for any portion of his or her academic program was included. Numbers and percentages of students by year, area of participation, grade, and handicapped status (i.e., learning disabled or nonhandicapped) are shown in Table 1.
Ongoing Measurement System: Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM)
Teachers employed CBM to index pupils' academic progress in reading, spelling, or math from the beginning of October through April. CBM was based on the standard measurement tasks described in the following sections. CBM was conducted at the grade level where the student was placed, so that all first graders were assessed on first-grade curriculum materials, all second graders on second-grade material, etc. In Year 1, every student was measured once each week; in Year 2, at least once each month. In Tables 2-6, the average number of measurements is shown for each type of CBM score at each grade level. During both years, teachers received computer-printed graphs monthly showing each student's scores over time.
Reading measurement procedures. Reading measurement procedures differed across Years 1 and 2. In Year 1, the standard CBM oral reading test was used, where students read aloud from passages. In Year 2, a computerized CBM maze test was employed. The CBM maze measure was adopted in Year 2, because of its feasibility and because of documentation that it can be used to monitor student growth and to help teachers develop more effective instructional programs (e.g., Fuchs, Fuchs, Hamlett, & Ferguson, 1992).
For oral passage reading CBM in Year 1, a teacher, aide, or volunteer administered the test individually according to standard directions. The student read aloud for 1 minute, each time from a different, generic grade-level passage (Deno, Deno, Marston, & Marston, 1987), while the adult marked incorrectly read words (i.e., substitutions, omissions, insertions, and hesitations). Generic passages were employed because different schools used different reading series and because research indicates that the CBM, or general outcome, model of formative teaching can be used successfully with curriculum-specific or generic materials (see Fuchs & Deno, 1991 and Fuchs & Deno, 1993 for discussion). Performance was scored by the testers as number of correctly read words. A coordinator periodically observed test administrations to monitor fidelity to standard procedures. Scores were entered by the data entry clerk into software that stored and organized test information.
For the maze CBM task in Year 2, students completed alternate forms of the test at the computer. Again, generic grade-level passages were employed. These generic passages were 400 words long, told complete stories, and were written to conform to the Fry readability formula (see Fuchs & Fuchs, 1992 for additional description of passages and maze measurement procedure). Students had 2.5 minutes to complete a maze of a 400-word grade-level passage on the screen. The first sentence of the passage was intact; thereafter, every seventh word was deleted and replaced with three choices. Only one choice was semantically correct. Distractors were not auditorally or graphically similar to the correct replacement; they were either the same length or within one letter of the correct replacement. Each maze was edited twice by independent editors to ensure compliance with these requirements. The task required students only to use the space bar and <RETURN> keys. A coordinator periodically observed test administrations to monitor fidelity to standard procedures. Performance was scored as number of correct replacements, and scores were automatically saved and organized.