Advertisement

Reading and Writing

, Volume 30, Issue 9, pp 2069–2091 | Cite as

Monitoring elementary students’ writing progress using curriculum-based measures: grade and gender differences

  • Kristen L. McMaster
  • Jaehyun Shin
  • Christine A. Espin
  • Pyung-Gang Jung
  • Miya Miura Wayman
  • Stanley L. Deno
Article
First Online:

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine slopes from curriculum-based measures of writing (CBM-W) as indicators of growth in writing. Responses to story prompts administered for 5 min to 89 students in Grades 2–5 were collected across 12 weeks and scored for correct word sequences (CWS) and correct minus incorrect sequences (CIWS). Linear mixed modeling revealed that, for students in Grades 2–3, a linear model with random effects on both intercept and slope fit the data best. For students in Grades 4–5, growth trends varied depending on number of weeks and scoring procedure used. The time point at which slopes were significantly different from zero varied by scoring procedure and grade. Gender was related to intercept and slope for CWS and CIWS in Grades 2–3 and to intercept and linear slope for CWS and CIWS in Grades 4–5. Findings suggest that CBM-W may be appropriate for monitoring student progress, and that gender should be considered in data-based decision making.

Keywords

Curriculum-based measurement Writing Elementary grades Gender differences 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported in part by Grant # H324H030003 awarded to the Institute on Community Integration and Department of Educational Psychology, College of Education and Human Development, at the University of Minnesota, by the Office of Special Education Programs in the U.S. Department of Education. The paper does not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the funding agency, and no official endorsement should be inferred.

References

  1. Andrade, H. L., Wang, X., Du, Y., & Akawi, R. L. (2009). Rubric-referenced self-assessment and self-efficacy for writing. The Journal of Educational Research, 102, 287–302. doi: 10.3200/JOER.102.4.287-302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beard, R., & Burrell, A. (2010). Writing attainment in 9- to 11-year-olds: Some differences between girls and boys in two genres. Language and Education, 24, 495–515. doi: 10.1080/09500782.2010.502968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berninger, V. W., & Fuller, F. F. (1992). Gender differences in orthographic, verbal, and compositional fluency: Implications for assessing writing disabilities in primary grade children. Journal of School Psychology, 30, 363–382. doi: 10.1016/0022-4405(92)90004-O.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berninger, V. W., Fuller, F., & Whitaker, D. (1996). A process model of writing development across the life span. Educational Psychology Review, 8, 193–218. doi: 10.1007/BF01464073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berninger, V. W., Nielsen, K. H., Abbott, R. D., Wijsman, E., & Raskind, W. (2008). Gender differences in severity of writing and reading disabilities. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 151–172. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2007.02.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bornstein, M. H., Hahn, C. S., & Haynes, O. M. (2004). Specific and general language performance across early childhood: Stability and gender considerations. First Language, 24, 267–303. doi: 10.1177/0142723704045681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Camarata, S., & Woodcock, R. (2006). Sex differences in processing speed: Developmental effects in males and females. Intelligence, 34, 231–252. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2005.12.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Christ, T. J. (2006). Short-term estimates of growth using curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency: Estimating standard error of the slope to construct confidence intervals. School Psychology Review, 35, 128–133.Google Scholar
  9. Christ, T. J., Silberglitt, B., Yeo, S., & Cormier, D. (2010). Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading: An evaluation of growth rates and seasonal effects among students served in general and special education. School Psychology Review, 39, 447–462.Google Scholar
  10. Christ, T. J., Zopluoglu, C., Monaghen, B. D., & Van Norman, E. R. (2013). Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading: Multi-study evaluation of schedule, duration, and dataset quality on progress monitoring outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 51, 19–57. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2012.11.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coker, D. L., & Ritchey, K. D. (2010). Curriculum-based measurement of writing in kindergarten and first grade: An investigation of production and qualitative scores. Exceptional Children, 76, 175–193. doi: 10.1177/001440291007600203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. De La Paz, S., Espin, C., & McMaster, K. L. (2010). RTI in writing instruction: Relating evidence-based interventions to curriculum-based measurement. In T. A. Glover & S. Vaughn (Eds.), Response to intervention: Empowering all students to learn. A critical account of the science and practice (pp. 204–238). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  13. Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 53, 219–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Development Core Team, R. (2009). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software]. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
  15. Eriksson, M., Marschik, P. B., Tulviste, T., Almgren, M., Pérez Pereira, M., Wehberg, S., et al. (2012). Differences between girls and boys in emerging language skills: Evidence from 10 language communities. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 30, 326–343. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-835X.2011.02042.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Espin, C. A., Busch, T., Lembke, E. S., Hampton, D., Seo, K., & Zukowski, B. A. (2013). Curriculum-based measurement in science learning: Vocabulary-matching as an indicator of performance and progress. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 38, 203–213. doi: 10.1177/1534508413489724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Espin, C. A., Scierka, B. J., Skare, S., & Halverson, N. (1999). Criterion-related validity of curriculum-based measures in writing for secondary students. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 15, 5–27. doi: 10.1080/105735699278279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Espin, C. A., Shin, J., & Busch, T. W. (2005). Curriculum-based measurement in the content areas: Vocabulary-matching as an indicator of social studies learning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 353–363. doi: 10.1177/00222194050380041301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Espin, C. A., Wallace, T., Campbell, H., Lembke, E., Long, J., & Tichá, R. (2008). Curriculum-based measurement in writing: Predicting the success of high-school students on state standards tests. Exceptional Children, 74, 174–193. doi: 10.1177/001440290807400203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Espin, C. A., Wallace, T., Lembke, E., Campbell, H., & Long, J. D. (2010). Creating a progress measurement system in reading for middle-school students: Monitoring progress towards meeting high stakes standards. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 25, 60–75. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5826.2010.00304.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Every Student Succeeds Act, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 (2015).Google Scholar
  22. Fearrington, J. Y., Parker, P. D., Kidder-Ashley, R., Gagnon, S. G., McCane-Bowling, S., & Sorrell, C. A. (2014). Gender differences in written expression curriculum-based measurement in third- through eighth-grade students. Psychology in the Schools, 51, 85–96. doi: 10.1002/pits.21733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fuchs, L. S. (2004). The past, present, and future of curriculum-based measurement research. School Psychology Review, 22, 188–192.Google Scholar
  24. 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.Google Scholar
  25. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2010). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference 18.0 update. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  26. Graham, S., Berninger, V., & Abbott, R. (2012). Are attitudes toward writing and reading separable constructs? A study with primary grade children. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28, 51–69. doi: 10.1080/10573569.2012.632732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Graham, S., Berninger, V., & Fan, W. (2007). The structural relationship between writing attitude and writing achievement in first and third grade students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 516–536. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.01.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Larsen, L. (2001). Prevention and intervention of writing difficulties for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, 16, 74–84. doi: 10.1111/0938-8982.00009.Google Scholar
  29. Hammill, D. D., & Larsen, S. C. (1996). Test of written language. Austin, TX: Pro-ed.Google Scholar
  30. Hintze, J. M., & Christ, T. J. (2004). An examination of variability as a function of passage variance in CBM progress monitoring. School Psychology Review, 33, 204–217.Google Scholar
  31. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).Google Scholar
  32. Kim, Y. S., Al Otaiba, S., Wanzek, J., & Gatlin, B. (2015). Toward an understanding of dimensions, predictors, and the gender gap in written composition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 79–95. doi: 10.1037/a0037210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Krieg, J. M. (2005). Student gender and teacher gender: What is the impact on high stakes test scores? Current Issues in Education, 8(9), 1–16.Google Scholar
  34. Long, J. (2011). Longitudinal data analysis for the behavioral sciences using R. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  35. Malecki, C. K., & Jewell, J. (2003). Developmental, gender, and practical considerations in scoring curriculum-based measurement writing probes. Psychology in the Schools, 40, 379–390. doi: 10.1002/pits.10096.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McCutchen, D. (2006). Cognitive factors in the development of children’s writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 115–130). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  37. McMaster, K. L., & Campbell, H. (2008). Technical features of new and existing measures of written expression: An examination within and across grade levels. School Psychology Review, 37, 550–566.Google Scholar
  38. McMaster, K. L., Du, X., Yeo, S., Deno, S. L., Parker, D., & Ellis, T. (2011a). Curriculum-based measures of beginning writing: Technical features of the slope. Exceptional Children, 77, 185–206. doi: 10.1177/001440291107700203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. McMaster, K. L., & Espin, C. (2007). Technical features of curriculum-based measurement in writing: A literature review. Journal of Special Education, 41, 68–84. doi: 10.1177/00224669070410020301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McMaster, K. L., Ritchey, K. D., & Lembke, E. (2011b). Curriculum-based measurement for beginning writers: Recent developments and future directions. In T. E. Scruggs & M. A. Mastropieri (Eds.), Assessment and intervention: Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities (Vol. 24, pp. 111–148). Emerald: Bingley. doi: 10.1108/S0735-004X(2011)0000024008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). The Nation’s report card: Writing 2011. Retrieved on November 15, 2014, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2012470.
  42. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards. Washington D.C: Author.Google Scholar
  43. Nelson, N. W., & Van Meter, A. M. (2007). Measuring written language ability in narrative samples. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23, 287–309. doi: 10.1080/10573560701277807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Olinghouse, N. G. (2008). Student-and instruction-level predictors of narrative writing in third-grade students. Reading and Writing, 21, 3–26. doi: 10.1007/s11145-007-9062-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pajares, F., Johnson, M. J., & Usher, E. L. (2007). Sources of writing self-efficacy beliefs of elementary, middle, and high school students. Research in the Teaching of English, 42, 104–120.Google Scholar
  46. Parker, D. C., McMaster, K. L., Medhanie, A., & Silberglitt, B. (2011). Modeling early writing growth with curriculum-based measures. School Psychology Quarterly, 26, 290–304. doi: 10.1037/a0026833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear model: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
  48. Ritchey, K. D., & Coker, D. L. (2013). An investigation of the validity and utility of two curriculum-based measurement writing tasks. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 29, 89–119. doi: 10.1080/10573569.2013.741957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shin, J., Deno, S. L., & Espin, C. (2000). Technical adequacy of the maze task for curriculum-based measurement of reading growth. Journal of Special Education, 34, 164–172. doi: 10.1177/002246690003400305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Shin, J., Espin, C. A., Deno, S. L., & McConnell, S. (2004). Use of hierarchical linear modeling and curriculum-based measurement for assessing academic growth and instructional factors for students with learning difficulties. Asia Pacific Education Review, 5, 136–148. doi: 10.1007/BF03024951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurrence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195152968.001.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tichá, R., Espin, C. A., & Wayman, M. M. (2009). Reading progress monitoring for secondary-school students: Reliability, validity, and sensitivity to growth of reading-aloud and maze-selection measures. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24, 132–142. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5826.2009.00287.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Troia, G. A. (2006). Writing instruction for students with learning disabilities. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 324–336). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  54. Troia, G. A., Harbaugh, A. G., Shankland, R. K., Wolbers, K. A., & Lawrence, A. M. (2013). Relationships between writing motivation, writing activity, and writing performance: Effects of grade, sex, and ability. Reading and Writing, 26, 17–44. doi: 10.1007/s11145-012-9379-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Truckenmiller, A. J., Eckert, T. L., Codding, R. S., & Petscher, Y. (2014). Evaluating the impact of feedback on elementary aged students’ fluency growth in written expression: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of School Psychology, 52, 531–548. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2014.09.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Videen, J., Marston, D., & Deno, S. L. (1982). Correct word sequences: A valid indicator of proficiency in written expression (Vol. IRLD-RR-84). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.Google Scholar
  57. Wallace, T., Espin, C. A., McMaster, K., Deno, S. L., & Foegen, A. (2007). CBM progress monitoring within a standards-based system. The Journal of Special Education, 41, 66–67. doi: 10.1177/00224669070410020201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kristen L. McMaster
    • 1
  • Jaehyun Shin
    • 1
  • Christine A. Espin
    • 2
  • Pyung-Gang Jung
    • 3
  • Miya Miura Wayman
    • 3
  • Stanley L. Deno
    • 3
  1. 1.University of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  2. 2.Leiden UniversityLeidenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.University of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options