TY - JOUR
T1 - Progress monitoring measures in mathematics. A review of the literature
AU - Foegen, Anne
AU - Jiban, Cynthia
AU - Deno, Stanley
PY - 2007
Y1 - 2007
N2 - This review of literature on progress monitoring was designed to examine the full array of curriculum-based measures (CBMs) in mathematics for students from preschool to secondary schools. We organized the article around two primary concerns: the approach used to develop the measures (curriculum sampling or robust indicators) and the type of research necessary to establish the viability of the tasks. Our review addressed the technical adequacy of the measures as indicators of performance and progress, as well as teachers' use of the measures to improve achievement. The largest number of studies has been conducted at the elementary level, with less work in early mathematics or at the secondary level. In general, the measures have acceptable levels of reliability; the criterion validity of mathematics CBMs appears to be lower than that for reading CBMs. One important finding that emerged was the relatively low degree of consensus on the best approach to use in developing mathematics CBMs. We discuss probable reasons for this, along with implications for practice and research.
AB - This review of literature on progress monitoring was designed to examine the full array of curriculum-based measures (CBMs) in mathematics for students from preschool to secondary schools. We organized the article around two primary concerns: the approach used to develop the measures (curriculum sampling or robust indicators) and the type of research necessary to establish the viability of the tasks. Our review addressed the technical adequacy of the measures as indicators of performance and progress, as well as teachers' use of the measures to improve achievement. The largest number of studies has been conducted at the elementary level, with less work in early mathematics or at the secondary level. In general, the measures have acceptable levels of reliability; the criterion validity of mathematics CBMs appears to be lower than that for reading CBMs. One important finding that emerged was the relatively low degree of consensus on the best approach to use in developing mathematics CBMs. We discuss probable reasons for this, along with implications for practice and research.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34548852633&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34548852633&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/00224669070410020101
DO - 10.1177/00224669070410020101
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:34548852633
SN - 0022-4669
VL - 41
SP - 121
EP - 139
JO - Journal of Special Education
JF - Journal of Special Education
IS - 2
ER -