The Generalizability of CBM Survey-Level Mathematics Assessments: Just How Many Samples Do We Need?

By John M. Hintze, Theodore J. Christ, L. Keller. 2002

67 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract This study examined the extent to which CBM survey-level mathematics assessment varies as a function of type of survey-level assessment used (i.e., single-skill and multiple-skill math probes) and the generalizability of results both within and across assessment methodologies. Participants included 67 students enrolled in first through fifth grades. All students were assessed using grade-appropriate single-and multiple-skill CBM math survey-level probes. Findings indicate that single-and multiple-skill survey level CBM math assessments do indeed measure two distinct constructs. Results of a generalizability analysis suggest that for single-skill survey-level CBM math assessments the administration of one single-skill math probe provides information of sufficient quality to make both criterion-and norm-referenced decisions. Similar results were also observed for multiple-skill probes. However, given variations in performance the administration of three multiple-skill math probes as part of a survey-level CBM math assessment continues to be recommended.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Management Science and Operations Research, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8fe38f47f78be423498eb7e887b1fc601ff345b7

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Implications of Recent Research (2008, methodology): “Recent recommendations in the published literature established that practitioners and researchers should carefully consider both the method and size of a behavior sample when interpreting the outcome of CBM-M (Christ et al., 2005; Christ & Vining, 2006; Hintze et al., 2002).”
Evaluation of the Relationship Between Literacy and Mathematics Skills As Assessed By Curriculum-Based Measures (2009, background): “Math CBM appears to be a strong measure of individual and developmental differences with respect to math calculations skills (Hintze et al., 2002).”
Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading: Passage equivalence and probe-set development (2009, background): “For example, when Poncy et al. (2005) examined the influence of individual CBM-R passages, the facet included 20 levels (i.”
Progress Monitoring Measures in Mathematics (2007, unknown): “The generalizability study results confirmed this finding; multiple skill probes representing more complex performance required a greater number of forms to produce a stable estimate of student performance than did single skill probes (Hintze et al., 2002).”
Assessing the Instructional Level for Mathematics: A Comparison of Methods (2006, methodology): “Mixed probes were used because previous research on technical adequacy of fluency measures for mathematics used mixed probes (Foegen & Deno, 2001; Fuchs et al., 1989; Hintze et al., 2002; Tindal et al., 1983; Thurber et al., 2002).”