A Comparison of Math Curriculum-Based Measurement Modalities for English Language Learners

Autor/inn/en	Aspiranti, Kathleen B.; Ebner, Sara; Reynolds, Jennifer L.; Henze, Erin E. C.
Titel	A Comparison of Math Curriculum-Based Measurement Modalities for English Language Learners
Quelle	In: Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 27 (2022) 2, S.147-160 (14 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1082-4669
DOI	10.1080/10824669.2021.2016408
Schlagwörter	Comparative Analysis; Mathematics Instruction; Curriculum Based Assessment; English Language Learners; Hispanic American Students; Graphs; Mathematics Skills; Scores; Cues; Mathematics Tests; Test Format; Computer Assisted Testing; Handheld Devices; Student Attitudes; Elementary School Students; Urban Schools + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Mathematics lessons; Mathematikunterricht; Hispanic; Hispanic Americans; Student; Students; Hispanoamerikaner; Schüler; Schülerin; Studentin; Grafische Darstellung; Mathmatics achievement; Mathematics ability; Mathematische Kompetenz; Stichwort; Testentwicklung; Schülerverhalten; Urban area; Urban areas; School; Schools; Stadtregion; Stadt; Schule
Abstract	There is a lack of research examining the use of curriculum-based measurements (CBMs) with special populations, particularly English Language Learners (ELLs). The current study used an alternating treatments single-case design with five Latinx ELL students to examine scores across three math fluency CBM modalities. One-minute probes using either traditional paper-pencil, iPad with a stylus, and iPad with a keyboard were alternated, with students taking two assessments per day. Visual analysis of time-series graphs suggested that most students answered more questions correctly on paper-pencil probes compared to either iPad modalities; scores on iPad with stylus were higher than iPad with keyboard for all students. Non-overlap of all pairs effect sizes indicated small to large differences between probe modalities. All students preferred the traditional paper-pencil probes to either iPad modality. Discussion focuses on the implications for educators using CBMs of different modalities for ELL students. (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