The Technical Adequacy of Curriculum-Based and Rating-Based Measures of Written Expression for Elementary School Students

Abstract

Five hundred thirty-eight elementary school students participated in a study designed to examine the technical characteristics of curriculum-based measures (CBMs) for the assessment of writing. In addition, the study investigated rating-based measures of writing using the Six Trait model, an assessment instrument and writing program in use in many schools throughout the United States (Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 2000). Technical characteristics of both models were evaluated. Results indicated that, using the Stanford-9 standard scores for written language subtests as the criterion, most scoring conventions of CBMs for written expression were reliable and valid. Despite adequate interobserver agreement on the Six Trait measures according to scoring conventions, exact agreement was low. The Six Trait measures do not measure distinct components of writing, nor do they share a significant amount of variance with Stanford-9 measures of written expression. CBMs of written expression have shown sufficient technical adequacy across several studies to warrant their use in writing assessment. These results do not support the use of the Six Trait model as a measure of written expression. Implications for research are presented.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 88 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.