Three concurrent validity studies were conducted on the relationship between performances on formative measures of spelling and performances on standardized spelling achievement measures. Results of correlational analysis for four formative measures and three standardized measures provided support for the validity of Number of Correct Letter Sequences and Number of Correct Words on a dictated word list as indices of spelling achievement. Data from different grades (2-6) and groups (LD resource vs regular program) supported the hypothesized developmental trends in performance across grades and the hypothesized differences in performance between regular and LD students. Additional analyses suggested that any word selection procedure may be used and that the dictated list may be presented for one to three minutes to obtain valid results. The implications of these results for the development of a formative evaluation system that teachers can use continuously to monitor growth in spelling and to evaluate interventions are discussed. PART I CONCURRENT VALIDITY OF FORMATIVE EVALUATION PROCEDURES: SPELLING Introduction The research reported here was conducted as part of a project that has as its purpose developing formative evaluation systems for teachers to use in improving learning disabilities service programs in spelling. The primary assumptions upon which that research project is based are: (1) that the success of learning disabilities services is defined primarily by the extent to which those services improve the academic and social behavior goals of the individual students served, (2) that teachers can increase the success of learning disabilities services by systematically measuring student progress toward achievement of goals and then adjusting student programs to improve that progress, and (3) that the technology presently available for teachers to use in measuring student progress and adjusting programs based on measured progress is either not sufficient or has not been sufficiently tested. The particular part of the research project described here was conducted to answer a first and critical question that is raised when developing a formative evaluation system in spelling: what student performance data can be routinely and easily obtained that validly index achievement? The question arises because, for several good reasons, commerically prepared standardized tests of spelling ordinarily used 1 2 to assess achievement cannot be used routinely in a formative evaluation system to monitor erformance. First, commercially produced standardized tests take too much time to administer. Second, an insufficient number of equivalent forms is available for any test to be used in the repeated measurement of performance required for formative evaluatior. Third, the cost of using achievement tests repeatedly is prohibitive. The development of measurement procedures that can be incorporated relatively easily into the daily routine of most teachers working in learning disabilities programs is deemed desirable if intensive monitoring of effects on student performance is to occur. The importance of intensively monitoring effects is that such monitoring enables us to more precisely determine the appropriateness of services provided to individual students. Given the requirement in P.L. 94-142 (Federal Register, 1977) that each handicapped student be provided an appropriate educational program and our current inability to diagnose and prescribe effective programs (Arter & Jenkins, 1978), continuous evaluation of a student's is the only way to achieve substantive ccmplianee with the law (Deno & Mirkin, 1980). Beyond compliance with the law., research on the use of intensive repeated measurement in formative evaluation of instruction has already yielded evidence bearing on its potential benefits (Bohannon, 1975; Crutcher & Hofmeister, 1975; Frumess, 1973; Lovitt, Schaff, & Sayre, 1970; Mirkin & Deno, 1979). The research findings are isolated, however. The research and development of which the present studies are a part was designed to systematically construct formative evaluation
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 74 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.