanic students, 8% Asian students, and 3% of students identified as 2 or more races. Of the sample, 8% were English Language Learners and 6% were students receiving special education. Three WE-CBM probes were administered for 7 min each at 3 time points across 1 year. Writing samples were scored for commonly used WE-CBM metrics (e.g., correct minus incorrect word sequences; CIWS). Results suggest that nearly half the variance in WE-CBM is related to unsystematic error and that conventional screening procedures (i.e., the use of one 3-min sample) do not yield scores with adequate reliability for relative or absolute decisions about student performance. In most grades, three 3-min writing samples (or 2 longer duration samples) were required for adequate reliability for relative decisions, and three 7-min writing samples would not yield adequate reliability for relative decisions about within-year student growth. Implications and recommendations are discussed. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01