MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995813195 · doi:10.1177/1534508407313234

Validating Curriculum-Based Measurement for Students With Emotional and Behavioral Disorders in Middle School

2008· article· en· W1995813195 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAssessment for Effective Intervention · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsLearning Partnership
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluencyCurriculum-based measurementPsychologyEmotional and behavioral disordersReading (process)Reading comprehensionCurriculumDevelopmental psychologyComprehensionWoodcockMathematics educationDyslexiaPedagogyCurriculum developmentLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to investigate the concurrent validity of curriculum-based measurement (CBM) for students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) in middle school using the Maze (MAZE); Oral Reading Fluency (ORF); and the Woodcock-Johnson, Third Edition (WJ-III), Passage Comprehension (WJ-PC) and Reading Fluency (WJ-RF) subtests. Fifty-five students in grades sixth through eighth with emotional and behavioral disorders participated in this study. Results indicated a strong correlation between the MAZE and the WJ-PC, while moderate correlations were found between the CBM Oral Reading Fluency and the Woodcock-Johnson subtests (passage comprehension and reading fluency). Limitations of the study, implications for practice, and future research are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.367 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it