An examination of the concurrent validity, unique contributions, and teacher acceptability of universal screening assessments

Schools employ curriculum-based measurement of oral reading (CBM-R) and the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) in their universal screening efforts to identify struggling readers. Among other things, universal screening assessments must be technically adequate and acceptable to teachers. A large body of research exists supporting the technical adequacy of CBM-R, but the degree to which it is acceptable to teachers is unclear. Regarding the MAP, only one empirical study examined its technical adequacy and no research exists evaluating its acceptability. The first study in this dissertation examined the concurrent validity of MAP and the relationship between CBM-R and reading achievement by administering CBM-R and MAP to 802 students in Grades 1-5. The second study examined teachers knowledge, use, and acceptability of MAP and CBM-R with a survey completed by 86 first through fifth-grade teachers. Together, results from these two studies provide strong support for the technical adequacy of MAP for universal screening and the acceptability of both MAP and CBM-R.