基于课程的二次写作测量的坡度技术特征

IF 1.5 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Reading & Writing Quarterly Pub Date : 2021-01-03 DOI:10.1080/10573569.2020.1860841
J. Romig, A. Olsen
{"title":"基于课程的二次写作测量的坡度技术特征","authors":"J. Romig, A. Olsen","doi":"10.1080/10573569.2020.1860841","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Compared to other content areas, there is a dearth of research examining curriculum-based measurement of writing (CBM-W). This study conducted a conceptual replication examining the reliability, stability, and sensitivity to growth of slopes produced from CBM-W. Eighty-nine (N = 89) eighth-grade students responded to one CBM-W probe weekly for 11 weeks. Probes were scored using four different CBM-W scoring procedures: words written, words spelled correctly, correct word sequences, and correct minus incorrect word sequences. We found limited evidence for reliability and stability of these slopes. Further, the slopes were not sensitive to growth, as defined as a slope significantly greater than zero. We recommend caution when using CBM-W to progress monitor eighth-grade students. Future research should examine the same technical features with a sample of students who are low-performing or at-risk for writing failure.","PeriodicalId":51619,"journal":{"name":"Reading & Writing Quarterly","volume":"37 1","pages":"535 - 551"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10573569.2020.1860841","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Technical Features of Slopes for Curriculum-Based Measures of Secondary Writing\",\"authors\":\"J. Romig, A. Olsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10573569.2020.1860841\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Compared to other content areas, there is a dearth of research examining curriculum-based measurement of writing (CBM-W). This study conducted a conceptual replication examining the reliability, stability, and sensitivity to growth of slopes produced from CBM-W. Eighty-nine (N = 89) eighth-grade students responded to one CBM-W probe weekly for 11 weeks. Probes were scored using four different CBM-W scoring procedures: words written, words spelled correctly, correct word sequences, and correct minus incorrect word sequences. We found limited evidence for reliability and stability of these slopes. Further, the slopes were not sensitive to growth, as defined as a slope significantly greater than zero. We recommend caution when using CBM-W to progress monitor eighth-grade students. Future research should examine the same technical features with a sample of students who are low-performing or at-risk for writing failure.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51619,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reading & Writing Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"535 - 551\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10573569.2020.1860841\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reading & Writing Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2020.1860841\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reading & Writing Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2020.1860841","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要与其他内容领域相比,缺乏对基于课程的写作测量(CBM-W)的研究。本研究对CBM-W产生的边坡的可靠性、稳定性和对生长的敏感性进行了概念复制。八十九(N = 89)八年级学生对CBM-W每周11次的调查做出回应 周。使用四种不同的CBM-W评分程序对探针进行评分:书写的单词、拼写正确的单词、正确的单词序列和正确减去错误的单词序列。我们发现这些斜坡的可靠性和稳定性证据有限。此外,斜率对生长不敏感,定义为明显大于零的斜率。我们建议在使用CBM-W对八年级学生进行进度监控时要谨慎。未来的研究应该以表现不佳或有写作失败风险的学生为样本,检验同样的技术特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Technical Features of Slopes for Curriculum-Based Measures of Secondary Writing
Abstract Compared to other content areas, there is a dearth of research examining curriculum-based measurement of writing (CBM-W). This study conducted a conceptual replication examining the reliability, stability, and sensitivity to growth of slopes produced from CBM-W. Eighty-nine (N = 89) eighth-grade students responded to one CBM-W probe weekly for 11 weeks. Probes were scored using four different CBM-W scoring procedures: words written, words spelled correctly, correct word sequences, and correct minus incorrect word sequences. We found limited evidence for reliability and stability of these slopes. Further, the slopes were not sensitive to growth, as defined as a slope significantly greater than zero. We recommend caution when using CBM-W to progress monitor eighth-grade students. Future research should examine the same technical features with a sample of students who are low-performing or at-risk for writing failure.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
24
期刊最新文献
Argumentative Writing for Students With Disabilities in Inclusive Science Classes: A Pilot Study Online Intervention to Prevent Summer Learning Loss For Struggling First Grade Writers Can Artificial Intelligence Identify Reading Fluency and Level? Comparison of Human and Machine Performance Exploring Relations between Teachers’ Language- and Code-Based Writing Supports to Early Literacy and Vocabulary Learning in Children with Language Vulnerabilities The Technical Adequacy of Coding Procedures for Retell Measures in Elementary School Students with Dyslexia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1