An Investigation of the Reliability and Standard Error of Measurement of Words Read Correctly Per Minute Using Curriculum-Based Measurement

By Brian C. Poncy, Christopher H. Skinner, Philip K. Axtell. 2005

124 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dc02eeb5d8f792d17ef48a498ee2e97188c0eb3b

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. C. Espin
2. S. Ardoin
3. Theodore J. Christ
4. Hilda Ives Wiley
5. T. Wallace
6. Miya Miura Wayman
7. R. Tichá
8. B. Silberglitt

In Education

1. C. Espin
2. S. Ardoin
3. Theodore J. Christ
4. Hilda Ives Wiley
5. T. Wallace
6. Miya Miura Wayman
7. R. Tichá
8. B. Silberglitt

In Statistics and Probability

1. C. Espin
2. S. Ardoin
3. Hilda Ives Wiley
4. Theodore J. Christ
5. T. Wallace
6. Miya Miura Wayman
7. R. Tichá
8. B. Silberglitt

Citations in the corpus

• Literature Synthesis on Curriculum-Based Measurement in Reading (2007, background): “In the first, Poncy, Skinner, and Axtell (2005) examined the effects of passage variability on reading-aloud scores.”
• Curriculum-Based Measurement of Oral Reading: Standard Errors Associated With Progress Monitoring Outcomes From DIBELS, AIMSweb, and an Experimental Passage Set (2009, unknown): “The procedures used to construct the mean passage set were consistent with recent published recommendations for screening and selecting passages with reference to performance means (Poncy et al., 2005).”
• Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading: Passage equivalence and probe-set development (2009, methodology): “For example, when Poncy et al. (2005) examined the influence of individual CBM-R passages, the facet included 20 levels (i.e., alternate passage forms).”
• Evaluating Curriculum-Based Measurement Slope Estimates Using Data From Triannual Universal Screenings (2008, methodology): “Although results of some recent studies provide useful estimates for the standard error of CBM-R levels (Christ & Ardoin, in press; Christ & Silberglitt, 2007; Poncy et al., 2005) and progress monitoring trends (Christ, 2006), relatively little is known about the effect of measurement error when dat”
• Estimates of the Standard Error of Measurement for Curriculum-Based Measures of Oral Reading Fluency (2007, methodology): “The results of this study converge with that of previous research (Christ & Ardoin, 2006; Poncy et al., 2005; Howe & Shinn, 2002) to establish that the magnitude of SEM for CBM-R is not likely to approximate zero.”