Abstract
National test data indicate that some students do not perform well in writing, suggesting a need to identify students at risk for poor performance. Research supports Written Expression Curriculum-Based Measurement (WE-CBM) as an indicator of writing proficiency, but it is less commonly used in practice. This study examined the usability of WE-CBM compared with Reading Curriculum-Based Measurement (R-CBM). Participants included 162 teachers who were given examples of WE-CBM and R-CBM and then completed a usability measure for both curriculum-based measurement (CBM) types. Teachers not only rated WE-CBM as usable but also rated R-CBM significantly higher in usability, with no significant differences in acceptability. Practical implications that may inform modifications to WE-CBM are discussed.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
