TY - JOUR
T1 - A Comparison of Math Curriculum-Based Measurement Modalities for English Language Learners
AU - Aspiranti, Kathleen B.
AU - Ebner, Sara
AU - Reynolds, Jennifer L.
AU - Henze, Erin E.C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - There is a lack of research examining the use of curriculum-based measurements (CBMs) with special populations, particularly English Language Learners (ELLs). The current study used an alternating treatments single-case design with five Latinx ELL students to examine scores across three math fluency CBM modalities. One-minute probes using either traditional paper-pencil, iPad with a stylus, and iPad with a keyboard were alternated, with students taking two assessments per day. Visual analysis of time-series graphs suggested that most students answered more questions correctly on paper-pencil probes compared to either iPad modalities; scores on iPad with stylus were higher than iPad with keyboard for all students. Non-overlap of all pairs effect sizes indicated small to large differences between probe modalities. All students preferred the traditional paper-pencil probes to either iPad modality. Discussion focuses on the implications for educators using CBMs of different modalities for ELL students.
AB - There is a lack of research examining the use of curriculum-based measurements (CBMs) with special populations, particularly English Language Learners (ELLs). The current study used an alternating treatments single-case design with five Latinx ELL students to examine scores across three math fluency CBM modalities. One-minute probes using either traditional paper-pencil, iPad with a stylus, and iPad with a keyboard were alternated, with students taking two assessments per day. Visual analysis of time-series graphs suggested that most students answered more questions correctly on paper-pencil probes compared to either iPad modalities; scores on iPad with stylus were higher than iPad with keyboard for all students. Non-overlap of all pairs effect sizes indicated small to large differences between probe modalities. All students preferred the traditional paper-pencil probes to either iPad modality. Discussion focuses on the implications for educators using CBMs of different modalities for ELL students.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85121809875&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85121809875&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/10824669.2021.2016408
DO - 10.1080/10824669.2021.2016408
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85121809875
SN - 1082-4669
VL - 27
SP - 147
EP - 160
JO - Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk
JF - Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk
IS - 2
ER -