DATA-BASED

DECISION MAKING

USING DATA-BASED DECISION MAKING IN

CONSULTATION
WHAT IS CBM?
Curriculum-based measurement is an ongoing measurement
system designed to account for student outcomes and
enhance instructional planning.
HOW TO MEASURE STUDENT
PROGRESS: READING
Reading Fluency: students read aloud individually from reading
passages or word lists of equivalent difficulty for 1 minute. The
number of words read correctly (WRC) is recorded.
Silent Reading (Maze): a multiple choice cloze reading technique
where students read passages silently for 3-5 minutes. After the
first sentence, every 7th word in the passage is missing. Students
choose the word from among three choices. The number of
correct word choices are recorded.
The two older daughters were good-looking (but, stand, then)
very disagreeable. They cared only for (until, themselves,
himself) and for their appearance; they spent (palace,
wicked, most) of the time admiring their reflections (in, of,
turned) a looking glass.
ORAL READING
FLUENCY EXAMPLE
https://acadiencelearning.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Re
adingScoringPractice_ORF_Grade_1.mp4
HOW TO MEASURE STUDENT
PROGRESS: WRITTEN EXPRESSION
Written Spelling: students write words that are dictated at
specified intervals (7 or 10 seconds) for 2 minutes. The number
of correct letter sequences (CLS) and words spelled correctly are
recorded. Word Student
Answer
CLS Score WSC Score

Summer Sumer 5 0

Summer 7 1

Word Student Answer CLS Score WSC Score

Other Examples: Train Train

Tran

Dress Dreass

Dress

Tapping Tapping

Taping

Monday monday

can’t cant
HOW TO MEASURE STUDENT
PROGRESS: WRITTEN EXPRESSION
Written Expression: students write their own story for 3 minutes
after being give a story starter or topic. The number of total words
written or correct word sequences are recorded.
Curriculum-Based Measurement: Written Expression Probe

Student Name: Classroom: Date:

The zookeeper noticed that the cage was open and...

Total Words: Correctly Spelled Words: Correct Writing Sequence:

www.interventioncentral.org • Copyright © 2009 - 2019 Jim Wright
HOW TO MEASURE STUDENT
PROGRESS: MATH
Math Computation: (a) Students write answers to computational
problems ranging from number sense to standard algorithms with whole
numbers and fractions, including percentages for 5-8 minutes. The
number of correct problems, often weighted by difficulty, is recorded, or
(b) Students write down answers to math problems during a 2 minute
interval and the number of correctly written digits is recorded.
41 41
+22 +22
63 603

Math Problem Solving: Students write answers to math problems ranging

from telling time, word problems, to geometry for 5-8 minutes. The
number of correct problems, often weighted by difficulty, are recorded.
PLACEMENT IN THE
CURRICULUM
Mastery, Instructional, or Frustration level?
Local Norms
National Normative Data (e.g. DIBELS Next- Acadience,
AIMSweb, easyCBM)
“Best Guess”
HASBROUCK &
TINDAL (2017)
HISTORICAL
PLACEMENT CRITERIA
Source Grades Level Median word Median Median
correct per words comprehension
minute incorrect (% correct)
per minute
Deno & Mirkin 1-3 Frustration 29 8+ 80
(1977) Instructional 30-49 3-7 80
Mastery 50+ 2 80
4+ Frustration 49 8+ 80
Instructional 50-99 3-7 80
Mastery 100+ 2 80
Lovitt & Hansen Instructional 45-65 4-8 50-75
(1976)
Starlin (1982) Frustration 69 11+
Instructional 70-149 6-10
Mastery 150+ 5
Fuchs & Deno 1-2 Frustration <40 >4
(1982) Instructional 40-60 </=4
Mastery >60 </=4
3-6 Frustration <70 >6
Instructional 70-100 </=6
Mastery >100 </=6
CASE EXAMPLE: CELIA
(GRADE 3-SEPTEMBER)
Baseline Data
Number of words read correctly per minute
Week 1=20 words Week 6=26 words
Week 2=26 words Week 7=20 words
Week 3=24 words Week 8=24 words
Week 4=22 words
Week 5=25 words

Is she placed at her instructional level?

PROGRESS
MONITORING/INSTRUCTIONAL
DECISION-MAKING
Time series analysis is an examination of the functional
relationship between the data and instructional interventions
over time.
Disappearing lake? (1972 versus 2001)
PROGRESS
MONITORING/INSTRUCTIONAL
DECISION-MAKING
Goal-oriented or Treatment Oriented?
GOAL-ORIENTED
APPROACH
Goal Lines
Option #1: End-of-Year Benchmarks
Option#2: Intra-Individual Approach
Option#3: National Norms
CASE EXAMPLE:
CELIA (GRADE 3)
Baseline Data
Number of words read correctly per minute
Week 1=20 words Week 6= 26 words
Week 2=26 words Week 7= 20 words
Week 3=24 words Week 8= 24 words
Week 4=22 words
Week 5=25 words
Design a graph and draw an appropriate goal line (there are
12 weeks left in the school year).
HOW TO SET
AMBITIOUS GOALS
1. End-of-year benchmark testing
DIBELS, district CBM measures, etc.
The goal line would be drawn between the median baseline
score and the end-of-year benchmark goal.
HOW TO SET
AMBITIOUS GOALS
2. Intra-Individual Framework
Celia data: 20, 26, 24, 22, 25, 26, 20, 24
Determine the weekly rate of improvement (need at least 8
data points) by taking the highest baseline score and subtract
it from the lowest baseline score and divide by the number of
data points. Multiply by 1.5. Take this product and multiply
by the number of weeks left in the school year. Add this
number to the student’s median baseline score. The sum is
the end-of-year goal.
Do the calculations:
HOW TO SET
AMBITIOUS GOALS

Baseline
GOALS: WEEKLY ORF
GROWTH IN READING
(SLOPE)
Fuchs et al. (1993)
Grade Realistic Ambitious
1 2.0 3.0
2 1.5 2.0
3 1.0 1.5
4 .85 1.1
5 .50 .85
6 .30 .65
HOW TO SET
AMBITIOUS GOALS
3. National Norms: use national norms to calculate an
ambitious goal (Fuchs, et. al, 1993)

Do the calculations:
PROGRESS MONITORING
GRAPH: CELIA

Baseline
CASE STUDY:
HOWARD: 6TH GRADE
 
Design a graph for the baseline data and draw and appropriate goal line (there are 22 weeks left in the
school year).
Enter the intervention data points on your graph. Draw appropriate phase change lines.
Analyze the data using a goal-oriented approach:
Visual Analysis
Specific Rate of Change
1). Slope
2). Split-Middle Method
3). Tukey Method
Magnitude of Change (Effect Sizes)
1).Change in variability (ESvar)
2).Change in level
a). d-index
b). percent of non-overlapping data points
c). g-index
Quality of Outcome (GAS)
How would you analyze the data using a treatment-oriented approach?
CASE STUDY: Day
1
Baseline
105
HOWARD 2
3
94
98
4 137
Set an appropriate goal line: 5 98
6 113
What procedure would you use? 7 111

Benchmark: 160+ WRC (DIBELS 8th Edition)

151+ WRC (Acadience)
Intra-Individual:
National norms:
Median baseline: 105 WRC
22 weeks left in the school year (do the calculations)

146 words (Hasbrouck & Tindal, 2017)

CASE EXAMPLE:
HOWARD

Baseline

Goal Line
CASE EXAMPLE:
HOWARD
CASE EXAMPLE:
HOWARD
HOWARD’S GRAPH
CASE EXAMPLE:
HOWARD
Visual Analysis: Stable or variable?
Gross Magnitude of change
CASE EXAMPLE: HOWARD
(TREND LINES) SLOPE
Where should the trend line go?
CASE EXAMPLE: HOWARD
(TREND LINES) SLOPE
SPLIT MIDDLE
METHOD
Example of the split middle technique for an even number of data points:
1. Divide the data into two equal parts, chronologically (from left to right).
Split each part in half.
2. Find the median point for each part from low score to high score (from top to bottom).
3. Move each median point over to the vertical mid point to make crosses.
4. Connect the crosses with a straight line. This is the student's trend (slope) or average
rate of growth.
Example of the split middle technique for an odd number of data points:
1. Divide the data into two equal parts, chronologically (from left to right).
Split each part in half.
2. Find the median point for each part from low score to high score (from top to bottom).
3. Move each median point over to the vertical mid point to make crosses as shown
below.
4. Connect the crosses with a straight line. This is the student's trend (slope) or average
rate of growth.
CASE EXAMPLE:
HOWARD (SPLIT MIDDLE)
CASE STUDY: HOWARD
(TUKEY METHOD)
1. Use only if you have at least 7 data points.
2. Divide scores into 3 equal groups (as equal as you can).
3. Draw 2 vertical lines to divide the scores into 3 groups.
4. Find the median data point and the median date of the 1st
and 3rd group and mark the point with an X.
5. Draw a line through the two Xs.
6. This line is the trend line.
CASE STUDY: HOWARD
(TUKEY METHOD)
MAGNITUDE OF CHANGE:
EFFECT SIZE
ESvar
d-index
Percent of Nonoverlapping Data Points
g-index
MAGNITUDE OF CHANGE:
EFFECT SIZE
Esvar: measures change in variability
Cohen (1992)
0.02 (mild effect)
0.15 (moderate effect)
0.35 (large effect)
3 Steps:
1. Calculate the variance for each phase.
2. Divide the larger of the variances by the smaller variance to obtain a
variance ratio.
3. Compute ESvar :
ESvar= (Number of data points in phase with largest variance-1)(Variance ratio)
Total Observations
CASE STUDY: HOWARD
(ESVAR)
Variance for baseline = 213.33, Intervention 1=232.03,
Intervention 2=235.60, Intervention 1+2=324.15
Variance ratio Intervention 1= 232.03/213.33=1.09, Intervention
2= 235.60/213.33=1.10, Intervention 1 and 2= 324.15/213.33=1.52
Number of data points in baseline=7
Number of data points in Intervention1=9
Number of data points in Intervention 2=13
ESvar:
Intervention 1:
Intervention 2:
Intervention 1 and 2:
MAGNITUDE OF CHANGE:
EFFECT SIZE
d-index and Percent of Non-overlapping Data Points: use when the
data does not reveal a trend.
d-index: standard mean difference in scores across phases
4 steps
1. Calculate the means for each phase and insert level lines on the
graph.
2. Determine whether levels represent change in the desired
direction.
3. Calculate the standard deviation for all data.
4. Compute d-index.
d-index= Intervention mean-baseline mean
Standard deviation of all data
MAGNITUDE OF CHANGE:
EFFECT SIZE
CASE STUDY: HOWARD
(D-INDEX)
Baseline mean= 108
Baseline
Intervention 1 mean=108
Intervention 2 mean=128
Intervention 1+2 mean = 119

Standard deviation: 14.46 (Baseline + Mapping), 17.54 (Baseline +

Intervention 2), 17.7 (All data)
d-index intervention 1=
d-index intervention 2=
d-index intervention 1+2=
MAGNITUDE OF CHANGE: EFFECT
SIZE

PND=NUMBER OF NDPx100/TOTAL NUMBER OF DATA POINTS

1. Count the number of data points which exceeded the highest
baseline data point (or you can use the median baseline data
point) in the expected direction (in Howard case in a positive
direction) and multiply by 100. You can also take the total number
of data points that fall at or above the goal line.
2. Divide it by the total number of data points in the treatment phase.
3. Suggested criteria (Scruggs et. al 1986)
1. Highly effective= 90+%
2. Moderately effective=70-89%
3. Questionably effective=50-69%
4. Ineffective=below 50%
CASE STUDY: HOWARD
PERCENT OF NONOVERLAPPING
DATA POINTS

If I used the median baseline point:

Intervention 1 (story map):
Intervention 2 (story map + self-monitoring):

If I used the number of points at or above the goal line:

Intervention 1 (story map):
Intervention 2 (story map + sf-monitoring):
MAGNITUDE OF CHANGE:
EFFECT SIZE
g-index: 4 steps
1. Plot the baseline trend line on the graph and extend it into the
intervention phase.
2. Calculate the proportion of scores in the baseline phase that are
located on the side of the trend line consistent with the desired behavior
change.
PB=number of baseline scores above the trend line/total number of
baseline scores
3. Calculate the proportion of scores in the intervention phase that are
located on the side of the trend line consistent with the desired change.
PI=number of intervention scores above the trend line/total number of
baseline scores
4. Compute the g-index using the following formula:
g-index=PI-PB
CASE STUDY:
HOWARD G-INDEX
CASE STUDY:
HOWARD G-INDEX
INTERVENTION 1 INTERVENTION 1+2

PB= PB=3/7
PI= PI=3/7=
PI-PB= PI-PB=
QUALITY OF
OUTCOME
Goal-Attainment Scale

-2 -1 0 +1 +2
         

-2 -1 0 +1 +2
0       .65 wrcm
TREATMENT-ORIENTED
APPROACHES
AB Designs
ABAB Designs
Multiple Baseline Designs