Evaluating the Interpretations and Use of Curriculum-Based Measurement in Reading and Word Lists for Universal Screening in First and Second Grade

Confirmatory Factor Structure and Predictive Validity of the Early Identification System-Student Report in a Community Sample of High School Students

The purpose of this paper is to confirm the factor structure, examine the invariance, and investigate the predictive validity using disciplinary data for 5262 high school students who completed the Early Identification System-Student Response (EIS-SR). The development and theory of the EIS-SR is discussed along with prior work. Building off of prior factor analytic work with a separate sample, it was hypothesized the items of the EIS-SR would coalesce into seven factors representing Externalizing Behavior, Internalizing Behavior, Peer Relationship Problems, School Disengagement, Emotional Dysregulation, Attention and Academic Issues, and Relational Aggression. Furthermore, it was hypothesized that EIS-SR scores would be invariant with regard to gender and grade level. Lastly, it was hypothesized that students with high EIS-SR subscale scores would be predictive of school discipline events. Our analyses indicated the EIS-SR did fit the previously observed factor structure with the items loading on seven distinct scales. Tests for measurement invariance indicated support that the EIS-SR measured the seven factors equally well regardless of both gender and grade level. Lastly, EIS-SR subscale scores predicted spring office disciplinary referrals, both in and out of school suspensions, and attendance.

Universal screening in grades K-2: A systematic review and meta-analysis of early reading curriculum-based measures

In reading, several curriculum-based measures (CBM) are used for universal screening in Grades K-2. This study summarized the criterion-related validity of early reading CBM tools used in the context of universal screening. After the application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 54 studies (53 documents across 34 articles, 16 dissertations, and 3 technical reports) were identified through a systematic review of the literature through December 2018. Forty-eight studies (47 documents across 31 articles, 15 dissertations, and 2 technical reports) were included in the meta-analysis, representing 47,168 students in the US who were enrolled in Grades K, 1, or 2 when they completed the screening measure. A random effects meta-analysis with robust variance estimation was conducted separately for concurrent and predictive correlations to estimate the average effect size between each early reading CBM and the reading outcome measures. Aggregated concurrent Pearson correlation coefficients (r) ranged from 0.343 (phoneme segmenting CBM predicting more complex reading skills) to 0.750 (nonsense words CBM predicting oral reading skills). Aggregated correlations were similar in magnitude for predictive validity. For some measures, correlations were moderated by administration lag. Findings have implications for research and practice regarding the use of universal reading screeners in the early elementary grades.

Validation of curriculum-based reading passages and comparison of college students with and without dyslexia or ADHD

Although reading is an essential skill for college success, little is known about how college students with and without disabilities read within their actual college curriculum. In the present article, we report on two studies addressing this issue. Within study 1, we developed and validated curriculum-based oral reading fluency measures using a sample of college students without disabilities (N = 125). In study 2, we administered the curriculum-based measures to four groups (each with n = 25): college students without disabilities, college students with dyslexia, college students with ADHD, and a clinical control group. Study 1 results indicated that the curriculum-based measures demonstrated good reliability and criterion validity. Results from study 2 indicated that college students with dyslexia were substantially slower readers than all groups without dyslexia (ds > 1.8). The curriculum-based measures demonstrated high accuracy in classifying participants with dyslexia and with impaired oral reading fluency (area under the curve > .94). Implications for incorporating curriculum-based measures in postsecondary settings are discussed.