This article reviews the decision rules for curriculum based reading scores. It concluded the rules were most often based on expert opinion.
Ardoin, S. P., Christ, T. J., Morena, L. S., Cormier, D. C., & Klingbeil, D. A. (2013). A systematic review and summarization of the recommendations and research surrounding Curriculum-Based Measurement of oral reading fluency (CBM-R) decision rules. Journal of School Psychology, 51(1), 1-18.
This paper describes the role end of course exams can play in the standards based reform movement.
Bishop, J. H., Mane, F., Bishop, M., Moriarty, J., Murnane, R., & Steinberg, L. T,. (2001). The role of end-of-course exams and minimum competency exams in standards-based reforms. Brookings papers on education policy, 4, 267-345.
This paper reviews the use of exit exams across the states and identifies challenges in implementation of these exams and what we know about the effects of them.
Chudowsky, N., Kober, N., Gayler, K. S., & Hamilton, M. (2002). State High School Exit Exams: A Baseline Report. ERIC. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED472055.pdf
Daly, I. I. I., Edward J, Martens, B. K., Barnett, D., Witt, J. C., & Olson, S. C. (2007). Varying Intervention Delivery in Response to Intervention: Confronting and Resolving Challenges With Measurement, Instruction, and Intensity. School Psychology Review, 36(4), 562-581.
Curriculum-based measurement is a type of formative assessment. It is used to screen for students who are not progressing and to identify how well students are responding to interventions.
Deno, S. L. (2003). Developments in Curriculum-Based Measurement. Journal of Special Education, 37(3), 184-192.
This article reviews the advantages of curriculum-based measurement as part of a data-based problem solving model.
Deno, S. L., & Fuchs, L. S. (1987). Developing Curriculum-Based Measurement Systems For Data Based Special Education Problem Solving. Focus on Exceptional Children, 19(8), 1-16.
Dougherty, C., Mellor, L., & Jian, S. (2006). The Relationship between Advanced Placement and College Graduation. 2005 AP Study Series, Report 1. National Center for Educational Accountability. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED519365.pdf
This article describes using formative assessemnt as a foundational tool in a data-based problem solving approach to solving social behavior problems.
Ervin, R. A., Schaughency, E., Matthews, A., Goodman, S. D., & McGlinchey, M. T. (2007). Primary and secondary prevention of behavior difficulties: Developing a data-informed problem-solving model to guide decision making at a school-wide level. Psychology in the Schools, 44(1), 7-18.
This article compares and contrasts mastery level measures (grades) with curriculum-based measurement (global outcome measure).
Fuchs, L. S., & Deno, S. L. (1991). Paradigmatic distinctions between instructionally relevant measurement models. Exceptional Children, 57(6), 488-500.
In this meta-analysis of studies that utilize formative assessment the authors report an effective size of .7.
Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1986). Effects of Systematic Formative Evaluation: A Meta-Analysis. Exceptional Children, 53(3), 199-208.
Curriculum-based measurement is recommended as an assessment method to identify students that require special education services.
Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1997). Use of curriculum-based measurement in identifying students with disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 1.
This study examines the effect of formative assessment on teachers’ instructional planning.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Stecker, P. M. (1989). Effects of Curriculum-Based Measurement on Teachers’ Instructional Planning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22(1).
The authors contrast the functions of high stakes testing with prevention-based assessment. The authors also show the value of using formative assesment to estimate performance on high stakes tests.
Good, R.H., III., Simmons, D. C., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2001). The Importance and Decision-Making Utility of a Continuum of Fluency-Based Indicators of Foundational Reading Skills for Third-Grade High-Stakes Outcomes. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 257-288.
Curriculum based measures were used to to evaluate student progress across multiple years following the introduction of selected evidence-based practices.
Greenwood, C. R., Tapia, Y., Abbott, M., & Walton, C. (2003). A Building-Based Case Study of Evidence-Based Literacy Practices: Implementation, Reading Behavior, and Growth in Reading Fluency, K--4. Journal of Special Education, 37(2), 95.
This study evaluated the effect data from end of course exams had on teacher practices in history instruction. In general, the teachers supported the changes but were reluctant to change their instructional practices.
Mueller, R. G. W., & Colley, L. M. (2015). An evaluation of the impact of end-of-course exams and ACT-QualityCore on US history instruction in a Kentucky high school. The Journal of Social Studies Research. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/download/41700187/JSSR.pdf
This study evaluated the effects of high stakes test such as end of course exams at the level of a school district. Across the six states included in the study the effects were mixed. In general the more developed the system was the better the effects but this was not always the case.
Opfer, V. D., Henry, G. T., & Mashburn, A. J. (2008). The district effect: Systemic responses to high stakes accountability policies in six southern states. American Journal of Education, 114(2), 299-332. Retrieved from http://www.darleenopfer.com/File/aje final.pdf
This article provides an overview of contextual factors across the levels of an educational system that influence implementation.
Schaughency, E., & Ervin, R. (2006). Building Capacity to Implement and Sustain Effective Practices to Better Serve Children. School Psychology Review, 35(2), 155-166. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ788242
Response to Intervention depends on regular, routine monitoring of student progress. This paper describes a multi-component approach to monitoring progress.
Stecker, P. M., Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2008). Progress Monitoring as Essential Practice Within Response to Intervention. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 27(4), 10-17.
This article reviews the efficacy of curriculum-based measurement as a methodology for enhancing student achievement in reading and math. Variables that contribute to the benefit of curriculum-based measurement are discussed.
Stecker, P. M., Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2005). Using Curriculum-Based Measurement to Improve Student Achievement: Review of Research. Psychology in the Schools, 42(8), 795-819.
The authors propose a model for using curriculum-based measurement to monitor and improve student achievement.
Stecker, P. M., Lembke, E. S., & Foegen, A. (2008). Using Progress-Monitoring Data to Improve Instructional Decision Making. Preventing School Failure, 52(2), 48-58.
This paper examines the use of high stakes testing such as end of course exams in American education. The conclusions are that the exams do not produce substantive changes in instructional practices and the information is useful to measure school and system progress but has limited utility for instructional guidance.
Supovitz, J. (2009). Can high stakes testing leverage educational improvement? Prospects from the last decade of testing and accountability reform. Journal of Educational Change, 10(2-3), 211-227.
The author makes the case that rapid assessment can identify struggling students who can then be provided intensive instruction so their performance on high stakes tests is improved.
Yeh, S. S. (2006). Can Rapid Assessment Moderate the Consequences of High-Stakes Testing. Education & Urban Society, 39(1), 91-112.
The author reports data suggesting that the systematic use of formative assessment can reduce the pressure on teachers that they experience with high stakes testing.
Yeh, S. S. (2006). High-stakes testing: Can rapid assessment reduce the pressure?. Teachers College Record, 108(4).
The author presents data suggesting that rapid assessment of student performance improves education outcomes for students at a very low cost compared to other initiatives to improve outcomes.
Yeh, S. S. (2007). The Cost-Effectiveness of Five Policies for Improving Student Achievement. American Journal of Evaluation, 28(4), 416-436.
The author compares the effectiness of comprehensive school reform relative to rapid progress monitoring. Progress monitoring results in much greater benefit than comprehensive school reform.
Yeh, S. S. (2008). The Cost-Effectiveness of Comprehensive School Reform and Rapid Assessment. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 16(13), 1-32.
The authors examine the effectiveness of replacing low performing teachers relative to using formative assessment as a means of increasing student outcomes.
Yeh, S. S., & Ritter, J. (2009). The Cost-Effectiveness of Replacing the Bottom Quartile of Novice Teachers Through Value-Added Teacher Assessment. Journal of Education Finance, 34(4), 426-451.
This article describes the use of technology to monitor student progress in math instruction. They highlight the importance of using the technology wiith fidelity.
Ysseldyke, J., & Bolt, D. M. (2007). Effect of Technology-Enhanced Continuous Progress Monitoring on Math Achievement. School Psychology Review, 36(3), 453-467.
This report updates the status of high school exit exams nationally. The number of states using end of course exams as part of accountability measures has become more common and data suggest the trend will continue.
Zabala, D., Minnici, A., McMurrer, J., & Briggs, L. (2008). State High School Exit Exams: A Move toward End-of-Course Exams. Center on Education Policy. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED504468.pdf