Curriculum Based Assessment - Research Paper Example

? Curriculum Based Assessment (CBA) Introduction Curriculum based assessment is an approach to measuring the educational growth of each student. The main objective of the curriculum-based assessment is to assist teachers in testing the effectiveness of the lessons they give to their individual students. This paper will highlight on the evaluation and the efficiency of curriculum based assessment for growing the achievement of special education. It furnishes students with broad range of educational issues. It offers special education with new curriculum domains to various special groups in the society. This paper provides a short history of curriculum based assessment, rationale of its design, and summary of primary features of CBA. The various perspectives and extensions of CBA to current research domains are identified in the wide context of assessment of education. Early efforts on improving the effectiveness of special learning for students with disabilities have been stretched. This fosters the identification and screening of students at risk; hence develop schools with broad accountability systems. It also assesses achievements in the specific area of learning as well as the childhood growth and the measurement of literacy amongst students with disability. It also evaluates students who are learning English language and to predict success on high-level assessment. History It is important to note that the curriculum based assessment originated in data based program modification model, which was described by Mirkin & Deno in 1977 (Mooney et al, 2013, p.90). It outlined how various progresses, which monitors data can be used in making decisions on educational programming for students with disability. The model was made for special education resource teachers. This model was also used to improve the teacher’s interventions on slow learners. As much as this model showed the manner, in which data can be used to get the desired decisions for the disabled students, its validity, as a way of improving special education had not been validated empirically. In order to explore the validity of the model, a six-year research and development program was conducted through the federally funded research on learning disabilities by the university of Minnesota institute of research. The research sought to establish the possibility of developing a formative assessment system. Teachers could use this system to grow their effectiveness in teaching learners with academic disabilities. Eventually, a comparative study showed that teachers were more effective on using this formative model. In this regard, the validity criteria and conventional credibility in writings, expressions, and spellings were emphasized. There were three key questions addressed in creating a curriculum based assessment procedures. This included the mode of structuring the activities of evaluation in order to produce adequate data, the parameters of measuring the results, and the possibility of using the data to grow educational programs (Stecker & Fuchs, 2000, P.130). These questions were answered using a systematic evaluation of three major issues relevant to each of the measures. The logistical feasibility of the measures and treatment of utility or validity of the measures were technically evaluated. The procedures for developing the assessment have been specified and will be briefly discussed. Definition Curriculum is the content that is organized for delivery to students. It is done with respect to sequence and scope of methods and materials by intended learning results (Lemons et al, 2013, p.450). Curriculum based assessment is a term that is used to refer to school based assessment that evaluates student performance in accordance to what is being taught. Curriculum based test measures the functioning of student in relation to knowledge and skills as outlined in the curriculum. It is noteworthy that the curriculum-based measurement measures the progress and competency of a student in the basic areas of skill such as math, spelling, fluency, and written language. Instruction is the organized process of giving information, resources, and opportunities to assist in development of students’ knowledge and skills. Learning environment is a setting in which students are given instructions. A lesson is the activity that is to be done or content that is to be taught during a given period. Reliability is the consistency of instruments and assessment procedures. A reliable test will give the same score when knowledge or abilities are similar over time to time. Pros and Cons Curriculum based assessment has both advantages and disadvantages. They are efficient and economical most of the important characteristics that are used in developing curriculum based measurement procedures are related to the need for them to be feasible logistically and within the context of the ongoing instructions. CBM are time efficient, they must be of short durations, should be done frequently, repeatedly for growth evaluation and measurement (Kind, 2013, p.675). CBM tasks are also of multiple forms each measure that is repeated should be in response to a task that is stimulus and not familiar to the student so that an increase in the students’ performance will represent real growth in proficiency and not the effect of practice. Therefore, the tasks used should create equivalent forms. CBM is also cheap; the teachers use cheap materials frequently, as it should be available in many forms. It is also easy to teach since many teachers are professionals and students will do the test that must have easily taught. The problems on implementing CBM entails the establishment of parameters in task selection that has always been important, this delimits the range and variety of tasks to be included in search for indicators that are valid for basic proficiency. Specifying the characteristics of a feasible task that is practical to be done frequently on repeated measurement enables the developer to focus only on tasks that are reasonably classroom based. Unfortunately, those who encounter CBM for the first time may not understand the reasons for limiting task selection (Wesson et al, 2006, p.170). Consequently, the developers and potential users of alternative measure may increase the scope and complexity of measures, which are necessary for the assessment of curriculum outcome. These results may not be a practical measure to be used as part of the classroom routine instruction. Contrary, CBM procedures do not require tasks for measurement that is sufficiently complex and can mislead critics to believe that CBM measures are valid. An illustrator of the problem in the reading area where evidence is developed that when properly structured such that it is read aloud from text can be used to develop an indicator globally for reading proficiency. Major critics of measuring reading have students read aloud from a connecting discourse such that the task does not reflect the student’s comprehension of text. Criticism is invalid on technical grounds the criterion used by validity research in reading measurement provides a basis to conclude that the number of words correctly read aloud from a text in a sample time say one minute is an indicator of students’ reading proficiency. The CBM reading scores is related to standardized achievement score test, student’s grade, and age. It is also related to the judgment of teachers on reading proficiency, and to their regular placement, special education program and compensatory. However, CBM in reading should be able to include a direct measure of comprehension like retelling a story that was read or answering comprehension questions. It is also possible to argue that reading aloud from texts is better than most of the so-called direct measures this based on empirical grounds. Retelling a story or answering questions do not meet the requirements that were established by CBM. This consumes too much time used for repeated measurement since students have to read long passages so that it will be possible to retell the story or answer comprehension questions. It is also expensive in developing multiple equal forms. In story retell, it is difficult to teach others how to score reliably. Therefore, since this tasks have been used in CBM selection of tasks a student should be excluded from repeated measures on important grounds. The developers of CBM have learned that neither technological nor empirical reasons are enough to lure many people. There is a difference between administrators and teachers as a study found out. Teachers focus more on the immediate effects of CBM frequently and express their concern about the time required doing CBM. Identified barriers by the teachers are time-associated problems. Administrators list of problems are associated with implementation of CBM, they address the difficulty in teachers’ lack of resourcefulness in using CBM data to evaluate and modify instruction that there is resistance to change of instruction by teachers (Fuchs et al, 2003, p.57). Comparison to Standardized Tests The results of CBM research provide a ground for developing standardized procedures of measurement used to evaluate the effects of modifying the instructional program of a student. A research on students’ achievement effects on teachers of special education using these procedures provided a basis to say that the effectiveness of instruction can be improved by use of CBM in formative evaluation. The procedures of CBM have been used to database the whole range of decision interventions that are made for learners who are academically at risk of failing. Curriculum based assessment is used to address the problem of representation proportion in public schools. Some models emphasize preferable intervention assessment to praise development in early childhood of students with disabilities to evaluating achievements in the content area of learning. They, unlike the standardized based assessment, predict that success on high-level evaluation. Improvements in the curriculum based measurement procedures have been done drastically in the past ten years. The textbooks, which were used, are now routinely added description of how the curriculum based measurement is used in both remediation, and assessment. The spread of this method of evaluation is now extensive and much of this dissemination is likely because of the functional utility of the evaluations. The generic nature of the outline has allowed a wide range of potential developers users feel the sense of ownership over both the data collected and procedures of collecting data. This puts apart the standardized procedures of curriculum-based measurement from other standardized examinations that are the property of the companies and developers that publish such tests. To follow the use of growth measures like CBM will be interesting and the status measures for example the commercial standardized tests. It is imperative that little work has been done in the private sector to develop a progressive monitoring system. The reason as to why this is done is probably due to the development of psychological and educational measurement in United States has been directed to discriminating individuals for the purpose of classification. The tests used for this purpose are made to show the difference between individuals but not within an individual across time. The difference between individuals is important when the main aim of the assessment is to group individuals for making selection decisions other than examining individual growth. Those working in school programs know that assessment is commonly conducted to classify students whether they are eligible for alternative programs like those of special education. In all these cases, the decision lies on differentiating the accomplishments of a small group of students within the whole population (Hargis, 2005, p.120). Assessment Assessment of CBM focuses mainly on reading and math as a basic skill. The broad focus is on the measurement areas, which includes basic skills, and behavior among others. The basic skills of reading, spelling, math, written expression, and critical thinking skills are assessed. The early reading skills targets the grade level 1-6, K-12, K-8, preschool, kindergarten, first, second and third grades. In development, the teacher uses guidelines, sampling of items created by authors, and the curriculum of instruction in developing the assessment of students (Shinn, 2009). In administering the examinations to the students, the provided procedures are followed. The learners provide the answers as per the instructions given. The learners give out the answers loud to the teacher, write on a paper, or choose production responses. This will be followed by simultaneous administration and scoring by the teacher. The results and its display vary with individual teacher, or the administrations preference. Some ways of display include graphical display on semi logarithmic charts, or charts used to show results. This is used as a guide in educational decisions, whether graphically, or numerically to show the individual as well as the class performance. Several associates have been noted to start the movement of combining the curriculum directly to assessment. This focuses on evaluating learners on the relationship between the known and the unknown. The model is analytic in nature and focuses on the teacher analysis of the requirements and links back to the instructional content. Teachers’ Aspects on CBA The curriculum based assessment procedures enables teachers to eliminate any instruction that may not meet the curriculum requirements. It provides teachers with information on the instructions’ specifics. Measures have been tested after research in the domains of reading, spelling, science, math, dictionary skills, study skills, and direction following. They assist teachers attain the short-term objectives. When students are assessed using the curriculum based measurement, the generic measurement used are based on having repeated samples of learners’ performance on the same forms of equal tasks over a period. The changes in the performance are then interpreted to give a generalized change in the learner’s proficiency upon evaluation. These measurements will act as indicators of whether the lessons taught result in the attainment of the target learning outcomes. The teachers in making instructional evaluation decisions use the information received. The decision is seeks to maintain the strategies and criterion of evaluation. In this regard, the administrators are able to determine whether the method is valid to measure the performance of the students or not. What Is Gained on Information Received From CBA The social and economic results of these decisions are very important. Decision makers would look for assessment procedures that will quantify the difference and discriminate between individuals as justified for the decisions. The individual performance should be examined to get the attained standards. In this regard, the criteria of performances on a certain tasks are getting prominent in the view of the decision makers. It is also important to move to other approaches to performance assessment. This will focus on not only the emphasis of criterion performance, but also the nature of the selected task to be assessed. If there is interest to develop CBM procedure for continuous use in monitoring the students’ progress, the recommendation on the alternative approaches to assessment warrants consideration. The recommendation lays emphasis on individual achievement that forms the basis of progress monitoring. It is important to note that discriminating the growth to performance is a shift of attention away from assessing the individual performance. In this case, the focus will emphasize on the excellence of the individual students and not the classified students. Those concerned with habitation and education of people with disabilities have seen that the emphasis on getting robust performance standards resulted in a tendency to exclude such persons from the assessment process. Jerome Bruner, years ago, argued that the technological advancement enhances the scientific achievement (Coding et al, 2005, p.171). Therefore, the improved procedure of assessing individual growth may result in the success that will improve and optimize human development. RTI (Response to Intervention) Response to intervention is nowadays common on how to foster learning and teaching as well as what it can be done to implement it. One effective component of RTI that requires particular attention from administrators is the monitoring of students progress required in every step of RTI. Knowing that the common method used in research is a curriculum-based measurement, the empirical evidence show that CBM provided a reliable and valid indicator showing students progress in basic areas such as math, writing, reading (Jones, 2008, p.440). It also proved that the CBM has a positive impact on students’ achievement. Research shows that CBM data may be used in many education decisions making like screening. It is important to note that screening plays a crucial role in reintegration and special education. In the RTI model, the progress monitoring system performs a number of decisions. Such decision includes the information regarding the trend of the student. This will inform the teachers’ decisions on their relationship with the students with regard to the individual student’s response to intervention. Students with Special Education Assessment is necessary in the overall program planning for students with special needs. However, these students are likely to present a unique challenge during evaluation. This may influence the evaluation and utility of the assessed data. The instructional programming is only based on information regarding the student’s present performance level, and identification of priority education needs. Due to a deficit in the social society, it is cumbersome for clinics to develop a rapport or a cooperative relationship with students in an evaluation process. Some students with special needs may not respond usually to methods of establishing a rapport. This may include the use of informal conversation and social praise to motivate the student. Therefore, special education must include all this depending on the special case of the student (Downey et al, 2013, p.322). CBA in Math Testing and assessment of math in CBM for students with special education include tests on what the child is learning in the curriculum. It is noteworthy that some assessments are formal while others are done to evaluate a chapter in mathematical textbooks according to the students’ ability. For example, the fourth grade children are mastering long divisions, but special students in the same class may be mastering only a single digit divisor to two or three digits. Most CBM tests come from the textbook directly often-in form of chapter test. Some publishers though offer assessments for special students. Conclusion In conclusion, curriculum based assessment is an approach to measuring the educational growth of each student. The main objective of the curriculum-based assessment is to assist teachers in testing the effectiveness of the lessons offer to individual students. Curriculum based assessment has both advantages and disadvantages. They are efficient and economical in that most of the important characteristics that are used in developing curriculum based measurement procedures are within the context of the ongoing instructions. The results of CBM research have provided a ground for developing standardized procedures of measurement used to evaluate the effects of modifying the students’ instructional program. A research on the student’s achievement effects on teachers of special education using these procedures proved that the effectiveness of instruction could be improved by the use of CBM in formative evaluation (Horwell, 2005, p.28). The assessment of CBM focuses mainly on reading and math as a basic skill. The broad focus is on the measurement areas, basic skills, behavior and others. The basic skills of reading, spelling, math, written expression and critical thinking skills are assessed. Curriculum based assessment procedures focus majorly on special education planning and development. It is evident that response to intervention is nowadays common. This improves teaching and learning with regard to the effective component of RTI that requires particular attention from administrators. References Codding, R. S., Skowron, J., & Pace, G. M. (2005). Back to basics: Training teachers to interpret curriculum-based measurement data and create observable and measurable objectives. Behavioral Interventions, 20, 165-176 Downey, C., Byrne, J. & Souza, A. (2013). Researching the competence-based curriculum: preface to a case study of four urban secondary schools. Curriculum Journal. Vol. 24 (3), p321-334. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Hamlett, C. L. (2003). Technological advances linking the assessment of student's academic proficiency to instructional planning. Journal of Special Education Technology, 12(1), 49-62. Hargis, C. H. (2005).Curriculum Based Assessment: A Primer. Charles C Thomas Publisher Horwell, K. W. (2005).Curriculum-Based Evaluation: Teaching and Decision Making. Wadsworth Incorporated Fulfillment. Jones, C. (2008).Curriculum-based Assessment: The Easy Way to Determine Response-to-intervention. Charles C Thomas Publisher. Kind, P. M. (2013). Conceptualizing the Science Curriculum: 40 Years of Developing Assessment Frameworks in Three Large-Scale Assessments. . Science Education. Vol. 97 (5), p671-694. Lemons, C. J., Zigmond, N., Kloo, A. M., Hill, D. R., Mrachko, A., Paterra, M. F., Bost, T J., Davis, S. M. (2013). Performance of students with significant cognitive disabilities on early-grade Curriculum- Based Measures of word and passage reading fluency. Exceptional Children. Vol. 79 (4), p408-426. Mooney, P., Mccarter, K. S., Schraven, J., & Callicoatte, S. (2013). Additional Performance and Progress Validity Findings Targeting the Content-Focused Vocabulary Matching. . Exceptional Children. Vol. 80 (1), p85-100. Shinn, M. (2009).Curriculum-based Measurement: Assessing Special Children. Guilford Press. Stecker, P. M., & Fuchs, L. S. (2000). Effecting superior achievement using curriculum-based measurement: The importance of individual progress monitoring. Learning Disability Research and Practice, 15, 128-134. Wesson, C, Fuchs, L. S., Tindal, G., Mirkin, P. K., & Deno, S. L. (2006). Facilitating the efficiency of on-going curriculum-based measurement. Teacher Education and Special Education, 9, 166-172. Read More