View in EDS

A Comparison of Two Content Area Curriculum-Based Measurement Tools

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: A Comparison of Two Content Area Curriculum-Based Measurement Tools
Language: English
Authors: Ford, Jeremy W., Conoyer, Sarah J., Lembke, Erica S., Smith, R. Alex, Hosp, John L.
Source: Assessment for Effective Intervention. Mar 2018 43(2):121-127.
Availability: SAGE Publications and Hammill Institute on Disabilities. 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
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 7
Publication Date: 2018
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Grade 8
Descriptors: Curriculum Based Assessment, Evaluation Methods, Measurement Techniques, Comparative Analysis, Methods Research, Test Format, Grade 8, Science Tests, Criterion Referenced Tests, Test Reliability, Test Validity, Statistical Analysis
DOI: 10.1177/1534508417736753
ISSN: 1534-5084
Abstract: In the present study, two types of curriculum-based measurement (CBM) tools in science, Vocabulary Matching (VM) and Statement Verification for Science (SV-S), a modified Sentence Verification Technique, were compared. Specifically, this study aimed to determine whether the format of information presented (i.e., SV-S vs. VM) produces differences in alternate form reliability and validity of scores or any differences in accuracy of prediction of scores on the state standardized science assessment. Overall, 25 eighth-grade science students were administered two SV-S and two VM forms with identical items along with spring eighth-grade maze passages from Aimsweb. Students had recently taken the eighth-grade state science test. Results regarding technical adequacy for each CBM tool were consistent with past findings. However, this study extends the literature base on CBM tools in science by providing evidence for using standards to develop VM forms. In addition, despite probable ceiling effects, additional evidence was found for the potential of SV-S as a CBM tool in science.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 25
Entry Date: 2018
Accession Number: EJ1169688
Database: ERIC
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1169688
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: A Comparison of Two Content Area Curriculum-Based Measurement Tools
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ford%2C+Jeremy+W%2E%22">Ford, Jeremy W.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Conoyer%2C+Sarah+J%2E%22">Conoyer, Sarah J.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lembke%2C+Erica+S%2E%22">Lembke, Erica S.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Smith%2C+R%2E+Alex%22">Smith, R. Alex</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hosp%2C+John+L%2E%22">Hosp, John L.</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Assessment+for+Effective+Intervention%22"><i>Assessment for Effective Intervention</i></searchLink>. Mar 2018 43(2):121-127.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: SAGE Publications and Hammill Institute on Disabilities. 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
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 7
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2018
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Grade+8%22">Grade 8</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Based+Assessment%22">Curriculum Based Assessment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+Methods%22">Evaluation Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Measurement+Techniques%22">Measurement Techniques</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Comparative+Analysis%22">Comparative Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Methods+Research%22">Methods Research</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+Format%22">Test Format</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grade+8%22">Grade 8</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Science+Tests%22">Science Tests</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Criterion+Referenced+Tests%22">Criterion Referenced Tests</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+Reliability%22">Test Reliability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+Validity%22">Test Validity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Statistical+Analysis%22">Statistical Analysis</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1177/1534508417736753
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1534-5084
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: In the present study, two types of curriculum-based measurement (CBM) tools in science, Vocabulary Matching (VM) and Statement Verification for Science (SV-S), a modified Sentence Verification Technique, were compared. Specifically, this study aimed to determine whether the format of information presented (i.e., SV-S vs. VM) produces differences in alternate form reliability and validity of scores or any differences in accuracy of prediction of scores on the state standardized science assessment. Overall, 25 eighth-grade science students were administered two SV-S and two VM forms with identical items along with spring eighth-grade maze passages from Aimsweb. Students had recently taken the eighth-grade state science test. Results regarding technical adequacy for each CBM tool were consistent with past findings. However, this study extends the literature base on CBM tools in science by providing evidence for using standards to develop VM forms. In addition, despite probable ceiling effects, additional evidence was found for the potential of SV-S as a CBM tool in science.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 25
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2018
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1169688
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1169688
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1177/1534508417736753
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 7
        StartPage: 121
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Curriculum Based Assessment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Evaluation Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Measurement Techniques
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Comparative Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Methods Research
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Test Format
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Grade 8
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Science Tests
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Criterion Referenced Tests
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Test Reliability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Test Validity
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Statistical Analysis
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: A Comparison of Two Content Area Curriculum-Based Measurement Tools
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ford, Jeremy W.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Conoyer, Sarah J.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Lembke, Erica S.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Smith, R. Alex
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hosp, John L.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 03
              Type: published
              Y: 2018
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1534-5084
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 43
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Assessment for Effective Intervention
              Type: main
ResultId 1