Curriculum-Based Measurement for Reading Progress

Transcription

1 Curriculum-Based Measurement for Reading Progress VICTORIA GROVES SCOTT AND MARY KONYA WEISHAAR This article contains a set of detailed steps that will assist middle and high school special education teachers in the construction and implementation of curriculum-based measurement (CBM) to track reading progress. CBM involves teachers, students, and parents in progress monitoring. The steps include information on how to construct and organize a CBM, how to administer and score a CBM, how to use the information for instructional changes, and how to use the data collected from a CBM to inform parents about their child s progress. Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is a series of informal miniachievement tests that teachers can develop in the areas of reading, mathematics, spelling, and writing. CBM focuses on measurement using the actual curriculum in which the student works. It uses standardized methodology with documented reliability and validity. CBM is an authentic, data-based assessment that helps the special education teacher monitor progress of individual students on an ongoing basis, determine what to teach, quickly determine if instruction is effective so that necessary changes in instruction can be made, and write measurable individual education goals. CBM is especially important when working with students with special needs because the use of CBM has been shown to increase student achievement. In the area of reading, CBM includes the important factor of rate of reading. Founders in the field of education, such as B. F. Skinner (1953), have long argued that rate of behavior and/or fluency is essential in the development of any skill (Shinn, Ysseldyke, Deon, & Tindal, 1986). CBM is a type of individual assessment and, as such, teachers can provide instructional methods with a more personalized instructional approach. Teachers can actively teach involved learners who are empowered to help make decisions about their own learning. In essence, teachers can easily manage the instructional process while promoting and nurturing active learning (Choate & Evans, 1992). CBM in reading involves asking a student to read aloud for 1 minute and then counting the number of words read correctly. The number of words read correctly can be frequently probed and graphed to assess the student s progress in reading. The process is intended for INTERVENTION IN SCHOOL AND CLINIC VOL. 38, NO. 3,JANUARY 2003 (PP ) 153

2 use in a special education, remedial, or inclusive reading language arts class where the students are reading from materials at their instructional level. The inability of thousands of middle and high school students to successfully read their academic texts (Schoenbach, Greenleaf, Cziko, & Hurwitz, 1999) makes the use of most contentarea texts inappropriate. The following steps demonstrate how to develop and incorporate CBM in reading instruction for middle and high school students with disabilities. By following these steps, the middle or high school special education teacher can involve students in their own progress monitoring (encouraging active, motivated learners) and comply with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 1997) requirements on parental notification of students progress. 1. Collect a series of text samples from your curriculum. The first step in the construction of a CBM is to analyze your language arts curriculum. In the area of reading, this would mean collecting a series of approximately 21 (or 1 for 18 weeks of instruction and 3 for the baseline) 1-minute reading samples of 250 to 300 words. The samples should be taken directly from instructional materials the students will be exposed to during the year. You should include a variety of sources. For example, if you use a basal text, a sample from the text should be included. If you will read a literature piece, a sample should be selected from the book. Select at least one but no more than three passages from each story read. The selected passages should be written in prose; this can include narrative and/or expository selections. Do not include poetry or plays. Remember that these samples should be taken from material that is, roughly speaking, at the student s instructional level. Material is considered at the frustrational level if the student cannot orally read between 85% and 90% of the words in the passage (Burns & Roe, 2002). 2. Calculate the readability for each passage. In order to estimate the reading level of each passage, it is a good idea to calculate the readability level of each passage. This can be done using several formulas. The Fry Readability Graph (Fry, 1977) can be found in most reading methods textbooks. The Flesch- Kinkaid readability estimate is built into Microsoft Word and other popular word-processing programs (Gunning, 2002). For Microsoft Word, follow these directions to get the readability levels: Click Tools and scroll down to Options, Click the Spelling and Grammar tab on the Options box, Check the Show Readability box, and Click okay. When you run the spelling and grammar check (under Tools) after the passage is typed, you will be given the readability. The intent of this step is not to level the passages but to give you more information about the curriculum. It will also allow you to make sure the chosen passages are not above the student s instructional reading level. If a student has difficulty reading a particular passage, it may be due to the level of language used in the passages. Readability information might influence the decisions you make about the curriculum later in the semester. 3. Type, organize, and copy the passages. Type the passages, leaving room for a heading and numbers at the right. The heading will include information such as the student s name, the date, and the passage score. Proof each passage, and make corrections. One copy of the text without numbers is used for the student copy. This copy is given to the student when he or she reads aloud. The teacher uses a second copy, which has a cumulative word count on the right-hand side of the paper. Compound words are counted as one word; hyphenated words are counted as two words. Type the numbers onto the teacher s copy of the text and proof the numbers as shown in Figure 1. To probe once a week for 18 weeks, you would need 21 different passages (1 for each week and 3 for baseline), one copy of the text only for the student, and one copy of the text with the heading and cumulative word count for the teacher. The passages should be arranged in random order. You can put the student copies into a folder for reuse by different students, but you will need a teacher copy of each passage for each student to whom you administer the CBM. Teacher s copies will be used to mark student errors and calculate the passage score. 4. Set up graphs to track student progress. The next step is to create the graph used to monitor student 154 INTERVENTION IN SCHOOL AND CLINIC

3 04 Scott p153 11/22/02 10:34 AM Page 155 Figure 1. Teacher s text copy. progress. On one piece of standard graph paper, four squares per inch, mark a horizontal and vertical line. The horizontal axis indicates the number of probes or weeks that the CBM will be used. The vertical axis is labeled with the number of words read correctly in a 1-minute interval (see Figure 2). 5. Arrange your setting and schedule. The CBM should be administered in a fairly quiet setting that will allow you to hear the student read orally. You will need to listen to the student read for 1 minute only, so a stopwatch or clock with a second hand that is easily seen is essential. The CBM is easily administered while other students are busy with seatwork. To collect data each week, you might want to administer the CBM to approximately four to five students per day. This would mean you would need to prepare for about 10 minutes of seatwork each day. Because the CBM is so easy and fast to use, a trained VOL. 38, N O. 3, J ANUARY

4 04 Scott p153 11/22/02 10:34 AM Page 156 Figure. Student graph. paraeducator could help with the CBM construction, organization, and administration. 6. Introduce CBM to the students in your class. To assist students in becoming active, motivated learners, it is important to involve them in their own 156 I NTERVENTION IN S CHOOL AND C LINIC progress monitoring using CBM. Prior to beginning the assessments, the teacher can say something to the class such as, This year we will be monitoring your reading progress by counting how many words you read correctly in 1 minute. It is important for

5 the teacher to emphasize what CBM involves, how it will be incorporated within the normal classroom routine, when students will read, and how students will be taught to graph their own data. This introduction should include a lesson or two explaining how to use graphs, plot data points, connect data points to show the trend, and interpret graphs. For students unable to understand graphs, the teacher can assist to the degree necessary. 7. Review the standard administration procedures for CBM. As the teacher administers individual probes to each student, standard administration procedures must be followed to ensure reliability and validity of the assessment. The teacher could say the following: When I say start, begin reading at the top of this page. If you wait on a word too long, I ll tell you the word. If you come to a word you cannot read, just say pass and go on to the next word. Do not attempt to read as fast as you can. This is not a speed reading test. Read at a comfortable rate. At the end of 1 minute, I ll say stop. (Tindal & Marston, 1990, p. 148) The student should be asked if there are any questions before you say, Ready, begin. If the student reads to the end of the selection before the minute is up, he or she should begin again at the top. You should supply a word only after 3 seconds without a response. Do not say the correct word if an incorrect response is given. 8. Record errors. While the student reads orally, the teacher will follow along, using the numbered passage as a protocol. You will mark a slash (/) through any word that is read incorrectly (error). As shown in Figure 3, errors include any word supplied for the student by the teacher, any word the student passes on, mispronunciations, omissions, words read out of sequence, and substitution. Repetitions, self-corrections, dialectical differences, and insertions (added words) are not counted as errors. After 1 minute, say stop and place a bracket ( ] ) after the last word said by the student (see Figure 1). 9. Scoring. On your teacher text copy, write the number of words the student attempted in the 1-minute interval. Subtract the number of errors, indicated by the slash (/) through them. As illustrated in Figure 1, the passage score will be the total number of words read correctly in a 1-minute interval. This score is then plotted along the vertical axis according to the date of the test administration, and a point is plotted at the intersection of the number on the vertical axis and the date of the horizontal axis. Error Type Text Student Response supplied word The building reached... The (3 seconds) reached... teacher says building passed word The building reached... The pass reached... mispronunciation The building reached... The bullding reached... omission The building reached... The reached... word read out The building reached... The reached building... of sequence substitution The building reached... The building stood... Figure 3. Types of student errors. 10. Gather baseline data for each student. Over a 2-week period, the teacher will administer three probes to each student and average the number of words read correctly. The average score will be graphed for each student. This score will represent each student s starting point in progress monitoring. 11. Develop an aim line on each student s graph, write a measurable Individualized Education Program (IEP) goal, and connect it to state standards or goals. As illustrated in Figure 2, an aim line represents the line drawn between the student s baseline (number of words read correctly) at the beginning of the term and an estimation of how many words the student will read correctly at the end of the term. Generally, the teacher can estimate 1 or 2 words gained for each week of instruction above the baseline. For example, if the student averages 52 words read correctly for his or her baseline score in August, the teacher might estimate a passage score of 70 words read correctly at the end of 18 weeks (i.e., gain of 1 word per week). As illustrated in Figure 2, a line drawn between 52 and 70 words read correctly is the aim line, and other probes during the semester are plotted around and compared to this aim line. The teacher then writes a measurable IEP goal using the estimated level of words read correctly in 18 weeks. The goal could look something like this: In 18 weeks, when given a randomly selected passage from the ninth-grade reading curriculum, John will read aloud at a rate of 70 words correct per minute. Because the majority of states have goals or standards for all students, the IEP goal can then be connected to the state standard or goal. For example, in Illinois, one state goal is to read with understanding and fluency. This state goal could be noted next to the IEP goal. 12. Draw a trend line. Because high school students need to be involved in self-monitoring, they should be given the data points following each CBM administration. Students can then plot the scores and VOL. 38, NO. 3,JANUARY

6 connect the dots to form a trend line (see Figure 2). Although the student will be responsible for plotting points and drawing the trend line, the teacher should closely monitor how the trend line falls around the aim line. Use the following decision rules to help you analyze the data. 13. Collect data weekly. After the baseline is plotted and the aim line is drawn, you will continue to collect data by administering one CBM to each participating student on a weekly basis. The passages will be in random order so no one passage is read more than once. One of the most valuable aspects of curriculum-based measures is their use of ongoing and continuous assessment data. Therefore, it is important to collect data each week. If possible, conduct data collection twice a week because it will yield more information. 14. Decision Rule 1: If three consecutive data points are below the aim line for a student, ask yourself why. You might want to focus on any possible upsetting events in the home, an illness, excessive absences, or behavior difficulties. In addition, you may want to check the readability level of the passages for those three probes. It is possible that all three are too difficult. If there are no unusual circumstances, you may want to consider making an instructional change. 15. Instructional changes for Decision Rule 1. Instructional changes can take several forms. The first type of change might be made to the environment in order to support the learners needs, such as changing the student s seating during instruction to facilitate better attention or changing the time of instruction to better match the student s learning preference. The second type of change involves modifications to the instructional design. You might change the type of instruction from small group to one-on-one, make sure the student has plenty of time for guided and independent practice of skills taught, provide reteaching when necessary, review skills, or simplify directions. Teachers might also look into changes that involve supplemental instruction. The student might need additional instruction in learning strategies, decoding skills, vocabulary, use of context clues, or visualization to be successful in the current curriculum. You might also want to do a student interview or think aloud during oral reading to determine what techniques the student is using during reading. 16. Decision Rule 2: If the student s performance is not consistently above or below the aim line (i.e., more than three consecutive data points), don t make any instructional changes. It is normal for a student s performance to be above, then below, the aim line. As long as this pattern doesn t consistently stay below the aim line for more than three consecutive data points, the student is learning. 17. Decision Rule 3: If the student s performance is above the aim line for three consecutive data points, consider enhancing and enriching the instructional program. In this case, the student may benefit from an enriched program in addition to the regular instructional program. Some additions to the student s program might include doing some independent silent reading, researching and reading about a topic of interest, or becoming a peer tutor in reading. 18. Continue to measure and monitor. It is essential for teachers to continue to measure and monitor student progress through weekly probes and through analysis of the trend line in relationship to the aim line. You can more effectively plan to meet the unique needs of individual students through the use of continuing and ongoing assessment. 19. Inform parents in writing of the child s progress at least as often as parents of students in general education are informed. IDEA states that parents must be regularly informed of their child s progress toward annual goals (1997). They must also be informed about the extent to which progress is sufficient to allow the student to achieve goals by the end of the year. In a middle or high school setting, this typically involves a quarterly or semester grade card sent to the parents. CBM results can also be used to inform parents of their child s progress in reading and can be sent at the same time as the grade card. 20. Prepare a written explanation for parents of the CBM graph to send with the student s quarterly or semester grade card. Included with a copy of 158 INTERVENTION IN SCHOOL AND CLINIC

7 the student s graph and report card could be a short note drafted for parents to explain CBM. It might include the following: This year we are measuring your child s reading progress. This involves your child reading aloud from materials in the Reading (or class name) class to the teacher for 1 minute on a weekly basis. The number of words read correctly are counted and graphed each week. As you look at your child s chart, here are some items to notice: Baseline: This is the number of words your child read correctly at the beginning of the term (on the left side of the graph). Aim line: This is the number of words I expect your child to be able to read correctly at the end of the term (on the right side of the graph). As your child progresses through the semester (or quarter), it is anticipated that (he or she) will read more words correctly over time. Graph points: These are the number of words read correctly by your child each week. Enclosed is your child s graph. I have also made some notes about (his or her) progress on the graph. This report will be sent to you periodically and updated at the annual review in May. Please contact me if you have questions or wish to discuss your child s progress. The teacher might also want to note positive changes in the student s reading progress on the graph. Some parents might need some assistance in understanding the concept and may need an explanation of the CBM during a conference. Following these steps will allow you to continually assess each student s progress in the reading curriculum and to evaluate your instructional program. Although you have not gained information about reading comprehension, the relationship between rate of reading and comprehension generally indicates that students who read at a higher rate comprehend better. This is primarily because slow readers spend more time decoding words and process words in smaller chunks than faster readers. The act of processing in chunks instead of words interferes with the student s ability to gain meaning from the printed text. Therefore, it can be assumed that as a student gains fluency and reading rate, his or her reading comprehension will follow. The use of these CBM steps will assure teacher, student, and parent involvement in the instructional process. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Victoria Groves Scott, EdD, is an associate professor of special education at Southern Illinois University Edwardsville in... as a student gains fluency and reading rate, his or her reading comprehension will follow. the Department of Special Education and Communications Disorders. She was awarded the Kansas Council for Exceptional Children Outstanding Special Education Teacher of the Year for She has conducted research and published an instructional manual and video related to the use of phonemic awareness in reading instruction for students with disabilities. Mary Konya Weishaar, PhD, is an associate professor of special education at Southern Illinois University Edwardsville and has coauthored two texts and several articles. Her current interests include legal aspects and administration of special education, teaching techniques, assessment, and university school partnerships. Address: Victoria Groves Scott, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, SECD, Box 1147, Edwardsville, IL 62025; viscott@siue.edu REFERENCES Burns, P. C., & Roe, B. D. (2002). Informal reading inventory. New York: Houghton Mifflin. Choate, J. S., & Evans, S. S. (1992). Authentic assessment of special learners: Problems or promise. Preventing School Failure, 37(1), 6 9. Fry, E. (1977). Fry s readability graph: Clarification, validity and extensions to level 17. Journal of Reading, 21, Glor-Scheib, S., & Zigmond, N. (1993). Exploring the potential motivational properties of curriculum-based measurement in reading among middle school students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 4(2), Gunning, T. B. (2002). Assessing and correcting reading and writing difficulties. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C (26). Schoenbach, R., Greenleaf, C., Cziko, C., & Hurwitz, L. (1999). Reading for understanding. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Macmillan. Shinn, M. R., Ysseldyke, J. E., Deon, S. L., & Tindal, G. A. (1986). A comparison of differences between students labeled learning disabled and low achieving on measures of classroom performance. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19, Tindal, G. A., & Marston, D. B. (1990). Classroom-based assessment. New York: Merrill/Macmillan. VOL. 38, NO. 3,JANUARY

8