FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W60439412> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W60439412 endingPage "192" @default.
• W60439412 startingPage "188" @default.
• W60439412 abstract "Thirty years ago, the dominant approach to progress monitoring was mastery measurement. With mastery measurement, teachers specify a hierarchy of instructional objectives constituting the annual curriculum and, for each objective in the sequence, devise a criterion-referenced test to assess mastery. When a student achieves the mastery criterion for an objective, the teacher simultaneously shifts instruction and assessment to the next skill in the hierarchy. In this way, learning is conceptualized as a series of short-term accomplishments, which are believed to accumulate into broad competence. This notion of progress monitoring was represented in popular methods such as the Wisconsin Instructional Design System (see www.wids.org) and Precision Teaching (e.g., www.celeration.org). At about that same time, Stan Deno at the University of Minnesota, with a handful of doctoral students (including Doug Marston, Steve Robinson, Mark Shinn, Jerry Tindal, Caren Wesson, and me), launched a systematic program of research on the technical features, logistical challenges, and instructional effectiveness of progress monitoring. The initial focus of that research program was mastery measurement, but several technical difficulties associated with mastery measurement quickly emerged. For example, to assess mastery of a specific skill, each mastery measurement criterion-referenced test addresses a single skill. Such testing is potentially misleading, however, because many low achievers can read consonant-vowel-consonant words if they know that all words on the page conform to the pattern; similarly, they can solve addition with regrouping problems if they know that all problems on the page fit that problem type. By contrast, when a test mixes words with different phonetic patterns or mixes math problems of different types (as occurs on high-stakes tests and in the real world), these same students no longer perform the skill competently. This questions mastery measurement's assumption that a series of short-term accomplishments accumulates into broad-based competence; it compromises the relation between number of objectives mastered during the year and end-of-year performance on more global assessments; and it can lull educators into a false sense that their students are making progress. The CBM Alternative To address this and other important problems associated with mastery measurement (for a full discussion, see Fuchs & Deno, 1991), Deno (1985) conceptualized an alternative approach for the purpose of progress monitoring: curriculum-based measurement (CBM). Each weekly CBM is an alternate form, representing the performance desired at the end of the year. In this way, CBM circumvents mastery measurement's technical difficulties by requiring students to simultaneously integrate the various skills required for competent yearend performance on every weekly test. As students learn the necessary components of the annual curriculum, their CBM score gradually increases. Also, because each weekly test is comparable in difficulty and conceptualization, slope can be used to quantify rate of learning. Slope can also be used to gauge a student's responsiveness to the instructional program and as a signal to revise the student's program when inadequate responsiveness is revealed. A key challenge in the development of CBM is to identify measurement tasks that simultaneously integrate the various skills required for competent year-end performance. Two approaches have been used. One involves identifying a task that correlates robustly (and better than potentially competing tasks) with the various component skills constituting the academic domain. For example, Deno, Mirkin, and Chiang (1982) first identified passage reading fluency (often termed oral reading fluency) as a key CBM task by showing how its correlations with valued criterion measures exceeded correlations for other potential CBM tasks. Conceptually, it makes sense that passage reading fluency is a robust indicator of overall reading competence. …" @default.
• W60439412 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W60439412 creator A5012462098 @default.
• W60439412 date "2004-06-01" @default.
• W60439412 modified "2023-10-15" @default.
• W60439412 title "The Past, Present, and Future of Curriculum-Based Measurement Research" @default.
• W60439412 cites W1553608953 @default.
• W60439412 cites W1585310111 @default.
• W60439412 cites W1590886819 @default.
• W60439412 cites W1861741623 @default.
• W60439412 cites W1872019827 @default.
• W60439412 cites W1944577436 @default.
• W60439412 cites W1949092850 @default.
• W60439412 cites W1991230504 @default.
• W60439412 cites W1999632382 @default.
• W60439412 cites W2149265185 @default.
• W60439412 cites W2167082431 @default.
• W60439412 cites W2732368125 @default.
• W60439412 cites W4300297215 @default.
• W60439412 cites W84204608 @default.
• W60439412 cites W91970908 @default.
• W60439412 cites W98395747 @default.
• W60439412 doi "https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2004.12086241" @default.
• W60439412 hasPublicationYear "2004" @default.
• W60439412 type Work @default.
• W60439412 sameAs 60439412 @default.
• W60439412 citedByCount "281" @default.
• W60439412 countsByYear W604394122012 @default.
• W60439412 countsByYear W604394122013 @default.
• W60439412 countsByYear W604394122014 @default.
• W60439412 countsByYear W604394122015 @default.
• W60439412 countsByYear W604394122016 @default.
• W60439412 countsByYear W604394122017 @default.
• W60439412 countsByYear W604394122018 @default.
• W60439412 countsByYear W604394122019 @default.
• W60439412 countsByYear W604394122020 @default.
• W60439412 countsByYear W604394122021 @default.
• W60439412 countsByYear W604394122022 @default.
• W60439412 countsByYear W604394122023 @default.
• W60439412 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W60439412 hasAuthorship W60439412A5012462098 @default.
• W60439412 hasConcept C143266803 @default.
• W60439412 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W60439412 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W60439412 hasConcept C172712801 @default.
• W60439412 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W60439412 hasConcept C2779011557 @default.
• W60439412 hasConcept C47177190 @default.
• W60439412 hasConcept C55762236 @default.
• W60439412 hasConcept C75630572 @default.
• W60439412 hasConceptScore W60439412C143266803 @default.
• W60439412 hasConceptScore W60439412C145420912 @default.
• W60439412 hasConceptScore W60439412C15744967 @default.
• W60439412 hasConceptScore W60439412C172712801 @default.
• W60439412 hasConceptScore W60439412C19417346 @default.
• W60439412 hasConceptScore W60439412C2779011557 @default.
• W60439412 hasConceptScore W60439412C47177190 @default.
• W60439412 hasConceptScore W60439412C55762236 @default.
• W60439412 hasConceptScore W60439412C75630572 @default.
• W60439412 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W60439412 hasLocation W604394121 @default.
• W60439412 hasOpenAccess W60439412 @default.
• W60439412 hasPrimaryLocation W604394121 @default.
• W60439412 hasRelatedWork W1514269689 @default.
• W60439412 hasRelatedWork W2157275069 @default.
• W60439412 hasRelatedWork W2349636629 @default.
• W60439412 hasRelatedWork W2354921830 @default.
• W60439412 hasRelatedWork W2378040739 @default.
• W60439412 hasRelatedWork W2393880843 @default.
• W60439412 hasRelatedWork W2912615831 @default.
• W60439412 hasRelatedWork W3183844994 @default.
• W60439412 hasRelatedWork W4309283856 @default.
• W60439412 hasRelatedWork W648810244 @default.
• W60439412 hasVolume "33" @default.
• W60439412 isParatext "false" @default.
• W60439412 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W60439412 magId "60439412" @default.
• W60439412 workType "article" @default.