Using Mathematics Curriculum Based Measurement as an Indicator of Student Performance on State Standards

Math skills are essential to daily life, impacting a person?s ability to function at home, work, and in the community. Although reading has been the focus in recent years, many students struggle in math. The inability to master math calculation and problem solving has contributed to the rising incidence of student failure, referrals for special education evaluations, and dropout rates. Studies have shown that curriculum based measurement (CBM) is a well-established tool for formative assessment, and could potentially be used for other purposes such as a prediction of state standards test scores, however to date there are limited validity studies between mathematics CBM and standard-based assessment. This research examined a brief assessment that reported to be aligned to national curriculum standards in order to predict student performance on state standards-based mathematics curriculum, identify students at-risk of failure, and plan instruction. Evidence was gathered on the System to Enhance Educational Performance Grade 3 Focal Mathematics Assessment Instrument (STEEP3M) as a formative, universal screener. Using a sample of 337 students and 22 instructional staff, four qualities of the STEEP3M were examined: a) internal consistency and criterion related validity (concurrent); b) screening students for a multi-tiered decision-making process; c) utility for instructional planning and intervention recommendations; and d) efficiency of administration, scoring, and reporting results which were the basis of the four research questions for this study. Several optimized solutions were generated from Receiver Operator Curve (ROC) statistical analysis; however none demonstrated that the STEEP3M maximized either sensitivity or specificity. In semi-structured interviews teachers reported that they would consider using the STEEP3M, however only as a part of a decision-making rubric along with other measures. Further, teachers indicated that lessons are developed before the school year starts, more in response to the sequence of the state standards than to students? needs. While the STEEP3M was sufficiently long enough for high-stakes or criterion-referenced decisions, this study found that the test does not provide sufficient diagnostic information for multi-tiered decision-making for intervention or instructional planning. Although practical and efficient to administer, the conclusions of this study show the test does not provide sufficient information on the content domain and does not accurately classify students in need of assistance.