Curriculum-based Measures (CBM): The Cornerstone of the RTI Pyramid
Long Island Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development
Friday October 17, 2008
Lindenhurst Public Schools – The Team
Joseph LaMelza – Assistant Superintendent
Donna Smawley – Principal, Bower School
Roni Loud – Psychologist, Bower School
Maria Bohrer – Reading Teacher, Bower School
Carol Grasso – Kindergarten Teacher, Bower School
Debra Mauro – Reading Teacher, Bower School
Presentation Objectives
Understanding curriculum-based measures Recognizing the importance of early literacy
skill development Identify factors that contribute to the effective
implementation of RTI Understanding the necessity of managing data Sharing ideas and insights
Essentials of Reading Instruction
Reading instruction MUST focus on instructional strategies that help overall reading ability, NOT only on isolated skills (Goodman;Pearson, 2006)
What is CBM?
CBM is an approach to measuring the growth of student proficiency in the core educational skills that contribute to success in school. It is a fast, inexpensive, and easy-to-use system that allows teachers to continually measure their students’ growth in performance, determine if their students’ are growing at the expected rate, and provide data for teachers to evaluate their instructional strategies if students are not demonstrating adequate growth.
Deno, Lembke, and Anderson
CBM as General Outcome Measures - GOM
Relevant Features – Measure Big Ideas– Efficient– Standardized– Sensitive to growth and change over time and to the
effects of intervention
CBM Levels of Performance
1. Accuracy – barely able to do something without error, if you go slowly and concentrate
2. Fluency – can do something quickly without errors (no more than 5%). Fluency comes after accuracy and only with practice
3. Automaticity – can do something quickly without error and in the presence of distracters. Automaticity comes after fluency and with considerable practice.
CBM = Improvement in RATE
Fluency and automaticity are measured by rate (how fast it can be performed). Rate increases gradually as proficiency develops - which means it is measured over time. Improvement in rate is a measure of progress.
READING RATE = COMPREHENSION
Reading connected text rapidly and accurately plays a crucial role in a student’s ability to comprehend.
Rapid word recognition frees up cognitive resources for higher-level comprehension processes (Fuchs et al., 2001)
ORAL READING FLUENCY IS RELATED TO OUTCOMES
Oral reading fluency predicted satisfactory comprehension skills with 80% accuracy for Grade 1 students and with 70% accuracy for Grade 2 students
Students with satisfactory oral reading fluency but low comprehension may have poor vocabulary skills
Students with good reading speed and accuracy but poor comprehension are the exception rather than the rule (Riedel, 2007)
The most legitimate use of oral reading speed is as Deno (1985) brilliantly conceptualized it; a
way to monitor student progress.
The danger of using speed as the measure is that some students and teachers focus on speed at the expense of understanding.
Students need to simultaneously decode and comprehend using texts that increase in
difficulty (Samuels, 2007)
FLUENCY IS MORE THAN SPEED!
R-CBM as a Predictor
Oral reading fluency correlates highly with comprehension– .67 (Good et al., 2001) and .70 (Buck and Torgesen,
2003) with state reading assessment scores for Grade 3
– .73 with Stanford Achievement for Grade 1 (Cook, 2003)
– .76 with Woodcock-Johnson Broad Reading Cluster (Roberts, 2005) for Grade 1
What Makes a Big Idea a BIG IDEA?
Predictive of reading acquisition and later reading achievement
Something we can do something about, i.e., something we can teach
Something that improves outcomes for children if/when we teach it
Graney, 2006
BIG IDEAS
Phonemic Awareness Alphabetic Principle Accuracy and Fluency with connected text Vocabulary Comprehension
National Reading Panel, 2000
Early Literacy Probs / DIBELS
Most research is based on the body of knowledge regarding R-CBM
Early literacy probs were designed to be a downward extension of CBM before reading
Early literacy probs are short-term measures Early literacy probs are in the CBM family, but are pre-
skills*Don’t test on pre-skills when you can test the skill
Shinn, 2008
How can we use CBM to change Reading Outcomes?
Begin Early Focus Instruction on the BIG IDEAS of Early
Literacy Focus Assessment on Outcomes for Students
CBM in Practice
The Big Ideas for Preventing Reading Failure Increase the quality, consistency, and reach of
instruction Universal screening with timely and valid
assessments of reading growth as progress monitoring – formative vs. summative assessment
Provide more intensive interventions to ‘catch up” the struggling reader
Adapted from: Torgesen/Shinn, 2008
REMEMBER . . .
CBM are indicators CBM is a specific set of procedures CBM is for evaluation of instruction. It does not
require a specific instructional technique Use of CBM formative evaluation increases
student achievement.
Graney, 2006
Definition of RTI
High-quality instruction/intervention that is matched to students’ needs and has been demonstrated through scientific research and practice to produce high learning rates for most students
Learning rate and level of performance are the primary sources of information used in ongoing decision-making
Important educational decisions about intensity and duration of interventions are based on individual student’s response to instruction across multiple tiers of intervention.
National Association of State Directors of Special Education, 2005
Multi-Tiered Response
Tier IIICSE
Referral
Tier IISmall Group InterventionMore intensive duration
Tier IWhole group classroom instruction
ALL
SOME
FEW
CORE Concepts of RTI
Research-based instruction – core programs are taught with fidelity as intended to maximize effectiveness. Instruction is focused on achieving state standards
Use of data to inform instruction – universal screening of all students to measure and to monitor the development of skills – provide program accountability
Measurement of response – progress monitoring is used to determine the effectiveness of interventions – it is systematic, documented, and shared with staff
Interventions are NOT
Shortened assignments Preferential seating Parent contacts Classroom observations Suspensions Doing more of the same assignments Retention
McCook, J., 2005
Intervention Organized in Tiers
• Layers of intervention responding to students’ needs
• Each tier provides more intensive and supportive intervention
• Aimed at preventing reading disabilities
Torgeson, 2004
Multi-Tiered Response
Tier III
Tier II
Tier I
Literacy
CBM
Benchmarks
Progress Monitor
Strategic Monitor
3 Tier Model for RTI
Tier 3
More Differentiated Intense Interventions
*Increase frequency and duration of intervention
*Referral to Special Education
Strategic Monitoring
Tier 2
Implementing Supplementary Instruction
*General Ed Teacher, AIS Teacher, Related Service Providers,
Special Ed Teachers
*Fundations, Wilson, Small Group Instruction through AIS Reading, ERSS Speech
Progress Monitoring
Tier 1
Implementing Classroom Instruction – General Ed Teacher
* Researched Based Curriculum – Harcourt Reading Program, Differentiated Instruction, Focus instruction on Big Ideas of Literacy.
Benchmark Assessments
Kindergarten
Fall – Initial Sound Fluency (ISF), Letter Naming Fluency (LNF), Letter Sound Fluency (LSF)
Winter – Letter Naming Fluency (LNF), Letter Sound Fluency (LSF), Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF), Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF)
Spring – Same as Winter
Benchmark Assessments
Grade 1Fall – Letter Naming Fluency (LNF), Letter Sound Fluency (LSF),
Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF), Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF)
Winter – Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF), Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF), Oral Reading Fluency (ORF), Maze
Spring – Same as Winter
Problem-solving Model – ISTProcess, not interventions, are standardized
Individualized plan for each child that involves different levels of consultation:
•Description of student’s problem
•Data collection and problem analysis
•Intervention design and implementation – differentiated instruction determined by data
•Progress monitoring
•Evaluation of intervention effectiveness
•Flexible groupings throughout the year Wilson, 2007
Three Levels of Assessment
Benchmark Assessment – 3 times a year– Are there children who need additional support?– How many?– Which children?- What to do? Evaluate benchmark assessment data
Progress Monitoring – - Assess at-risk children more frequently – every two weeks
- Are current programs sufficient to keep progress on track or are additional supports / interventions needed?
Strategic Monitoring - weekly monitoring
What decisions do we make with data?
Plan for support with focus on BIG IDEAS.– Grouping – small group instruction, homogenous
groups, differentiated instruction, flexible grouping.– Time – How much? How Frequently? When?– Teacher / Student Interactions – modeling, direct
explanation, increase student engagement, increase guided practice with immediate feedback, scaffolding to support learning, review
Getting Started…..
Select a team – – Classroom teachers, reading specialists, psychologist, building
principal, special education teacher(s), speech teacher, other. People that have a vested interest in reading and literacy outcomes.
– Attend training sessions– Plan for data collection –
Who will collect data? When will you collect data? How will you collect data?
Collecting Data
Plan and Schedule Data Collection Organize Resources Collect Data Enter the Data Use Data for Educational Decision Making
Scheduling Data Collection
Classroom Approach – Obtain coverage for classroom teacher. Approximately 1-2 minutes per benchmark per student. Teacher works in hallway / room.
Advantages – Teachers assess own students, less disruptive to entire school. Disadvantages – Loss of instructional time, coverage, requires more days.
Building-wide Approach – Multiple specialists / trained members of team will assess students. Teacher brings class to library, cafeteria, gym, or other location with tables. Entire class can be assessed in 30 minutes.
Advantages – can be completed in one day, minimal classroom disruptions and loss of instructional time.
Disadvantages – space, trained staff, teachers not assessing.
School Readiness for RTI
Assessment: screening measures, progress monitoring practices and procedures
Curriculum: high-quality, research-based core curricula
Instruction: focus on effective instruction and interventions
School Readiness - Continued
Positive School Climate: school-wide processes and structures, individual student interventions, and a professional learning community
Professional Development: outcome focused content and ongoing assistance
Leadership: problem solving and individual characteristics of strong leaders
Closing the Achievement Gap: School Readiness for RtI, Sopris West Educational Services, 2007
See. . .
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (2006) Best practice in progress monitoring reading and mathematics at the elementary level. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds). Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 2147 -2164). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
Hosp, M.K., Hosp, J.L. & Howell, K.W. (2007). The ABCs of CBM: A practical guide to Curriculum-based Measurement. New York, NY: Guilford.
Miura, Wayman,M., Wallace, T., Ives Wiley, H., Ticha, R., & Espin, C. (2007). Literature synthesis on curriculum-based measurement in reading. The Journal of Special Education, 41(2), 85-120.
Shinn, M.R. (2008). Best practices in Curriculum-based Measurement and its use in a Problem-solving model. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.). Best practices in school psychology V (pp.243-262). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. Shinn, 2008
Top Related