Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorJanuary, Stacy-Ann Allicia
dc.description.abstractSchools employ curriculum-based measurement of oral reading (CBM-R) and the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) in their universal screening efforts to identify struggling readers. Among other things, universal screening assessments must be technically adequate and acceptable to teachers. A large body of research exists supporting the technical adequacy of CBM-R, but the degree to which it is acceptable to teachers is unclear. Regarding the MAP, only one empirical study examined its technical adequacy and no research exists evaluating its acceptability. The first study in this dissertation examined the concurrent validity of MAP and the relationship between CBM-R and reading achievement by administering CBM-R and MAP to 802 students in Grades 1-5. The second study examined teachers’ knowledge, use, and acceptability of MAP and CBM-R with a survey completed by 86 first through fifth-grade teachers. Together, results from these two studies provide strong support for the technical adequacy of MAP for universal screening and the acceptability of both MAP and CBM-R.
dc.subjectCurriculum-based measurement
dc.subjectReading achievement
dc.subjectComputer Adaptive Tests
dc.subjectSchool-wide assessments
dc.subjectUniversal screening
dc.titleAn examination of the concurrent validity, unique contributions, and teacher acceptability of universal screening assessments
dc.description.departmentEducational Psychology and Instructional Technology
dc.description.majorEducational Psychology
dc.description.advisorScott Ardoin
dc.description.committeeScott Ardoin
dc.description.committeeAmy Reschly
dc.description.committeeMichele Lease
dc.description.committeeMartha Carr

Files in this item


There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record