This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Graney, S. B. Articles by Aricak, O. T. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Universal Screening of Reading in Late Elementary School: R-CBM Versus CBM Maze

¹ Rochester Institute of Technology
² Indiana University
³ University of Kentucky
⁴ Trakya University, Edirne

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: sbggsp{at}rit.edu.

	Abstract

Two curriculum-based measurement tools are commonly used to assess progress in reading in elementary school: R-CBM and CBM maze. R-CBM is used in practice more frequently than CBM maze is, although CBM maze is more time efficient to administer than R-CBM is. The technical adequacy of each of these measures has been reported in the literature; however, a comparative analysis of their technical adequacy has not been published. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the technical adequacy of R-CBM and CBM maze to inform their use in a universal screening program of reading in fourth and fifth grades. Results suggest evidence of short- and long-term alternate forms reliability, criterion validity, and predictive validity for both R-CBM and CBM maze, supporting the possibility that the two measures are comparable for use in universal screening at those grade levels.

First published on September 23, 2009
Remedial and Special Education 2009, doi:10.1177/0741932509338371


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?