Improving Mathematics Screening in Middle School

REFERENCES

• Anselmo, G. A., Yarbrough, J. L., Kovaleski, J. F., & Tran, V. N. (2017). Criterion-related validity of two curriculum-based measures of mathematical skill in relation to reading comprehension in secondary students. Psychology in the Schools, 54, 1148–1159. 10.1002/pits.22050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Catts, H. W., Fey, M. E., Zhang, X., & Tomblin, J. B. (2001). Estimating the risk of future reading difficulties in kindergarten children: A research-based model and its clinical implementation. Language, Speech, & Hearing Services in Schools, 32(1), 38–50. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2001/004)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christ, T. J., & Nelson, P. M. (2014). Developing and evaluating screening systems: Practical and psychometric considerations. In R. J.Kettler, T. A.Glover, C. A.Albers, & K. A.Feeney-Kettler (Eds.), Universal screening in educational settings: Evidence-based decision making for schools. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/14316-004
   Google Scholar
• Christ, T. J., Scullin, S., Tolbize, A., & Jiban, C. L. (2008). Implications of recent research: Curriculum-based measurement of math computation. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 33(4), 198–205. 10.1177/1534508407313480
   Google Scholar
• Clemens, N. H., Keller-Margulis, M. A., Scholten, T., & Yoon, M. (2015). Screening assessment within a multi-tiered system of support: Current practices, advances, and next steps. In S. R.Jimerson, M. K.Burns, & A. M.VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention (pp. 187–213). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Codding, R. S., Mercer, S., Connell, J., Fiorello, C., & Kleinert, W. (2016). Mapping the relationships among basic facts, concepts and application, and common core curriculum-based mathematics measures. School Psychology Review, 45, 19–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Codding, R. S., Petscher, Y., & Truckenmiller, A. (2015). CBM reading, mathematics, and written expression at the secondary level: Examining latent composite relations among indices and unique predictions with a state achievement test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 437–450. 10.1037/a0037520
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Codding, R. S., Volpe, R. J., & Poncy, B. C. (2017). Effective math interventions: A guide to improving whole-number knowledge. New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Bouton, B., Gilbert, J. K., Barquero, L. A., … Crouch, R. C. (2010). Selecting at-risk first-grade readers for early intervention: Eliminating false positives and exploring the promise of a two-stage gated screening process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 327–340. 10.1037/a0018448
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cummings, K. D., Stoolmiller, M. L., Baker, S. K., Fien, H., & Kame'enui, E. J. (2015). Using school-level student achievement to engage in formative evaluation: Comparative school-level rates of oral reading fluency growth conditioned by initial skill for second grade students. Reading and Writing, 28(1), 105–130. 10.1007/s11145-014-9512-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Data Recognition Corporation. (2016). Wisconsin standard setting 2016: Final technical report. Maple Grove, MN: Author. Retrieved from https://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/assessment/pdf/Forward%20Exam%20Standard%20Setting%20Technical%20Report%202016.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Enders, C. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Enders, C. K. (2017). Multiple imputation as a flexible tool for missing data handling in clinical research. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 98, 4–18. 10.1016/j.brat.2016.11.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Compton, D. L. (2010). Rethinking response to intervention at middle and high school. School Psychology Review, 39, 22–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gersten, R., Beckmann, S., Clarke, B., Foegen, A., Marsh, L., Star, J. R., & Witzel, B. (2009). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to intervention (RtI) for elementary and middle schools (NCEE 2009-4060). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practiceguides/
   Google Scholar
• Glover, T. A., & Albers, C. A. (2007). Considerations for evaluating universal screening assessments. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 117–135. 10.1016/j.jsp.2006.05.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harper, R., & Reeves, B. (1999). Reporting of precision of estimates for diagnostic accuracy: A review. British Medical Journal, 318, 1322–1323. 10.1136/bmj.318.7194.1322-a
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helwig, R., Anderson, L., & Tindal, G. (2002). Using a concept-grounded, curriculum-based measure in mathematics to predict statewide test scores for middle school students with LD. Journal of Special Education, 36(2), 102–112. 10.1177/002F00224669020360020501
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenkins, J. R., Hudson, R. F., & Johnson, E. S. (2007). Screening for at-risk readers in a response to intervention framework. School Psychology Review, 36, 582–600.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, E. S., Jenkins, J. R., & Petscher, Y. (2010). Improving the accuracy of a direct route screening process. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 35(3), 131–140. 10.1177/1534508409348375
   Google Scholar
• Keller-Margulis, M. A., Shapiro, E. S., & Hintze, J. M. (2008). Long-term diagnostic accuracy of curriculum-based measures in reading and mathematics. School Psychology Review, 37, 374–390.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kilgus, S. P., Methe, S. A., Maggin, D. M., & Tomasula, J. L. (2014). Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading (R-CBM): A diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis of evidence supporting use in universal screening. Journal of School Psychology, 52, 377–405. 10.1016/j.jsp.2014.06.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klingbeil, D. A., Van Norman, E. R., Nelson, P. M., & Birr, C. (2018). Evaluating screening procedures across changes to the statewide achievement test. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 44(1), 17–31. 10.1177/1534508417747390
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leblanc, M., Dufore, E., & McDougal, J. (2012). Using general outcome measures to predict student performance on state-mandated assessments: An applied approach for establishing predictive cutscores. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 28, 1–13. 10.1080/15377903.2012.643753
   Google Scholar
• Meehl, P. E., & Rosen, A. (1955). Antecedent probability and the efficiency of psychometric signs, patterns, or cutting scores. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 194–216. 10.1037/h0048070
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Association of School Psychologists. (2010). Model for ­comprehensive and integrated school psychological services. Bethesda, MD: Author. Retrieved from: https://www.nasponline.org/assets/Documents/Standards%20and%20Certification/Standards/2_PracticeModel.pdf
   Google Scholar
• NCS Pearson. (2011). AIMSweb default cut scores explained. Bloomington, MN: Author.
   Google Scholar
• NCS Pearson. (2012). AIMSweb technical manual. Bloomington, MN: Author.
   Google Scholar
• NCS Pearson. (2017). AIMSwebplus technical manual. Bloomington, MN: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, P. M., Van Norman, E. R., & Lackner, S. K. (2016). A comparison of methods to screen middle school students for reading and math difficulties. School Psychology Review, 45, 327–342. doi:10.17105/SPR45-3.327-342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson, P. M., Van Norman, E. R., & VanDerHeyden, A. (2017). Reduce, reuse, recycle: The longitudinal value of local cut scores using state test data. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 35(7), 683–694. 10.1177/0734282916658567
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Northwest Evaluation Association. (2011). Technical manual for Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) and Measures of Academic Progress for Primary Grades (MPG). Portland, OR: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Northwest Evaluation Association. (2013). Measures of Academic Progress: A comprehensive guide to the MAP K – 12 Computer Adaptive Interim Assessment. Portland, OR: Author. Retrieved from nwea.org.
   Google Scholar
• Northwest Evaluation Association. (2017). Linking the Wisconsin Forward Exam to NWEA MAP tests. Retrieved from https://www.nwea.org/resources/wisconsin-linking-study/
   Google Scholar
• Prewett, S., Mellard, D. F., Deshler, D. D., Allen, J., Alexander, R., & Stern, A. (2012). Response to intervention in middle schools: Practices and outcomes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27(3), 136–147. 10.1111/j.1540-5826.2012.00359.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapiro, E. S., & Gebhardt, S. N. (2012). Comparing computer-adaptive and curriculum-based measurement methods of assessment. School Psychology Review, 41, 295–305.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shinn, M. R., Windram, H. S., & Bollman, K. A. (2016). Implementing response to intervention in secondary schools. In S. R.Jimerson, M. K.Burns, & A. M.VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention (pp. 563–586). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Smolkowski, K., Cummings, K. D., & Strycker, L. (2016). An introduction to the statistical evaluation of fluency measures with signal detection theory. In K. D.Cummings, & Y.Petscher (Eds.), The fluency construct (pp. 187–221). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Strait, G. G., Smith, B. H., & McQuillin, S. D. (2018). Aggregated randomly generated math curriculum–based measurements for middle school students: Reliability, predictive validity, and cut score precision. Assessment for Effective Intervention. 44(1), 58–64. doi:10.1177/1534508418761231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swets, J. A. (1988). Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science, 240(4857), 1285–1293. doi:10.1126/science.3287615
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thum, Y. M., & Hauser, C. H. (2015). NWEA 2015 MAP norms for student and school achievement status and growth (NWEA Research Report). Portland, OR: NWEA. Retrieved from https://www.nwea.org/content/uploads/2018/01/2015-MAP-Norms-for-Student-and-School-Achievement-Status-and-Growth.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Van Norman, E. R., Nelson, P. M., & Klingbeil, D. A. (2017). Single measure and gated screening approaches for identifying students at-risk for academic problems: Implications for sensitivity and specificity. School Psychology Quarterly, 32, 405–413. 10.1037/spq0000177
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Norman, E. R., Nelson, P. M., Klingbeil, D. A., Cormier, D. C., & Lekwa, A. J. (2018). Gated screening frameworks for academic concerns: The influence of redundant information on diagnostic accuracy outcomes. Contemporary School Psychology. 23(2), 152–162. 10.1007/s40688-018-0183-0
   Google Scholar
• VanDerHeyden, A. M. (2011). Technical adequacy of response to intervention decisions. Exceptional Children, 77, 335–350. 10.1177/​001440291107700305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VanDerHeyden, A. M. (2013). Universal screening may not be for everyone: Using a threshold model as a smarter way to determine risk. School Psychology Review, 42, 402–414.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VanDerHeyden, A. M., Codding, R. S., & Martin, R. (2017). Relative value of common screening measures in mathematics. School Psychology Review, 46, 65–87. 10.17105/SPR46-1.65-87
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. (2016). Wisconsin Forward Exam: Spring 2016 technical report. Madison, WI: Author. Retrieved from https://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/assessment/pdf/Forward%202016%20Technical%20Report.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Zhou, X.-H., Obuchowski, N. A., & McClish, D. K. (2011). Statistical methods in diagnostic medicine. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
   Google Scholar