What is Measured in Mathematics Tests? Construct Validity of Curriculum-Based Mathematics Measures

By Robin Schul Thurber, M. Shinn, K. Smolkowski. 2002

156 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/93e66332b32c3507d68ef20eab52070571bff4f2

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

1. Theodore J. Christ
2. Cynthia L. Jiban
3. A. Vanderheyden
4. A. Foegen
5. John M. Hintze
6. E. Shapiro
7. M. Burns
8. Milena A. Keller‐Margulis

In Education

1. Theodore J. Christ
2. E. Shapiro
3. Milena A. Keller‐Margulis
4. John M. Hintze
5. M. Burns
6. R. Gersten
7. A. Foegen
8. A. Vanderheyden

In Statistics and Probability

1. Theodore J. Christ
2. A. Vanderheyden
3. E. Shapiro
4. Cynthia L. Jiban
5. Milena A. Keller‐Margulis
6. John M. Hintze
7. M. Burns
8. R. Gersten

Citations in the corpus

• Evaluation of the Relationship Between Literacy and Mathematics Skills As Assessed By Curriculum-Based Measures (2009, background): “Alternate forms reliability has been reported from .66 to .91 (Thurber et al., 2002).”
• Implications of Recent Research (2008, background): “As a result, criterion-related validity coefficients between CBM-M and NAEP items are within the range of .38 to .44 (Thurber et al., 2002).”
• Assisting Students Struggling with Mathematics: Response to Intervention (RtI) for Elementary and Middle Schools. NCEE 2009-4060. (2009, background): “Tournaki (2003). Note that learning the counting-up strategy not only improves students’ fact fluency145 but also immerses students in the commutative property of addition.”
• Progress Monitoring Measures in Mathematics (2007, unknown): “Only three of the studies (Hintze et al., 2002; Shinn & Marston, 1985; Thurber et al., 2002) provided a direct comparison of measures drawn from the two approaches.”
• Long-Term Diagnostic Accuracy of Curriculum-Based Measures in Reading and Mathematics (2008, background): “…for math CBM data have been established through multiple studies indicating internal consistency, interscorer agreement, and test– retest reliability over .90 (e.g., Foegen et al., 2007; Fuchs et al., 1994; Good & Jefferson, 1998; Marston, 1989; Tindal, Marston, & Deno, 1983; Thurber 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).”
• Using Math and Reading Curriculum-Based Measurements to Predict State Mathematics Test Performance (2007, background): “We know that scores on reading CBMs correlate moderately with three other math criteria in other studies at this age level, including a state’s standards test and two norm-referenced achievement tests (Crawford et al., 2001; Thurber et al., 2002).”