Mercer Sterett H, Martínez Rebecca S, Faust Dennis, Mitchell Rachel R
Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology and Special Education.
Department of Counseling and Educational Psychology, Indiana University.
Sch Psychol Q. 2012 Jun;27(2):85-95. doi: 10.1037/a0029123.
We investigated the criterion-related validity of four indicators of curriculum-based measurement in writing (WCBM) when using expository versus narrative writing prompts as compared to the validity of passage copying speed. Specifically, we compared criterion-related validity of production-dependent (total words written, correct word sequences), accurate-production (correct minus incorrect word sequences [CIWS]), and production-independent (percent of correct word sequences [%CWS]) scoring methods on narrative and expository writing probes in relation to a state-mandated writing assessment. Participants included all tenth grade students (N=163) from a rural high school in the Midwest. Results indicated that the more complex indicators of writing, %CWS (when taking into account passage copying speed), and CIWS (when passage copying speed was not considered) on narrative probes explained the greatest amount of variance in the criterion measure. None of the WCBM indicators, alone or in combination with passage copying speed, explained more than 25% of the variance in the state writing assessment, suggesting that WCBM may have limitations as a universal screening measure for high school students.
我们研究了在使用说明文写作提示与记叙文写作提示时，基于课程的写作测量（WCBM）的四个指标与篇章抄写速度的有效性相比的标准关联效度。具体而言，我们将记叙文和说明文写作测试中依赖产出（总字数、正确单词序列）、准确产出（正确单词序列减去错误单词序列[CIWS]）和独立于产出（正确单词序列百分比[%CWS]）的评分方法的标准关联效度与一项州规定的写作评估进行了比较。参与者包括来自中西部一所农村高中的所有十年级学生（N = 163）。结果表明，记叙文测试中更复杂的写作指标，即考虑篇章抄写速度时的%CWS以及不考虑篇章抄写速度时的CIWS，在标准测量中解释的方差量最大。没有一个WCBM指标单独或与篇章抄写速度相结合，能解释州写作评估中方差的25%以上，这表明WCBM作为高中生的通用筛查措施可能存在局限性。
