Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Screening Assessment Within a Multi-Tiered System of Support: Current Practices, Advances, and Next Steps

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Response to Intervention

Abstract

Within multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS), screening assessments play an important role in identifying students who are in need of supplemental support strategies. In this chapter, the authors review the tools and methods commonly used in MTSS for academic skills screening, identify limitations with these practices, and highlight potential areas of improvement regarding assessment methods and content of screening tools, decision-making processes used to identify students in need of support, and methods used for evaluating screening tools. A set of recommendations and directions for future work are offered for advancing screening assessment and improving decision-making processes in schools with MTSS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 269.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 349.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The p value indicates the statistical significance of that predictor in the model for predicting the subsequent first-grade reading outcome (40 words per minute), and the odds ratio indicates the percentage change in likelihood of the subsequent outcome given every point increase in the predictor (e.g., the odds ratio of 1.15 for LSF means that every 1 point increase in LSF equals an increase of 15 % probability of meeting the first grade criterion). The log likelihood value (expressed as −2LL; log likelihood is multiplied by −2 to derive a value equivalent to a chi square distribution) can be used to evaluate model fit and compare models. Smaller −2LL values indicate better-fitting models.

References

  • Alonzo, J., Tindal, G., Ulmer, K., & Glasgow, A. (2006). easyCBM online progress monitoring assessment system. Eugene: University of Oregon, Behavioral Research and Teaching.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allan, N. P., & Lonigan, C. J. (2011). Examining the dimensionality of effortful control in preschool children and its relation to academic and socioemotional indicators. Developmental Psychology, 47(4), 905–915.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, D., Alonzo, J., & Tindal, G. (2010). easyCBM Mathematics Criterion Related Validity Evidence: Washington State Test (Technical Report No. 1010). Eugene: Behavioral Research and Teaching, University of Oregon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, D., Jasmine Park, B., Irvin, P. S., Alonzo, J., & Tindal, G. (2011). Diagnostic efficiency of EasyCBM Reading: Washington state (Technical Report #1107). Eugene: Behavioral Research and Teaching, University of Oregon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ardoin, S. P., Witt, J. C., Suldo, S. M., Connell, J. E., Koenig, J. L., Restetar, J. L., Slider, N. J., & Williams, K. L. (2004). Examining the incremental benefits of administering a maze and three versus one curriculum-based measurement reading probes when conducting universal screening. School Psychology Review, 33, 218–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baglici, S. P., Codding, R. S., & Tryon, G. (2010). Extending the research on tests of early numeracy: Longitudinal analyses over two years. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 35, 89–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batsche, G., Elliott, J., Graden, J., Grimes, J., Kovaleski, J., Prasse, D., Reschly, D., Schrag, J., & Tilly, D. (2006). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Begeny, J. C., Eckert, T. L., Montarello, S. A., & Storie, M. S. (2008). Teachers’ perceptions of students’ reading abilities: An examination of the relationship between teachers’ judgments and students’ performance across a continuum of rating methods. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(1), 43–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Begeny, J. C., Krouse, H. E., Brown, K. G., & Mann, C. M. (2011). Teacher judgments of students’ reading abilities across a continuum of rating methods and achievement measures. School Psychology Review, 40(1), 23–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabell, S. Q., Justice, L. M., Zucker, T. A., & Kilday, C. R. (2009). Validity of teacher report for assessing the emergent literacy skills of at-risk preschoolers. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40(2), 161–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catts, H. W., Fey, M. E., Zhang, X., & Tomblin, J. B. (2001). Estimating the risk of future reading difficulties in kindergarten children: A research-based model and its clinical implementation. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 32(1), 38–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catts, H. W., Petscher, Y., Schatschneider, C., Bridges, M. S., & Mendoza, K. (2009). Floor effects associated with universal screening and their impact on the early identification of reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(2), 163–176.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Catts, H. W., Compton, D., Tomblin, J. B., & Sittner Bridges, M. (2012). Prevalence and nature of late-emerging poor readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(1), 166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christ, T. J., Scullin, S., Tolbize, A., & Jiban, C. L. (2008). Implications of recent research: Curriculum based measurement of math computation. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 33, 198–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, B., Nese, J. F., Alonzo, J., Smith, J. L. M., Tindal, G., Kame’enui, E. J., & Baker, S. K. (2011). Classification accuracy of easyCBM first-grade mathematics measures: Findings and implications for the field. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 36, 243–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clemens, N. H., Shapiro, E. S., & Thoemmes, F. (2011). Improving the efficacy of first grade reading screening: An investigation of word identification fluency with other early literacy indicators. School Psychology Quarterly, 26, 231–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clemens, N. H., Hagan-Burke, S., Luo, W., Cerda, C. A., Blakely, A., Frosch, J., Gamez, B., & Jones, M. (in press). Investigating the validity of a computer-adaptive assessment of early reading in kindergarten. School Psychology Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemens, N. H., Oslund, E. L., Simmons, L. E., & Simmons, D. (2014). Assessing spelling in kindergarten: Further comparison of scoring metrics and their relation to reading skills. Journal of School Psychology, 52, 49–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cocker, 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(10), 175–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Bryant, J. D. (2006). Selecting at-risk readers in first grade for early intervention: A two-year longitudinal study of decision rules and procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 394–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Bouton, B., Gilbert, J. K., Barquero, L. A., Cho, E., & Crouch, R. C. (2010). Selecting at-risk first-grade readers for early intervention: Eliminating false positives and exploring the promise of a two-stage gated screening process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 327–340.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Compton, D. L., Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Lambert, W., & Hamlett, C. (2012). The cognitive and academic profiles of reading and mathematics learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(1), 79–95.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coventry, W. L., Byrne, B., Olson, R. K., Corley, R., & Samuelsson, S. (2011). Dynamic and static assessment of phonological awareness in preschool: A behavior-genetic study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(4), 322–329. doi:10.1177/0022219411407862.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coyne, M. D., McCoach, D. B., Loftus, S., Zipoli, R. Jr., Ruby, M., Crevecoeur, Y. C., & Kapp, S. (2010). Direct and extended vocabulary instruction in kindergarten: Investigating transfer effects. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 3(2), 93–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demaray, M. K., & Elliot, S. N. (1998). Teachers’ judgments of students’ academic functioning: Comparison of actual and predicted performances. School Psychology Quarterly, 13(1), 8–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deno, S. L. (2003). Developments in curriculum-based measurement. The Journal of Special Education, 37(3), 184–192. doi:10.1177/00224669030370030801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deno, S. L., Marston, D., & Mirkin, P. (1982). Valid measurement procedures for continuous evaluation of written expression. Exceptional Children, 48(4), 368–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiPerna, J. C., & Elliott, S. N. (1999). Development and validation of the academic competence evaluation scales. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 17(3), 207–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denton, C. A., Barth, A. E., Fletcher, J. M., Wexler, J., Vaughn, S., Cirino, P. T., ... & Francis, D. J. (2011). The relations among oral and silent reading fluency and comprehension in middle school: Implications for identification and instruction of students with reading difficulties. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15(2), 109–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eaves, R. C., Williams, P., Winchester, K., & Darch, C. (1994). Using teacher judgment and IQ to estimate reading and mathematics achievement in a remedial-reading program. Psychology in the Schools, 31(4), 261–272. doi:10.1002/1520-6807.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eckert, T. L., Dunn, E. K., Codding, R. S., Begeny, J. C., & Kleinmann, A. E. (2006). Assessment of mathematics and reading performance: An examination of the correspondence between direct assessment of student performance and teacher report. Psychology in the Schools, 43(3), 247–265. doi:10.1002/pits.20147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eckert, T. L., Koenig, E. A., Hier, B. O., & Arbolino, L. A. (2013). The role of teacher perspectives in diagnostic and program evaluation of academic skills. In R. Brown-Chidsey & K. J. Andren (Eds.), Assessment for intervention: A problem-solving approach (2nd ed., pp. 62–76). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egan, J. P., Clarke, F. R., & Carterette, E. C. (1956). On the transmission and confirmation of messages in noise. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 28, 536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elleman, A. M., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Bouton, B. (2011). Exploring dynamic assessment as a means of identifying children at risk of developing comprehension difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(4), 348–357.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Espin, C., Shin, J., Deno, S. L., Skare, S., Robinson, S., & Benner, B. (2000). Identifying indicators of written expression proficiency for middle school students. The Journal of Special Education, 34(3), 140–153. doi:10.1177/002246690003400303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feeney-Kettler, K. A., Kratochwill, T. R., & Kettler, R. J. (2011). Identification of preschool children at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders: Development and validation of a universal screening system. Journal of school psychology, 49(2), 197–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, A. B., & Shapiro, E. S. (2009). Teacher accuracy: An examination of teacher-based judgments of students’ reading with differing achievement levels. The Journal of Educational Research, 102(6), 453–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, J. M., Lyon, G. R., Fuchs, L. S., & Barnes, M. (2006). Learning disabilities. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Formative Assessment System for Teachers. (2013). Formative Assessment system for teachers. University of Minnesota, Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foulin, J. N. (2005). Why is letter-name knowledge such a good predictor of learning to read? Reading and Writing, 18(2), 129–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1992). Identifying a measure for monitoring student reading progress. School Psychology Review, 21(1), 45–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., & Vaughn, S. (2012). Responsiveness-to-intervention: A decade later. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(3), 195–203.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9(2), 20–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Compton, D. L. (2004). Identifying reading disabilities by responsiveness to instruction: Specifying measures and criteria. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27(4), 216–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Paulsen, K., Bryant, J. D., & Hamlett, C. L. (2005). The prevention, identification, and cognitive determinants of math difficulty. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(3), 493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Powell, S. R., Seethaler, P. M., Capizzi, A. M., Schatschneider, C & Fletcher, J. M. (2006). The cognitive correlates of third-grade skill in arithmetic, algorithmic computation, and arithmetic word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Bryant, J. D., Hamlett, C. L., & Seethaler, P. M. (2007). Mathematics screening and progress monitoring at first grade: Implications for responsiveness-to-intervention. Exceptional Children, 72, 311–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, L. S., Bouton, B., & Caffrey, E. (2011a). The construct and predictive validity of a dynamic assessment of young children learning to read: Implications for RTI frameworks. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(4), 339–347.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Hollenbeck, K. N., Hamlett, C. L., & Seethaler, P. M. (2011b). Two-stage screening for math problem-solving difficulty using dynamic assessment of algebraic learning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 372–380.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Compton, D. L. (2012). Smart RTI: A next-generation approach to multilevel prevention. Exceptional Children, 78, 263–279.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gansle, K. A., VanDerHeyden, A. M., Noell, G. H., Resetar, J. L., & Williams, K. L. (2006). The technical adequacy of curriculum-based writing and rating-based measures of written expression for elementary school students. School Psychology Review, 35, 435–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gersten, R., Jordan, N. C., & Flojo, J. R. (2005). Early identification and interventions for students with mathematics difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(4), 293–304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, C. M., Dimino, J., Santoro, L., Linan-Thompson, S., & Tilly, W. D. (2009a). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to Intervention and multi-tier intervention in the primary grades. A practice guide. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gersten, R., Beckmann, S., Clarke, B., Foegen, A., Marsh, L., Star, J. R., & Witzel, B. (2009b). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to intervention (rti) for elementary and middle schools. NCEE, 4060. Washington, DC: Institute of Educational Services, U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2012). Early screening for risk of reading disabilities: Recommendations for a four-step screening system. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 38(1), 6–14.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glover, T., & Albers, C. (2007). Considerations for evaluating universal screening assessments. Journal of School Psychology, 45(2), 117–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goffreda, C. T., & DiPerna, C. (2010). An empirical review of psychometric evidence for the dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills. School Psychology Review, 39(3), 463–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffreda, C. T., DiPerna, J. C., & Pedersen, J. A. (2009). Preventive screening for early readers: Predictive validity of the dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (DIBELS). Psychology in the Schools, 46(6), 539–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez, J. E., Goetz, E. T., Hall, R. J., Payne, T., Taylor, A. B., Kim, M., & McCormick, A. S. (2011). An evaluation of Early Reading First (ERF) preschool enrichment on language and literacy skills. Reading and Writing, 24(3), 253–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A. (Eds.). (2002). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (6th ed.). Eugene: Institute for the Development of Education Achievement. http://dibels.uoregon.edu.

  • Goodenough, D. J. (1975). The use of ROC curves in testing the proficiency of individuals in classifying pneumoconiosis. Radiology, 114(2), 472–473.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). What we know, what we still need to know: Teaching adolescents to write. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 313–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., McKeown, D., Kiuhara, S., & Harris, K. R. (2012). Meta-analysis of writing instruction for students in elementary school grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 879–896.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graney, S. B. (2008). General education teacher judgments of their low-performing students’ short-term reading progress. Psychology in the Schools, 45(6), 537–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graney, S. B., Martínez, R. S., Missall, K. N., & Aricak, O. T. (2010). Universal screening of reading in late elementary school: R-CBM versus CBM Maze. Remedial and Special Education, 31, 368–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammill, D. D., Wiederholt, J. L., & Allen, E. A. (2006). Test of silent contextual reading fluency. Austin: PRO-ED.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagan-Burke, S., Kwok, O. M., Zou, Y., Johnson, C., Simmons, D., & Coyne, M. D. (2011). An examination of problem behaviors and reading outcomes in kindergarten students. The Journal of Special Education, 45, 131–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, C., & Shinn, M. R. (2003). Characteristics of word callers: An investigation of the accuracy of teachers’ judgments of reading comprehension and oral reading skills. School Psychology Review, 32, 228–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harber, J. R. (1981). Learning disability research: How far have we progressed? Learning Disability Quarterly, 4(4), 372–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasselbring, T. S. (1984). Computer-based assessment of special-needs students. Special Services in the Schools, 1(1), 7–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hecht, S. A., & Greenfield, D. B. (2001). Comparing the predictive validity of first grade teacher ratings and reading-related tests on third grade levels of reading skills in young children exposed to poverty. School Psychology Review, 30(1), 50–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintze, J., & Silbertglitt, B. (2005). A longitudinal examination of the diagnostic accuracy and predictive validity of R-CBM and high stakes testing. School Psychology Review, 34, 372–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintze, J. M., Ryan, A. L., & Stoner, G. (2003). Concurrent validity and diagnostic accuracy of the dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills and the comprehensive test of phonological processing. School Psychology Review, 32(4), 541–556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinshaw, S. P. (1992). Externalizing behavior problems and academic underachievement in childhood and adolescence: Causal relationships and underlying mechanisms. Psychological Bulletin, 111(1), 127–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoge, R. D., & Coladarci, T. (1989). Teacher-based judgments of academic achievement: A review of literature. Review of Educational Research, 59(3), 297–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeltova, I., Birney, D., Fredine, N., Jarvin, L., Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2011). Making instruction and assessment responsive to diverse students’ progress: Group-administered dynamic assessment in teaching mathematics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(4), 381–395.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, J. R., Hudson, R. F., & Johnson, E. S. (2007). Screening for at-risk readers in a response to intervention framework. School Psychology Review, 36(4), 582–600.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, J. R., Schiller, E., Blackorby, J., Thayer, S. K., & Tilly, W. D. (2013). Responsiveness to intervention in reading: Architecture and practices. Learning Disability Quarterly, 36(1), 36–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jewell, J., & Malecki, C. K. (2005). The utility of CBM written language indices: An investigation of production-dependent, production-independent, and accurate-production scores. School Psychology Review, 34, 27–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, E. S., Jenkins, J. R., Petscher, Y., & Catts, H. W. (2009). How can we improve the accuracy of screening instruments? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24, 174–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, E. S., Jenkins, J. R., & Petscher, Y. (2010). Improving the accuracy of a direct route screening process. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 35, 131–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, N. C., Glutting, J., Ramineni, C., & Watkins, M. W. (2010). Validating a number sense screening tool for use in kindergarten and first grade: Prediction of mathematics proficiency in third grade. School Psychology Review, 39, 181–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kantor, P. T., Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (2011). Comparing two forms of dynamic assessment and traditional assessment of preschool phonological awareness. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(4), 313–321.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, J. M., Betjemann, R. S., & Olson, R. K. (2008). Reading comprehension tests vary in the skills they assess: Differential dependence on decoding and oral comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 12(3), 281–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kegel, C. A., van der Kooy-Hofland, V. A., & Bus, A. G. (2009). Improving early phoneme skills with a computer program: Differential effects of regulatory skills. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(4), 549–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller-Margulis, M. A., Shapiro, E. S., & Hintze, J. M. (2008). Long term diagnostic accuracy of curriculum-based measures in reading and mathematics. School Psychology Review, 37(3), 374–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, D. T., & Chekaluk, E. (1993). Early reading performance: A comparison of teacher-based and test-based assessments. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26(4), 227–236.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kilday, C. R., Kinzie, M. B., Mashburn, A. J., & Whittaker, J. V. (2012). Accuracy of teacher judgments of preschoolers’ math skills. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30(2), 148–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landry, S., Assel, M. A., Gunnewig, S. B., & Swank, P. R. (2007). MClass: CIRCLE. New York: Wireless Generation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, K. L., Little, M. A., Casey, A. M., Lambert, W., Wehby, J., Weisenbach, J. L., & Phillips, A. (2009). A comparison of systematic screening tools for emotional and behavioral disorders. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 17(2), 93–105. doi:10.1177/1063426608326203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. M., Clark, W. W., & Lee, D. M. (1934). Measuring reading readiness. The Elementary School Journal, 34(9), 656–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. S., Lembke, E., Moore, D., Ginsburg, H. P., & Pappas, S. (2012). Item-level and construct evaluation of early numeracy curriculum-based measures. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 37(2), 107–117. doi:10.1177/1534508411431255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lembke, E., & Foegen, A. (2009). Identifying early numeracy indicators for kindergarten and first-grade students. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 24(1), 12–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lembke, E. S., Deno, S. L., & Hall, K. (2003). Identifying an indicator of growth in early writing proficiency for elementary school students. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 28(3&4), 23–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lembke, E. S., Hampton, D., & Beyers, S. H. (2012). Response to intervention in mathematics: Critical elements. Psychology in the Schools, 49(3), 257–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locuniak, M. N., & Jordan, N. C. (2008). Using kindergarten number sense to predict calculation fluency in second grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(5), 451–459.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcotte, A. M., & Hintze, J. M. (2009). Incremental and predictive utility of formative assessment methods of reading comprehension. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 315–335.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marston, D., Mirkin, P., & Deno, S. (1984). Curriculum-based measurement: An alternative to traditional screening, referral, and identification. The Journal of Special Education, 18, 109–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Masterson, J. J., & Apel, K. (2010). Linking characteristics discovered in spelling assessment to intervention goals and methods. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33, 185–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, S. D., & Shapiro, E. S. (2011). Examining the accuracy of teachers’ judgments of DIBELS performance. Psychology in the Schools, 48(4), 343–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez, R. S., Missal, K. N., Bamonto-Graney, S., Aricak, T. O., & Clarke, B. (2009). Technical adequacy of early numeracy curriculum-based measurement in kindergarten. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 34(2), 116–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mather, N., Hammill, D. D., Allen, E. A., & Roberts, R. (2004). TOSWRF: Test of silent word reading fluency: Examiner’s manual. Austin: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • McBride, J. R., Ysseldyke, J., Milone, M., & Stickney, E. (2010). Technical adequacy and cost benefit of four measures of early literacy. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 25, 189–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, M. M., Acock, A. C., & Morrison, F. J. (2006). The impact of kindergarten learning-related skills on academic trajectories at the end of elementary school. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 471–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMaster, K., & Espin, C. (2007). Technical features of curriculum-based measurement in writing: A literature review. The Journal of Special Education, 41(2), 68–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 27(4), 550–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMaster, K. L., Du, X., & Petursdottir, A. (2009). Technical features of curriculum-based measures for beginning writers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 41–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McMaster, K. L., Parker, D., & Jung, P. G. (2012). Using Curriculum-Based measurement for beginning writers within a response to intervention framework. Reading Psychology, 33, 190–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meisinger, E. B., Bradley, B. A., Schwanenflugel, P. J., Kuhn, M. R., & Morris, R. D. (2009). Myth and reality of the word caller: The relation between teacher nominations and prevalence among elementary school children. School Psychology Quarterly, 24(3), 147–150.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mellard, D. F., McKnight, M., & Woods, K. (2009). Response to intervention screening and progress-monitoring practices in 41 local schools. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24(4), 186–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, S., Martinez, R. S., Faust, D., & Mitchell, R. R. (2012a). Criterion-related validity of writing curriculum-based measurement (WCBM) in high school students. School Psychology Quarterly, 27(2), 85–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, S. H., Dufrene, B. A., Zoder-Martell, K., Harpole, L. L., Mitchell, R. R., & Blaze, J. T. (2012b). Generalizability theory analysis of cbm maze reliability in third-through fifth-grade students. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 37(3), 183–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metz, C. E., Goodenough, D. J., & Rossmann, K. (1973). Evaluation of receiver operating characteristic curve data in terms of information theory, with applications in radiography. Radiology, 109(2), 297–303.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Missal, K., Mercer, S., Martinez, R. S., & Casebeer, D. (2012). Concurrent and predictive patterns and trends in performance on early numeracy curriculum-based measures in kindergarten and first grade. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 37(2), 95–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NCS Pearson. (2012). Test of early literacy administration and scoring guide. Bloomington: NCS Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Early Literacy Panel. (2008). Developing early literacy: Report of the national early literacy panel. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the national mathematics advisory panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Bethesda: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J. M. (2008). Beyond correlational analysis of the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS): A classification validity study. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 542–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Northwest Evaluation Association. (2013). Measures of Academic Progress. www.nwea.org.

  • Norwalk, K. E., DiPerna, J. C., Lei, P., & Wu, Q. (2012). Examining early literacy skill differences among children in head start via latent profile analysis. School Psychology Quarterly, 27(3), 170–183.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, R. E., & Jenkins, J. R. (1999). The prediction of reading disabilities in kindergarten and first grade. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 159–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, C., & Ditkowsky, B. (2006). Examining the predictive validity of the dynamic indicators of vocabulary skills. Technical Report, 4. Westport.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pauker, S. G., & Kassirer, J. P. (1980). The threshold approach to clinical decision making. The New England Journal of Medicine, 302(20), 1109–1117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prewett, S., Mellard, D. F., Deshler, D. D., Allen, J., Alexander, R., & Stern, A. (2012). Response to intervention in middle schools: Practices and outcomes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27, 136–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puranik, C. S., & Lonigan, C. J. (2012). Name-writing proficiency, not length of name, is associated with preschool children’s emergent literacy skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27(2), 284–294.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Puranik, C. S., Petscher, Y., & Lonigan, C. J. (2012). Dimensionality and reliability of letter writing in 3- to 5-year-old preschool children. Learning and Individual Differences.

    Google Scholar 

  • RAND Mathematics Study Panel, Chair, D.L.B. (2003). Mathematical proficiency for all students: Toward a strategic research and development program in mathematics education. Arlington: RAND.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renaissance Learning (2010). The foundation of the STAR Assessments. Wisconsin Rapids: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reschly, A. L., Busch, T. W., Betts, J., Deno, S. L., & Long, J. (2009). Curriculum-Based Measurement oral reading as an indicator of reading achievement: A meta-analysis of the correlational evidence. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 427–469.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Riedel, B. W. (2007). The relation between DIBELS, reading comprehension, and vocabulary in urban first-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(4), 546–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roehrig, A. D., Petscher, Y., Nettles, S. M., Hudson, R. F., & Torgesen, J. K. (2008). Accuracy of the DIBELS oral reading fluency measure for predicting third grade reading comprehension outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 46(3), 343–366.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Seethaler, P. M., & Fuchs, L. S. (2010). The predictive utility of kindergarten screening for math difficulty. Exceptional Children, 77, 37–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seethaler, P. M., Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Compton, D. L. (2012). Predicting first graders’ development of calculation versus word-problem performance: The role of dynamic assessment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(1), 224–234.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, E. S., & Gebhardt, S. N. (2012). Comparing computer-adaptive and curriculum-based measurement methods of assessment. School Psychology Review, 41, 295–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, E. S., Keller, M. A., Lutz, J. G., Santoro, L. E., & Hintze, J. M. (2006). Curriculum-based measures and performance on state assessment and standardized tests reading and math performance in Pennsylvania. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 24, 19–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, E. S., Solari, E., & Petscher, Y. (2008). Use of a measure of reading comprehension to enhance prediction on the state high stakes assessment. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 316–328.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sittner Bridges, M., & Catts, H. (2011). The dynamic screening of a phonological awareness to predict risk for reading disabilities in kindergarten children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(4), 330–338.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snowling, M. J., Duff, F., Petrou, A., Schiffeldrin, J., & Bailey, A. M. (2011). Identification of children at risk of dyslexia: The validity of teacher judgments using ‘phonic awareness.’ Journal of Research in Reading, 34(2), 157–170. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2011.01492.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Speece, D. L., & Ritchey, K. D. (2005). A longitudinal study of the development of oral reading fluency in young children at risk for reading failure. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(5), 387–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Speece, D. L., Ritchey, K. D., Silverman, R., Schatschneider, C., Walker, C. Y., & Andrusik, K. N. (2010). Identifying children in middle childhood who are at risk for reading problems. School Psychology Review, 39, 258–276.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Speece, D. L., Schatschneider, C., Silverman, R., Case, L. P., Cooper, D. H., & Jacobs, D. M. (2011). Identification of reading problems in first grade within a response-to-intervention framework. The Elementary School Journal, 111, 585–607.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. L., & Howard, C. B. (2005). Children with reading disabilities: Does dynamic assessment help in classification? Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 28, 17–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swets, J. A., Tanner, W. P. Jr., & Birdsall, T. G. (1961). Decision processes in perception. Psychological Review, 68(5), 301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tackett, K. K., Roberts, G., Baker, S., & Scammaca, N. (2009). Implementing Response to Intervention: Practices and perspectives from five schools. Frequently asked questions. Portsmouth: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teisl, J. T., Mazzocco, M. M., & Myers, G. F. (2001). The utility of kindergarten teacher ratings for predicting low academic achievement in first grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(3), 286–293.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thurber, R. S., Shinn, M. R., & Smolkowski, K. (2002). What is measurement in mathematics? Construct validity of curriculum-based mathematics measures. School Psychology Review, 31(4), 498–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tindal, G., & Parker, R. (1989). Assessment of written expression for students in compensatory and special education programs. The Journal of Special Education, 23(2), 169–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolar, T. D., Lederberg, A. R., & Fletcher, J. M. (2012). A structural model of algebra achievement: Computational fluency and spatial visualisation as mediators of the effect of working memory on algebra achievement. Educational Psychology, 29(2), 239–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K. (1998). Catch them before they fall: Identification and assessment to prevent reading failure in young children. American Educator, 22, 32–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 55–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tower, D. M. (1973). A kindergarten screening index to predict reading failure. Annals of Dyslexia, 23(1), 90–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • TPRI. (2013). TPRI Early Reading Assessment. Author: Texas Education Agency & University of Texas System.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanDerHeyden, A. M. (in press). Universal screening may not be for everyone: The threshold model as a smarter way to determine risk. Manuscript accepted for publication in School Psychology Review, 43.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanDerHeyden, A. M. (2011). Technical adequacy of response to intervention decisions. Exceptional Children, 77, 335–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Burns, M. K. (2005). Using curriculum-based assessment and curriculum-based measurement to guide elementary mathematics instruction: Effect on individual and group accountability scores. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 30, 15–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanDerHeyden, A. M., Broussard, C., & Cooley, A. (2006). Further development of measures of early math performance for preschoolers. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 533–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VanDerHeyden, A. M., Broussard, C., Snyder, P., George, J., Lafleur, S. M., & Williams, C. (2011). Measurement of kindergartners’ understanding of early mathematical concepts. School Psychology Review, 40(2), 296–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Waelvelde, H., Hellinckx, T., Peersman, W., & Smits-Engelsman, B. C. (2012). SOS: A screening instrument to identify children with handwriting impairments. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 32(3), 306–319.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, S., & Fletcher, J. M. (2012). Response to intervention with secondary school students with reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(3), 244–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, S., Jiao, H., Young, M. J., Brooks, T., & Olson, J. (2008). Comparability of computer-based and paper-and-pencil testing in K–12 reading assessments: A meta-analysis of testing mode effects. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68(1), 5–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., & Pearson, N. A. (2009). TOSREC: Test of Sentence Reading Efficiency and Comprehension. Austin: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, R. K., & Compton, D. L. (2011). Dynamic Assessment and Its Implications for RTI Models. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(4), 311.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wayman, M. M., Wallace, T., Wiley, H. I., Ticha, R., & Espin, C. A. (2007). Literature synthesis on curriculum-based measurement in reading. Journal of Special Education, 41, 85–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yovanoff, P., Duesbery, L., Alonzo, J., & Tindal, G. (2005). Grade-level invariance of a theoretical causal structure predicting reading comprehension with vocabulary and oral reading fluency. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24, 4–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zirkel, P. A., & Thomas, L. B. (2010). State laws for rti: An updated snapshot. Teaching Exceptional Children, 42(3), 56–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zumeta, R. O., Compton, D. L., & Fuchs, L. S. (2012). Using word identification fluency to monitor first-grade reading developlemt. Exceptional Children, 78(2), 201–220.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Texas A&M University, College Station, USA

    Nathan H. Clemens & Myeongsun Yoon

  2. University of Houston, Houston, USA

    Milena A. Keller-Margulis

  3. Ossining Union Free School District, New York, USA

    Timothy Scholten

Authors
  1. Nathan H. Clemens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Milena A. Keller-Margulis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Timothy Scholten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Myeongsun Yoon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nathan H. Clemens .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of California, Santa Barbara Gevirtz Graduate School of Education, Santa Barbara, California, USA

    Shane R. Jimerson

  2. University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA

    Matthew K. Burns

  3. Education Research & Consulting, Inc., FAIRHOPE, Alabama, USA

    Amanda M. VanDerHeyden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Clemens, N., Keller-Margulis, M., Scholten, T., Yoon, M. (2016). Screening Assessment Within a Multi-Tiered System of Support: Current Practices, Advances, and Next Steps. In: Jimerson, S., Burns, M., VanDerHeyden, A. (eds) Handbook of Response to Intervention. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7568-3_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation