| Abstract: | Curriculum‐based measurement is commonly used within a response‐to‐intervention framework to assess the effectiveness of intervention and to triage students into intervention tiers (e.g., the lowest 10% receive a Tier 3 intervention, and those in the 11th to 25th percentiles receive a Tier 2 intervention). We conducted a meta‐analysis of 18 studies to examine the relationship between pre‐intervention assessments and post‐intervention level and growth in reading fluency. The results indicated that several pre‐intervention measures were moderately related to post‐intervention fluency, but only a percentage of comprehension questions answered during baseline assessments, reading fluency age or grade‐based standard scores (SS), and word attack SS resulted in even a small to moderate relationship with reading growth. Moreover, there was no significant difference between the correlation of any two pre‐intervention measures with reading growth, which suggested that all of the measures were equally poorly related to reading growth. Implications for research and practice are discussed. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. |
