Open Journal Systems

Obstacles facing teacher of students with learning disabilities in applying curriculum-based measurement at learning disabilities resource rooms

Ahmed Khaled Khazaleh, Mo'en Salman Alnasraween, Faisal Khlaif Naser ALshraah, Wafa’ Aeid Aleid, Hanada Omar Mohammad Abzakh

Article ID: 2329
Vol 9, Issue 7, 2024, Article identifier:

VIEWS - 0 (Abstract) 0 (PDF)


This study aimed to identify the obstacles facing teachers of students’ with learning disabilities in applying curriculum-based measurement in learning disabilities resource rooms. The study sample consisted of 121 male and female teachers. To achieve the objectives of the study, a questionnaire was used, which in its final form consisted of 24 items. Its validity and reliability were verified before it was applied to the study sample.The results of the study showed that the level of obstacles facing learning disabilities teachers in applying curriculum-based measurement in learning disabilities resource rooms was moderate. The results also showed that there were no statistically significant differences due to the variables: gender, level of education, and years of experience in the level of obstacles facing teachers of students with learning disabilities. However, the results showed that there were statistically significant differences on the two dimensions roles and responsibilities of teachers of students with learning disabilities, the school administration attributed to those with experience categories less than 5 years, and 5 years to 10 years.


learning difficulties; obstacles; curriculum-based measurement; learning difficulties resource rooms

Full Text:



1. Yarbrough, J., Cannon, L., Bergman, S., Kidder-Ashley, P., & McCane-Bowling, S. (2017). Let the data speak: Gender differences in math curriculum-based measurement. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 35(6), 568-580.

2. Shinn, M. (2013). Curriculum-based measurement. In B. J. Irby, G. Brown, R. Lara-Alecio, & S. Jackson (Eds.), The handbook of educational theories (pp. 783–791). IAP Information Age Publishing.

3. Stecker, P., Fuchs, L., & Fuchs, D. (2005). Using curriculum-based measurement to improve student achievement: Review of the research. Psychology in the Schools, 42(8), 795-819.

4. Keller-Margulis, M., Mercer, S. & Shapiro, E. (2014). Differences in growth on math curriculum-based measures using triannual benchmarks. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 39(3), 146-155.

5. Jiban, C., Deno, S. & Foegen, A. (2009, September). Developing measures for monitoring progress in elementary grade mathematics: An investigation of desirable characteristics. Retrieved from

6. Hale, A., Skinner, C., Williams, J., Hawkins, R., Neddenriep, C. , & Dizer, J. (2007). Comparing comprehension following silent and aloud reading across elementary and secondary students: Implication for curriculum-based measurement.The Behavior Analyst Today, 8(1), 9-23.

7. Marchand, G.& Furrer,C.(2014). Formative, Informative, and Summative Assessment: The Relationship among Curriculum-Based Measurement of Reading, Classroom Engagement, and Reading Performance. Psychology in the Schools, 51, 659-676.

8. Espin, B., Liende, R., Beutick, L & Mol. S.(2021). A Systematic Review of CBM Professional Development Materials: Are Teachers Receiving Sufficient Instruction in Data-Based Decision-Making?, J Learn Disabil.;54(4):256-268, doi: 10.1177/0022219421997103

9. Hall-Mills, S. (2009). Linguistic Feature Development in Elementary Writing: Analysis of Microstructure and Macrostructure Features in a Narrative and an Expository Genre. Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

10. Jitendra, A., Sczesniak, E., & Deatline-Buchman, A. (2005). An exploratory validation of curriculum-based mathematical word problem-solving tasks as indicators of mathematics’ proficiency for third graders. School Psychology Review, 34(3), 358-371.

11. Hosp, J., Hensley, K., Huddle, S& Ford, J.(2014). Using Curriculum-Based Measures with Postsecondary Students with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 35(4), 247-257. doi:10.1177/0741932514530572

12. Clarke, S. (2009). Using curriculum-based measurement to improve achievement. Principal, 88(3), 30-33.

13. Hosp, M., & Hosp, J. & Howell ,K. (2016).The ABCs of CBM: A Practical Guide to Curriculum Based Measurement. New York: The Guilford Press.

14. Fuchs, L. & Fuchs, D. (2002). Curriculum-based measurement: Describing competence, enhancing outcomes, evaluating treatment effects, and identifying treatment nonresponders. Peabody Journal of Education, 77, 64–84.

15. Espin C. , Wayman M., Deno S., McMaster K., de Rooij ,M. (2017). Data-based decision-making: Developing a method for capturing teachers’ understanding of CBM graphs. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 32(1), 8-21.

16. Graney, S & Shinn, M.(2005). Effects of Reading Curriculum-Based Measurement (R-CBM) Teacher Feedback in General Education Classrooms. School Psychology Review, 34(2), 184-201.

17. Deno, S. (1989). Curriculum-based measurement and alternative special education services: A fundamental and direct relationship. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 1-17). New York: Guilford Press.

18. Gersten, R., Chard, D., Jayanthi, M., Baker, S., Morphy, P., & Flojo, J. (2009) Mathematics Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Instructional Components. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1202-1242.

19. Popham, W.(2009). A process-not a test. Educational leadership: journal of the Department of Supervision and Curriculum Development. 66(7):85-86.

20. Deno, S.(2003). Curriculum-based measures: Development and perspectives. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 28(3-4): 3-12, DOI:10.1177/073724770302800302

21. Foegen, A., Espin, C., Allinder, R. & Markell, M. (2001). Translating research into practice: Preservice teachers’ beliefs about curriculum-based measurement. The Journal of Special Education, 34, 226-236.

22. Welch,K.(2020). Teachers’ Challenges with Implementing Curriculum-Based Assessment in Secondary Students with Disabilities, Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies. 8817.

23. Al-Bitar, A, Al-Asiri, H. (2023). Obstacles to the Application of the Intervention Response Model from Teachers’ Point of View of Students with Learning Disabilities and General Education at Primary Level, Journal of Education and Rehabilitation, 12(50), pp. 52-100.

24. Fletcher, J. , Lyon, G., Fuchs, L., & Barnes, M. (2018). Learning disabilities: From identification to intervention. Guilford Publications.

25. Richards, S. (2015). Characteristics, assessment, and treatment of writing difficulties in college students with language disorders and/or learning disabilities. Topics in Language Disorders, 35(4), 329-344.

26. Syamsi, I., & Dharma, D. (2023). Identification and academic assessment models for students with specific learning difficulties in inclusive elementary schools. Jurnal Prima Edukasia, 11(1), 16-29.

27. Sahoo, M. , Biswas, H., & Padhy, S. (2015). Psychological co-morbidity in children with specific learning disorders. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 4(1), 21.

28. Velasco, A., & Campbell, M. (2020). Assessment of academic difficulties in culturally and linguistically diverse school students. Journal of Psychologists and Counsellors in Schools, 30(1), 25-42.

29. Dueker, S. & Day J. (2022). Using standardized assessment to identify and teach prerequisite numeracy skills to learners with disabilities using video modeling. Psychology in the Schools, 59, 1001-1014.

30. Hargis, C. H. (2013). Curriculum-based assessment: A primer. Charles C Thomas Publisher.

31. Hosp, M. K., Hosp, J. L., & Howell, K. W. (2016). The ABCs of CBM: A practical guide to curriculum-based measurement. Guilford Publications.

32. Kovaleski, J. ., VanDerHeyden, A. Runge, T. , Zirkel, P., & Shapiro, E. (2022). The RTI approach to evaluating learning disabilities. Guilford Publications.

33. Kontu, E. & Pirttimaa, R. (2016). Teaching children with intellectual disabilities: Analysis of research-based recommendations. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(2), 318-336.

34. Werts, M., Carpenter, E & Fewel, C. (2014). Barriers and benefits to response to intervention: Perceptions of special education teachers. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 33(2), 3-11.

35. Sywelem.M,& Witte,J.(2013). Continuing Professional Development: Perceptions of Elementary School Teachers in Saudi Arabia, Journal of Modern Education Review, 3(12), pp. 881–898.

36. Alshammari,M.(2020). Difficulties of applying the continuous evaluation to the upper primary students from the point of view of teachers in Saudi Arabia, Journal of Educational and Psychological Sciences ,4(9), P: 80-94

37. Adams, B,.(2019).Teacher Acceptability of Curriculum Based Measurement as a Universal Screener in Reading.All Master's Theses. 1125,

38. Zhao, Xiaoyan (2018). Chinese Primary School Mathematics Teachers' Assessment Profiles: Findings from a Large-Scale Questionnaire Survey, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(7), p1387-1407 Oct 2018. 21 pp.

39. Seymour, S.(2016). Elementary Special Education Resource Teachers’ Practices And Perceptions Of Curriculum-Based Measurement. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from etd/4000.

40. Abongdia, J., Foncha, J., & Dakada, A. (2015). Challenges Encountered by Teachers in Identifying Learners with Learning Barriers: Toward Inclusive Education. International Journal of Educational Science, 8(3), 493-501. /10.1080/09751122.2015.11890271.

41. Swain, K. & Allinder, R. (1998). An Exploration of the Use of Curriculum-Based Measurement by Elementary Special Educators. Diagnostique, 23(2), 87–104. 10.1177/073724779702300203.

42. Foegen, A., Jiban, C., & Deno, S. (2007). Progress monitoring measures in mathematics: A review of the literature. The Journal of Special Education, 41(2), 121–139.

43. Rowe, S, Witmer, S, Katelin,(2014). Teachers' Attitudes about Using Curriculum-Based Measurement in Reading (CBM-R) for Universal Screening and Progress Monitoring, Journal of Applied School Psychology, 30(4), p305-337 2014.

44. Robinson, C.(2020).Curriculum Based Measures for Screening English Language Learners: What We Know and Future Directions. Masters Theses & Specialist Projects. Paper 3169.

45. Nevenglosky, E., Cale, C., & Aguilar, S.(2019). Barriers to Effective Curriculum Implementation. Research in Higher Education Journal, 36, Article ID: 182882

46. Kate,L, Rena, D, Adrea,T &, Meagan,W.(2023). An evaluation of a decision‐making model on preservice teachers' instructional decision‐making from curriculum‐based measurement progress monitoring graphs, Psychology in the Schools, 60(7), Pages: 2129-2609.

(0 Abstract Views, 0 PDF Downloads)


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2024 Ahmed Khaled Khazaleh, Mo'en salman Alnasraween, Faisal Khlaif Naser ALshraah, Wafa’ Aeid Aleid, Hanada Omar Mohammad Abzakh

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.