Relative Efficacy of Teacher Rankings and Curriculum-Based Measures as Predictors of Performance on High-Stakes Tests

Autor/inn/en	Mingo, Maya A.; Bell, Sherry Mee; McCallum, R. Steve; Walpitage, D. Lakmal
Titel	Relative Efficacy of Teacher Rankings and Curriculum-Based Measures as Predictors of Performance on High-Stakes Tests
Quelle	In: Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 38 (2020) 2, S.147-167 (21 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Mingo, Maya A.)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0734-2829
DOI	10.1177/0734282919831103
Schlagwörter	Curriculum Based Assessment; Predictor Variables; High Stakes Tests; At Risk Students; Reading Achievement; Mathematics Achievement; Scores; Response to Intervention; Educational Testing; Identification; Elementary School Students; Emergent Literacy; Reading Fluency; Reading Tests; Mathematics Tests; Achievement Tests; Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Prädiktor; Leseleistung; Mathmatics sikills; Mathmatics achievement; Mathematical ability; Mathematische Kompetenz; Identifikation; Identifizierung; Frühleseunterricht; Lesetest; Achievement test; Achievement; Testing; Test; Tests; Leistungsbeurteilung; Leistungsüberprüfung; Leistung; Testdurchführung; Testen
Abstract	Data from 403 third graders were analyzed to determine relative and combined efficacy of group-administered Curriculum-Based Measures (CBMs) and Teacher Rankings of student reading and math performance taken early in the school year to predict end-of-year achievement scores. Teacher Rankings added to the power of CBMs to predict reading (R2 change = 0.18) and math (R2 change = 0.22). Combined CBMs and Teacher Rankings predicted at-risk status in reading (82%) and math (86%), based on logistic regression, and yielded strong area under the curve (AUC) statistics, defining risk status 0.88 (reading) and 0.82 (math). Surprisingly, Teacher Rankings yielded higher correlations with end-of-year scores than CBMs. Findings support using rankings as a simple, efficient strategy to add to the predictive power of CBMs readily available within a response to intervention (RTI) context and depicts a methodology school personnel can use to determine the relative/combined predictive power of CBMs and rankings. Of note, predictions based on Teacher Rankings vary across end-of-year performance levels. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: http://sagepub.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01