Reading Progress Monitoring Research Articles

Effects of using curriculum-based measurement (CBM) for progress monitoring in reading and an additive reading instruction in second classes

In this study, poor readers in second school year were selected from three schools (n = 32). Their reading skills were surveyed weekly using a CBM instrument over one school semester. Furthermore, they were supported by a five-week reading fluency instruction. The majority of students increased their weekly learning growth in regular teaching and in the phase with the additive instruction. The weekly learning growth was higher in the phase with the additive instruction in reading syllables (b = 0.69), reading words (b = 0.44) and reading comprehension at sentence level (b = 0.45) than without (reading syllables: b = 0.49; reading words: b = 0.18; reading comprehension: b = 0.30). Based on the results of this study, the benefit of CBM for adaptive reading instruction will be discussed.

Developing a school‐wide progress‐monitoring system

AbstractThis article describes the development of a process for universal screening and progress monitoring in reading at the elementary level that can be used in a school‐wide Response to Intervention (RtI) model. University personnel worked with teachers and administration at an urban elementary school to develop and implement the model in response to a school district mandate for school improvement. All students were screened in reading during the fall using the MAZE procedure, and students scoring in the lowest 20% of each class were monitored using curriculum‐based measurement of oral reading every other week. The MAZE was re‐administered to all students in the winter and spring to assess school‐wide growth in reading. Features of the model that made it useful include group administration of the screening task and use of the same passages at all grades so that direct comparisons could be made within and across grade levels, and across years. Results of model implementation are described for all students and for special subgroups, and recommendations and examples are provided for data use with respect to all students, students at risk, students who are non‐native English speakers, and students with special needs. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Problem Solving With Guided Repeated Oral Reading Instruction

Many students with disabilities require specialized instructional interventions and frequent progress monitoring in reading. The guided repeated oral reading technique promotes oral reading fluency while providing a reliable data-based monitoring system. This article emphasizes the importance of problem-solving when using this reading approach.

An Examination of Variability as a Function of Passage Variance in CBM Progress Monitoring

This study examined the effects of controlling the level of difficulty on the sensitivity of repeated curriculum-based measurement (CBM). Participants included 99 students in Grades 2 through 5 who were administered CBM reading passage probes twice weekly over an 11-week period. Two sets of CBM reading progress monitoring materials were compared: (a) grade level material that was controlled for difficulty, and (b) uncontrolled randomly selected material from graded readers. Students' rate of progress in each progress monitoring series was summarized for slope, standard error of estimate, and standard error of slope. Results suggested that controlled reading passages significantly reduced measurement error as compared to uncontrolled reading passages, leading to increased sensitivity and reliability of measurement.

An Exploration of the Use of Curriculum-Based Measurement By Elementary Special Educators

This study examined special educators' use of curriculum-based measurement as progress monitoring. Teacher characteristics were examined to determine if there was a relationship between certain teacher characteristics and utilizing curriculum-based measurement. A questionnaire was completed by 191 special educators in the Midwest. Results showed that 45% (n = 86) of the respondents utilized curriculum-based measurement for at least one purpose (monitoring ongoing progress, part of the prereferral process, evaluating programs, or identifying students with disabilities) and 55% (n = 105) did not use curriculum-based measurement. Curriculum-based measurement for progress monitoring in reading is utilized significantly more often than curriculum-based measurement in math or spelling. Teachers also responded that they had an interest in attending a workshop and reading information on curriculum-based measurement. Suggestions for practice and future research are explained.