Search

Replication is a foundation of the development of a knowledge base in an evidence-based field such as education. This study includes two direct replications of Hosp, Hensley, Huddle, and Ford which found evidence of criterion-related validity of curriculum-based measurement (CBM) for reading and mathematics with postsecondary students with developmental disabilities (DD). Participants included two cohorts of postsecondary students with DD enrolled in a 2-year certificate program at a large Midwestern university (n = 24 and 21). Using the same standardized procedures as Hosp et al., participants were administered CBMs for Oral Passage Reading (OPR), Maze, Math Computation, and Math Concepts and Applications. Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations between CBMs and the content-appropriate "Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement--Third Edition" were calculated. No significant differences in criterion-related validity coefficients between cohorts were found but differences between the correlations for Math Computation and Math Concepts and Applications identified in Hosp et al. were not found in either replication cohort.

In a recent study, Bettini, Gilmour, et al. (2020) used the theory of conservation of resources to explain how educators balance access to resources and the demands of their job. In teaching, these resources manifest in the form of administrative support; colleague support; access to materials, such as curricular resources; and increased teaching experience. They found teachers with access to supportive resources intend to stay at their schools, as these resources balanced out the stressors of teaching special education (Bettini, Gilmour, et al., 2020). This article begins by detailing the importance of securing appropriate curricular resources to support the instructional needs of students with disabilities. Suggestions for free curricular resources and materials that support implementation of evidence-based practices are provided first, in an effort to supplement missing curriculum, interventions, and supports without additional expense. Then, the authors provide guidance on using appropriate resources and collaborating with colleagues to find other curricular resources and materials to facilitate implementation of evidence-based practices that are not free. An outline is provided for how to engage in a conversation with an administrator to ask for needed curricular resources and materials. Often, that conversation can be uncomfortable, so having a structured set of steps can increase confidence and preparation that will lead to successful self-advocacy.

The purpose of this study was to provide preliminary evidence of the criterion-related validity of curriculum-based measurement (CBM) for reading, mathematics, and written expression with postsecondary students with intellectual and developmental disabilities (ID). The participants included 41 postsecondary students with ID enrolled in a 2-year certificate program at a large Midwestern university. CBMs were administered to participants using standardized procedures, and results were compared with performance on the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement. Descriptive statistics were calculated as were bivariate correlations between CBM measures and the content-appropriate criterion measure. Results are discussed in terms of the potential use of CBMs as indicators of academic performance for postsecondary students with ID.

Replication is a foundation of the development of a knowledge base in an evidence-based field such as education. This study includes two direct replications of Hosp, Hensley, Huddle, and Ford which found evidence of criterion-related validity of curriculum-based measurement (CBM) for reading and mathematics with postsecondary students with developmental disabilities (DD). Participants included two cohorts of postsecondary students with DD enrolled in a 2-year certificate program at a large Midwestern university (n = 24 and 21). Using the same standardized procedures as Hosp et al., participants were administered CBMs for Oral Passage Reading (OPR), Maze, Math Computation, and Math Concepts and Applications. Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations between CBMs and the content-appropriate Woodcock–Johnson Tests of Achievement–Third Edition were calculated. No significant differences in criterion-related validity coefficients between cohorts were found but differences between the correlations for Math Computation and Math Concepts and Applications identified in Hosp et al. were not found in either replication cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]