Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
The Journal of Special Education
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Foegen, A.
Right arrow Articles by Deno, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Foegen, A.
Right arrow Articles by Deno, S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Progress Monitoring Measures in Mathematics

A Review of the Literature

Anne Foegen

Iowa State University, afoegen{at}iastate.edu

Cynthia Jiban

University of Minnesota

Stanley Deno

University of Minnesota

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.

The Journal of Special Education, Vol. 41, No. 2, 121-139 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/00224669070410020101
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Learn DisabilHome page
K. L. McMaster, Xiaoqing Du, and A.-L. Petursdottir
Technical Features of Curriculum-Based Measures for Beginning Writers
J Learn Disabil, January 1, 2009; 42(1): 41 - 60.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Assessment for Effective InterventionHome page
A. Foegen, J. R. Olson, and L. Impecoven-Lind
Developing Progress Monitoring Measures for Secondary Mathematics: An Illustration in Algebra
Assessment for Effective Intervention, September 1, 2008; 33(4): 240 - 249.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Assessment for Effective InterventionHome page
T. J. Christ, S. Scullin, A. Tolbize, and C. L. Jiban
Implications of Recent Research: Curriculum-Based Measurement of Math Computation
Assessment for Effective Intervention, September 1, 2008; 33(4): 198 - 205.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Assessment for Effective InterventionHome page
E. S. Lembke, A. Foegen, T. A. Whittaker, and D. Hampton
Establishing Technically Adequate Measures of Progress in Early Numeracy
Assessment for Effective Intervention, September 1, 2008; 33(4): 206 - 214.
[Abstract] [PDF]