• unlimited access with print and download
    $ 37 00
  • read full document, no print or download, expires after 72 hours
    $ 4 99
More info
Unlimited access including download and printing, plus availability for reading and annotating in your in your Udini library.
  • Access to this article in your Udini library for 72 hours from purchase.
  • The article will not be available for download or print.
  • Upgrade to the full version of this document at a reduced price.
  • Your trial access payment is credited when purchasing the full version.
Buy
Continue searching

Curriculum-based measurement: Attitudes and training practices in teacher education programs

Dissertation
Author: Misha Nicole Graves
Abstract:
Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) has been shown to be an effective tool for screening and progress-monitoring in the general education classroom. However, CBM has been slow to gain a foothold among teachers. The purpose of this study was to identify the barriers to the implementation of comprehensive CBM training in pre-service teacher education programs. Faculty members (n = 141) in Elementary Education teacher training programs at NCATE-accredited colleges or universities in a large, Midwest state were surveyed regarding their; (1) Knowledge of and attitudes towards CBM, (2) Attitudes toward evidence-based practice; (3) Attitudes regarding the importance of pre-service training in CBM; (4) Attitudes regarding the importance of CBM in general education classrooms; and (5) current CBM training practices. Survey data were analyzed using Logistic Regression modeling, and results indicated that respondents' beliefs regarding the importance of CBM in the general education classroom and the importance of CBM training for pre-service teachers were the most significant predictors of respondents' including CBM training in their course curricula. Results are discussed with consideration of practical implications for school psychologists and teacher educators interested in increasing the use of CBM and other evidence-based practices among general education teachers. Recommendations for future research are discussed.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction…………………………………………………………………

1

Statement of the Problem………………………………………………………

2

Purpose of the Current Study…………………………………………………...

5

Significance of the Study……………………………………………………….

7

Chapter 2: Literature Review…………………………………………………………..

8

Teacher Education in the United States………………………………………...

8

National Standards……………………………………………………...

10

State Partnerships………………………………………………………

11

Dominant Themes in NCATE Teacher Education Standards………….

12

Data - based

decision making……………………………………

12

Professional development………………………………………

13

Research - based practice………………………………………..

13

Equitable treatment of all students……………………………..

14

Current State of Teacher Education …………………………………….

14

Curriculum - Based Measurement ……………………………………………….

15

Background …………………………………………………………….

15

Curriculum - based assessment………………………………….

16

Response to Intervention ……………………………………………….

17

Current Use of CBM ……………………………………………………

18

CBM in screening………………………………………………

19

Early literacy CBM…………………………………………….

19

Reading CBM…………………………………………………..

20

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES vii

Reading maze…………………………………………………..

20

Early n umeracy CBM………………………………………….

20

Math CBM……………………………………………………..

21

Empirical Support for CBM ……………………………………………

21

Cross - disciplinary support for CBM…………………………...

2 5

Legislative and Policy Support for CBM ………………………………

26

Research in Education ………………………………………………………….

28

Research - Practice Gap in Education …………………………………...

28

The Reading Wars ……………………………………………………...

31

Teacher Acceptability of CBM …………………………………………

32

Summary ………………………………………………………………………..

35

Chapter 3: Method ……………………………………………………………………. ..

37

Participants ……………………………………………………………………..

37

Instrumentation …………………………………………………………………

38

Questionnaire…………………………………………………………...

38

Web - based survey program…………………………………………….

40

Procedure ……………………………………………………………………….

41

Questionnaire Design Phase……………………………………………

41

Field Pretesting Phase One……………………………………………..

41

Field Pretesting Phase Two…………………………………………….

42

Survey Administration Phase…………………………………………..

45

Chapter 4: Results………………………………………………………………………

47

Data Analysis …………………………………………………………………...

47

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES viii

Descriptive Statistics …………………………………………………………...

48

Knowledge……………………………………………………………..

48

Importance……………………………………………………………...

48

Training………………………………………………………………...

48

Research………………………………………………………………...

48

Scale - Independent Items………………………………………………..

48

Analysis ………………………………………………………………………...

49

Chapter 5: Discussion…………………………………………………………………..

51

Purpose of Study ……………………………………………………………….

51

Attitudes Toward Evidence - Based Practice ……………………………………

51

Perceived Importance of CBM in In - Service Teachers‟ Practice ………………

53

Perceptions Regarding Importance of Training in CBM ……………………….

54

Knowledge of and Familiarity with CBM ……………………………………...

54

Knowledge of and Familiarity with National Standards and Education Law ….

55

Implications for Practice……………………………………………………….

56

Implications for school psychologists………………………………….

57

Implications for teacher educators……………………………………..

58

Limitations of the Current Study……………………………………………….

61

Measurement Error……………………………………………………..

61

Non - Response Error/Generalizability………………………………….

62

Technical Adequacy……………………………………………………

62

Questionnaire Response Type………………………………………….

63

Recommendations for Future Research………………………………………...

63

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES ix

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………...

65

References……………………………………………………………………...

100

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES x

LIST OF TABLES Table 3.

Survey Administration Phase: Participant Institution Affiliation ………………

81

Table 3.1. Survey Administration Phase: Participant Gender …………………………...

82

Table 3.2. Survey Administration Phase: Participant Employment Status ………………

83

Table 3.3. Survey Administration Phase: Participant Highest Level of Education Achieved ………………………………………………………………………………….

84

Table 3.4. Survey Administration Phase: Participant Number of Years Teaching at the Post - Secondary Level …………………………………………………………………….

85

Table 3.5. S urvey Administration Phase: Participants Who Have Taught an Assessment Course of Practicum ……………………………………………………………………...

86

Table 3.6. Survey Administration Phase: Participants Who Have Received Training in CBM ………………………………………………………………………………………

87

Table 3.7. Survey Administration Phase: Context of Participants‟ CBM Traini ng……...

88

Table 3.8. Cronbach‟s alpha for Questionnaire Scales …………………………………...

89

Table 4. Descriptive Statistics for Questionnaire Scales …………………………………

90

Table 4.1. Likert Scale Response Percentages for Knowledge Items ……………………

91

Table 4.2. Likert Scale Response Percentages for Importance Items …………………….

92

Table 4.3. Likert Scale Response Percentages for Training Items ……………………….

93

Table 4.4. Likert Scale Response Percentages f or Practice Items ………………………..

94

Table 4.5. Likert Scale Response Percentages for Scale - Independent Items …………….

95

Table 4.6. Significance of each predictor in individual Logistic Regression models on on CBM training …………………………………………………………………….........

96

Table 4.7. Logistic Regression on CBM including all four predictors simultaneously …..

97

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES xi

Table 4.8. Logistic Regression Analysis for CBM Instruction …………………………...

98

Table 4.9. The Observed and Predicted Frequencies for CBM Instruction by Logistic Regressio n ……………………………………………………………………………….

99

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES xii

APPENDICES Appendix A. Survey Questionnaire…………………………………………………….

67

Appendix B. Phase One: Email Invitation……………………………………………...

75

Appendix C. Phase One Interview Protocol……………………………………………

76

Appendix D. Phase Two: Email Invitation……………………………………………..

77

Appendix E. Phase Two: Follow - Up Email Invitation…………………………………

78

Appendix F. Survey Administration: Initial Email Invitation………………………….

79

Appendix G. Survey Administration: Follow - Up Email Invitation……………………

80

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 1

CHAPTER ONE Curriculum-Based Measurement: Attitudes and Training Practices in Teacher Education

Programs

Curriculum-based measurement (CBM), a brief assessment tool developed over 30 years ago and supported by a large body of empirical evidence, has been shown to be an effective tool for screening and progress-monitoring in the general education classroom (Deno, 1985; Hosp, Hosp, & Howell, 2007; Stecker, Lembke & Foegen, 2008). Despite a large body of empirical support and a strong push for the use of scientifically valid educational practices in federal education policy, CBM has not received widespread adoption by general education teachers, whose students stand to benefit considerably through the adoption CBM. The use of CBM, when paired with data-based instructional modification in a Response to Intervention (RTI) framework, has been shown to significantly increase student achievement in the areas of reading and mathematics (Stecker, Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2005). Though the accreditation standards for many U.S. preservice teacher training programs require that those programs teach research-based assessment and instructional methods (National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education [NCATE], 2009), preservice teachers are not being universally trained in the use of CBM (Stecker, Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2005; Shapiro, Angello, & Eckert, 2004), nor do many teachers have a thorough understanding of the role of research in the practice of education (Boardman, et al., 2005; Denton, Vaughn, & Fletcher, 2003). However, the reason(s) why pre-service teachers are not receiving extensive CBM training is only partially answered by the current research. This study seeks to further investigate the specific barriers to the inclusion of CBM in teacher training.

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 2

Statement of the Problem Several clear themes have emerged from the current literature, and will be discussed in detail in Chapter Two: 1) CBM is an empirically valid educational practice with widespread support in educational policy, 2) Most teacher training programs are required by their accrediting body (e.g., NCATE) to teach empirically-valid educational practices, 3) Preservice teachers are not being extensively trained in the use of CBM, 4) Federal education policy mandates the use of empirically-valid instructional practices and assessment in the classroom, 4) In-service teachers are not using CBM to its full potential, and 5) The disconnect between educational research and practice has had a significant effect on teacher attitudes toward research-based practice in general and CBM in particular. With regard to the use of CBM in the classroom, the implications of the research-practice gap are significant. While evidence exists that exposure to research-based practices in pre- service teacher programs increases the likelihood that teachers will employ these methods in their practice (Gagnon & Maccini, 2007; Swain & Allinder, 1997), the majority of general education teachers currently do not use CBM in practice (Blankenship, 2005). Despite national accreditation standards that require teacher education programs to focus on research-based instruction and national education policy requiring teachers to use scientifically-based assessment and instructional methods, CBM – with its 30 years of empirical support – is still not being fully utilized in the general education setting. While some research indicates that distrust of, and resistance to research among teachers, along with a culture that does not value data-based decision making (Tankersley & Fitzgerald, 2007), may be significant hurdles to the widespread buy-in and adoption of CBM, teacher resistance to research could conceivably be mitigated at its source: preservice teacher education programs. It would seem that if teacher educators embraced

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 3

the culture of research so evident in other academic disciplines, used empirical evidence to guide their own instruction, and trained preservice teachers to be scientifically-minded consumers of research, then teacher resistance to empirically valid practices like CBM could be significantly reduced. Simply endorsing (or even mandating) the utilization of research in practice, however, has not been an adequate solution. All major accrediting bodies as well as the federal government already endorse these practices. In order to meet these criteria, preservice teachers would need to be systematically trained in the skills necessary to access, interpret, evaluate, and apply research findings effectively. Compared to other topics concerning best practices in education (e.g., reading and math instruction) that engender bitter divisions within the field, CBM seems to be void of any significant controversy. A review of the literature did not reveal any intellectually sound arguments against the use of CBM, nor does there appear to be any “anti-CBM” camp within the field. Resistance to CBM, at least among teachers (there is a dearth of empirical literature regarding teacher educator attitudes toward CBM), appears to be a symptom of the larger gap between research and practice in education, as well as attitudes that favor experience and judgment over empirical research among some educators. Among teacher educators, it is possible that rejection of CBM is related to the “reading wars”, an ongoing debate between advocates of two different forms of reading instruction: phonics-based approaches and whole- language instruction. CBM, with its focus on the assessment of fundamental skills, is associated with skills-based instructional approaches like phonics. This type of “reductionist” approach to assessment and instruction is opposed by many whole-language advocates, who favor a top down instructional approach focused on reading comprehension. Thus, teacher educators, many of

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 4

whom are supporters of whole-language (Walsh, Glaser, & Dunne-Wilcox, 2006), may reject CBM because of its association with phonics-based reading instruction. Although an extensive discussion of narrowing the research-practice gap in education is beyond the scope of the current study, it would seem that teacher education programs would be good place to start and a largely non-controversial topic like CBM would be more likely than many other initiatives to overcome opposition to research. Despite some harsh opposition and debate over the definition of “evidence,” education is a field in transition toward an evidence- based practice (EBP) model and preservice teachers need to be prepared for a rapidly changing field. If other fields that are further along in the transition to EBP, such as medicine, nursing, and psychology are any indication, the true paradigm shift in education must begin in training programs (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2005). It would be impractical, if not impossible, to reform education from the bottom up, beginning in the field. Reforming teacher training programs does not negate the need to train in-service teachers in the use of CBM, but it stands to reason that change can be most effective at the beginning of a teacher‟s career. Hence, if teacher education programs were more research-focused and trained students in the use of CBM, eventually most teachers in the U.S. would be familiar with CBM through the attrition of experienced teachers who are not trained in the use of CBM. In addition, thorough training in CBM would be much easier and more cost-effective to accomplish at the pre-service level. Time and money for intensive in-service training are severely limited and CBM must compete with other educational initiatives. The field of school psychology can serve as a possible model for the adoption of CBM by teachers. Shapiro, Angello, and Eckert (2004) noted that among school psychologists, the use of CBM has increased dramatically in the past 15 years. In a survey of 517 practicing school

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 5

psychologists, only 18.3% of those who had been in the field more than 12 years had received CBM training in graduate school, while 90.8% of recent graduates (in the field less than 4 years) reported receiving CBM training. Further support for implementing CBM training at the pre- service level can be found in the fact that although over 60% of experienced school psychologists had received formal CBM training in the form of in-service or conference presentations, recent graduates (who received their CBM training in graduate school) were far more likely to use CBM (and use it more often) than the experienced school psychologists. Although there are clear differences between teacher training and school psychology training (e.g., each field‟s approach to research and the age/experience difference between school psychology graduate students and education undergraduates), this is a good example of a dramatic paradigm shift occurring in a short period of time beginning with changes in pre-service training. This study also indicates that preservice training may be a much more effective place to initiate lasting systems change than in-service training of experienced practitioners. Purpose for the Current Study In order to more fully understand the problem and make useful recommendations, further research is needed to identify the specific barriers to the inclusion of instruction in CBM in preservice teacher training programs. While research exists demonstrating that many teacher education programs do not employ evidence-based instructional practices (Walsh, Glaser, & Dunne-Wilcox, 2006), there is virtually no published research explaining why many teacher education programs do not focus on research-based practices or train preservice teachers in the use of CBM. Since recommendations and mandates have not had the desired effect at a universal level, it is particularly important to understand the attitudes and practices of teacher educators regarding evidence-based practice in general and CBM specifically. It is also

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 6

necessary to understand the theoretical or practical objections, if any, that teacher educators have regarding CBM that may influence their likelihood of teaching it. The purpose of the current study is to identify the barriers to the implementation of comprehensive CBM training in pre- service teacher education programs by surveying the attitudes and practices of faculty members in teacher education programs. Specifically, the study seeks to answer the following research question: What are the barriers to the inclusion of comprehensive CBM training in preservice teacher education programs? Based on the following review of the literature, five hypotheses were proposed: H 1: Faculty attitudes toward evidence-based practice in education will predict the likelihood of including CBM in course curricula. H 2 : Faculty perceptions of the importance of including CBM training in preservice teacher education will predict the likelihood that they will include CBM in course curricula. H 3 : The perceived importance of CBM in in-service teachers' practice will predict the likelihood of including CBM in course curricula. H 4 : Faculty knowledge of and familiarity with CBM will predict the likelihood of including CBM in course curricula. H 5 : Faculty knowledge of and familiarity with national standards and education law will predict the likelihood of including CBM in course curricula.

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 7

Significance of the Study The current study seeks to clarify any specific objections that teacher educators may have toward the use of CBM in the general education classroom and the inclusion of comprehensive CBM training in preservice teacher education. Based on the specific hurdles to CBM training in preservice teacher education, recommendations will be made for restructuring teacher education programs to incorporate CBM and reflect changes in educational research and policy. In addition, the findings should help to more accurately inform the role of school psychologists in providing CBM training at the in-service level by providing insight into teachers‟ preconceived ideas or possible objections to CBM based on their preservice training. Finally, recommendations will be made for more effective changes to educational policy and regulations that will help ensure the universal adoption of and continued oversight of research-based practices in teacher education programs.

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 8

CHAPTER TWO Literature Review This chapter begins with a review of teacher education in the United States, focusing on national accreditation standards. Then an overview of the curriculum-based measurement literature will be presented along with a discussion of the role of CBM within a response to intervention (RTI) framework. Finally, the chapter will conclude with an analysis of the research-practice gap within education and a summary of the literature related to teacher acceptability of research-based practices generally and CBM specifically.

Teacher Education in the United States The desire to help ensure high quality teacher education programs led to the formation of an independent accrediting body in 1952 known as The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). At the time of its inception, NCATE was made up of five organizations that generally represented the teaching profession. Today, a total of 33 professional organizations have partnered with NCATE in its mission, including among others, the National Education Association, the National Association of State Boards of Education, and the National Association of School Psychologists. There additionally has been a steady increase in the number of accredited institutions in the NCATE system (588 in 2004, up from 492 in 1999 [NCATE, 2009]). Although NCATE is currently the largest accrediting body for teacher education in the

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 9

United States, a newer accrediting body, Teacher Education Accreditation Council, also serves a similar function to NCATE and has a relatively small, but growing influence. By the 1980s, realization that the public education system, largely unchanged since its inception 19 th century, was failing to meet the national need for a competitive workforce, the Secretary of Education in Ronald Reagan‟s cabinet, T.H. Bell, commissioned members of the private sector, government, and education, to assess the quality of education in the United States (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). The findings of the commission, explicated in a report entitled, A Nation at Risk, served as the impetus for the beginning of a standards-based reform movement in the field of education. In an information-driven economy, education reform pushed for greater emphasis on the development of higher order thinking skills and problem-solving ability in the nation‟s youth. For the first time, grade-level competencies and benchmarks were established for each academic subject, and systems of accountability were instituted to ensure progress was made. In 2001, as a natural outgrowth of the standards movement of the 1980s and 1990s, NCATE began implementing a new performance-based system of accreditation, centering primarily on the performance of teacher candidates. That is, teacher education programs were no longer accredited based on evaluation of their curricula; rather, program faculty were required to demonstrate their students‟ competence, with data collected through both formative and summative assessment measures ( NCATE, 2009). Specialty associations partnered with NCATE were additionally required, as a stipulation of their continued partnership, to revise their professional standards to be performance-based.

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 10

NCATE has additionally made great progress in its effort to align its standards with state standards; NCATE currently holds partnerships with 48 states and the District of Columbia (New Hampshire and Vermont are not official NCATE partners), and so conducts joint or concurrent reviews of colleges of education based in each of these 48 states. Consensus between the profession and states has led to a systematic and meaningful system of quality assurance, in which pre-service preparation, licensure, and professional development are viewed collectively along a continuum. Though NCATE accreditation remains voluntary, the growing support from states and professional organizations, in addition to the continual increase in the number of institutions seeking accreditation, suggests overwhelming recognition of NCATE as the profession‟s gold standard. However, despite NCATE‟s dominance in the accreditation of teacher training programs (roughly 70 percent of pre-service teachers graduate from NCATE accredited programs), fewer than half of the nation‟s roughly 1300 teacher education programs are accredited by NCATE (Vergari & Hess, 2002) Also, many notable programs, including Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, University of Michigan, University of Wisconsin, University of Texas, and University of Illinois, among others, have chosen not to pursue NCATE accreditation (U.S. News and World Report, 2009). National Standards According to the six standards that form the conceptual framework of the NCATE standards, program accreditation requires pedagogical content knowledge to be grounded in educational theory and research. Preservice teachers must have the ability to effectively critique research, and use empirical findings to guide the adoption and implementation of those

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 11

instructional strategies that present the greatest opportunity for student success. Preservice teachers are further expected to have both the formative and summative assessment skills necessary to monitor student and classroom learning, and make data-based instructional decisions. NCATE assumes that in-service teachers will seek out collaborative relationships with related service personnel in order to identify and implement strategies that support student learning (NCATE, 2009). NCATE standards are revised every seven years to reflect the most up-to-date research findings. This is a practice that affirms the intent to transform education to a field that is grounded in research, as well as a one that holds its service personnel accountable to research- based best practice recommendations. State Partnerships NCATE began formal state partnerships in the late 1980s in an effort to align state and national standards, streamline the review process, and reduce expenses related to NCATE and state departments of education conducting separate and often redundant institutional reviews. Today, NCATE has partnered in some capacity with all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, and most of these partnerships have resulted in a closer alignment of state and national standards. However, the level of partnership and alignment between NCATE and the states varies considerably. For example, 25 states have adopted NCATE standards in whole for the purposes of institutional program approval, while 29 states defer to NCATE to conduct institutional reviews for both NCATE and state accreditation (NCATE, 2010). The State of Indiana, along with 21 other states, maintains a separate, but closely aligned program review process conducted by the Office of the Coordinator of Preservice Education at

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 12

the Indiana Division of Professional Standards (DPS). The state is also involved in the NCATE program accreditation process within Indiana and as part of its partnership agreement. NCATE evaluation teams include a non-voting DPS representative. Also, the state uses NCATE teams‟ decisions to make recommendations for state approval, since NCATE reports include state- specific program information (NCATE, 2009). Dominant Themes in NCATE Teacher Education Standards Part of the accreditation process requires that teacher candidates meet the expectations of the standards outlined by NCATE member organizations. These specialty associations submit independent reports to the NCATE review committee, documenting evidence, or lack thereof, of candidate content-area knowledge (NCATE, 2009). Following is a review of the dominant themes present in both NCATE and specialty association standards: a) Data-based decision making, b) Professional development, c) Research-based practice, and d) Equitable treatment of all students. Data-based decision making. The use of data to systematically plan instruction, evaluate student progress and responsiveness to instruction, and guide instructional modifications and intervention development is endorsed by many of NCATE‟s specialty associations (Association of Teacher Educators [ATE], 2002; International Reading Association [IRA], 2009; National Board for Professional Teaching Standards [NBPTS], 1992). School administrators are also encouraged to allow the time and fiscal resources necessary for teachers to fulfill their assessment responsibilities (ATE, 2002; IRA, 2009). The depth and breadth of knowledge that in-service teachers must possess in regards to assessment measures and procedures is referenced, as teachers ought to be guided by a

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 13

framework for selecting and administering assessments, and interpreting results. Each assessment used in practice should be selected based on its level of technical adequacy that has been established through rigorous empirical testing. It is therefore imperative that preservice teachers possess the requisite skills for evaluating the norming procedure and applicability of a testing sample, as well as the validity and reliability of a testing instrument (ATE, 2002; IRA, 2009; NBPTS, 1992; NCATE, 2009). Professional development. On-going professional development is recognized by NCATE specialty associations as a fundamental responsibility of in-service teachers (IRA, 2009; NBPTS, 1992; NCATE, 2009). Organizations representing educational leaders further promote the facilitation of professional growth plans for active members of school staff. School administrators are responsible for providing in-service teachers regular opportunities for professional development in the use of evidence-based instructional approaches (IRA, 2009). Research-based practice. The foundational knowledge that preservice teachers are expected to have before entering the field should encompass major theories, research, and best practices that share a consensus of acceptance in the field. Further, this knowledge base should be subject to change and adapt as in-service teachers stay abreast of up-to-date research findings; findings that in-service teachers are expected to incorporate into their teaching methods and instructional practices. In-service teachers are additionally encouraged to contribute to the professional literature by conducting and publishing their own research (ATE, 2002; IRA, 2009; NBPTS, 1992; NCATE, 2009). This sentiment is also echoed in current educational policy, but all available empirical evidence indicates that many teachers are not comfortable accessing and reading research, and are even less likely to alter their instructional methods to incorporate new findings (Billups, 1997; Carnine, 1995; Greenwood & Maheany, 2001).

CBM ATTITUDES AND TRAINING PRACTICES 14

Equitable treatment of all students. The legal entitlement to a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) does not apply only to select populations. Unfortunately, there are great disparities in the educational system, in which certain linguistic and cultural groups are often denied, whether intentionally or unintentionally, their right to FAPE (Coutinho & Oswald, 2000). National standards, established by NCATE and specialty associations, seek to furnish the opportunity for teachers to examine their personal practice as it relates to the education of students who have historically been disadvantaged. Teacher candidates must receive training in cultural sensitivity, including exposure to multiple cultural perspectives, practices, and traditions. It is important that in-service teachers understand the implications of particular teaching methods and practices on children of different race, gender, ethnic, class, language, religious, and cultural groups. Of equal importance is a teacher‟s ability to recognize how individual differences affect the learning process. Teachers have a responsibility to prepare learners in a way that values their diversity, as well as prepare them to engage in active citizenship to rectify areas of inequity (IRA, 2009; NCATE, 2009). Current State of Teacher Education Evidence points to the possibility of a significant disconnect between the standards governing teacher education programs and the practices within many programs (Shapiro, Angello, & Eckert, 2004; Stecker, Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2005). Although there is a dearth of empirical literature investigating the attitudes of teacher educators toward research-based practices like CBM, it is clear from the available results (i.e. practicing teachers) that research- based practices are not being universally taught within many teacher education programs, despite the very clear support for this in the NCATE standards. In addition to the support for evidence-

Full document contains 130 pages
Abstract: Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) has been shown to be an effective tool for screening and progress-monitoring in the general education classroom. However, CBM has been slow to gain a foothold among teachers. The purpose of this study was to identify the barriers to the implementation of comprehensive CBM training in pre-service teacher education programs. Faculty members (n = 141) in Elementary Education teacher training programs at NCATE-accredited colleges or universities in a large, Midwest state were surveyed regarding their; (1) Knowledge of and attitudes towards CBM, (2) Attitudes toward evidence-based practice; (3) Attitudes regarding the importance of pre-service training in CBM; (4) Attitudes regarding the importance of CBM in general education classrooms; and (5) current CBM training practices. Survey data were analyzed using Logistic Regression modeling, and results indicated that respondents' beliefs regarding the importance of CBM in the general education classroom and the importance of CBM training for pre-service teachers were the most significant predictors of respondents' including CBM training in their course curricula. Results are discussed with consideration of practical implications for school psychologists and teacher educators interested in increasing the use of CBM and other evidence-based practices among general education teachers. Recommendations for future research are discussed.