Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is a useful tool for both general and special educators to evaluate and improve student achievement. Although it is backed by more than 30 years of research and validation, particularly in reading, many teachers still do not use CBM in their classrooms. Historically, the use of CBM to guide instructional changes is more familiar to special education teachers than to general education teachers. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of CBM, along with a graphic organizer worksheet, to help teachers get started with using CBM in reading. First, CBM and its relationship to response to intervention (RTI) are discussed. Second, challenges to the use of CBM are addressed, and instructions for using the graphic organizer worksheet are provided. Finally, strategies are suggested to facilitate the use of CBM to enhance collaboration among general and special education teachers.
Bos, C.S., & Vaughn, S. ( 2006). Strategies for teaching students with learning and behavior problems. Boston: Pearson.
2.
Brown, T.E. ( 2005). Circles inside squares: A graphic organizer to focus diagnostic formulations. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 44, 1309-1312.
3.
Capizzi, A.M., & Fuchs, L.S. ( 2005). The effects of curriculum-based measurement with and without diagnostic feedback on teacher planning. Remedial and Special Education, 26, 159-174.
4.
Case, L.P., Speece, D.L., & Molloy, D.E. ( 2003) The validity of a response-to-instruction paradigm to identify reading disabilities: A longitudinal analysis of individual differences and contextual factors. School Psychology Review, 32, 557-582.
5.
Deno, S.L. ( 1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative . Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232.
6.
Deno, S.L. ( 2003). Developments in curriculum based measurement. The Journal of Special Education, 37, 184-192.
7.
Deno, S.L., Mirkin, P., & Chiang, B. ( 1982). Identifying valid measures of reading. Exceptional Children, 49(1), 36-45.
8.
Dye, G. ( 2000). Graphic organizers to the rescue! Helping students link-and remember-information. Teaching Exceptional Children , 32, 72-76.
9.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. ( 2001). Access to the core curriculum: Critical ingredients for student success. Remedial and Special Education, 22, 148-157.
10.
Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P.L., & Young, C.L. ( 2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 157-171.
11.
Fuchs, L.S., & Deno, S.L., (1994) Must instructionally useful performance assessment be based in the curriculum? Exceptional Children, 61(1), 15-24.
12.
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. ( 2003). Can diagnostic reading assessment enhance general educators’ instructional differentiation and student learning? In B. Foorman (Ed.), Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale (pp. 325-351). Baltimore: York Press.
13.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Deno, S.L. ( 1982). Reliability and validity of curriculum-based informal reading inventories. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 6-26.
14.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C.L. ( 1989). Effects of instrumental use of curriculum-based measurement to enhance instructional programs. Remedial and Special Education , 10(2), 43-52.
15.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett. C.L., Walz, L., & Germann, G. ( 1993). Formative evaluation of academic progress: How much growth can we expect?School Psychology Review, 22, 27-48.
16.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Hollenbeck, K.N. (2007). Extending responsiveness to intervention to mathematics at first and third grades. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22, 13-24.
17.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. ( 1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures . Remedial and Special Education, 9, 20-28.
18.
Graney, S.B., & Shinn, M.R. ( 2005). Effects of reading curriculum-based measurement (R-CBM) teacher feedback in general education classrooms. School Psychology Review, 34(2), 184-202.
19.
Hasbrouck, J.E., Woldbeck, T., Ihnot, C., & Parker, R.I. ( 1999). One teacher’s use of curriculum-based measurement: A changed opinion. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice , 14(2), 118-126.
20.
Hosp, M.K., Hosp, J.L., & Howell, K.W. ( 2007). The ABCs of CBM: A practical guide to curriculum-based measurement. New York: Guilford .
Mastropieri, M.A., & Scruggs, T.E. ( 2007). The inclusive classroom: Strategies for effective instruction . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson .
23.
Shinn, M.R., Good, R.H., Knutson. H., Tilly, W.D., & Collins, V. ( 1992). Curriculum-based reading fluency: A confirmatory analysis of its relation to reading. School Psychology Review , 21(3), 458-478.
24.
Stecker, P.M., & Lembke, E.S. ( 2005). Advanced applications of CBM in reading: Instructional decision-making strategies manual. National Center on Student Progress Monitoring. Retrieved January 5, 2007, from http://www.studentprogress.org/library/Training/CBMmath/AdvancedReading/AdvRdgManualFORMATTEDSept29.pdf
25.
Wesson, C.L., King, R.P., & Deno, S.L. ( 1984). Direct and frequent measurements of student performance: If it’s good for us, why don’t we do it?Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 7, 45-48.
26.
Yell, M., Deno, S.L., & Marston, D. ( 1992). Barriers to implementing curriculum-based measurement . Diagnostique, 18(1), 99.
