PDF

Published

2024-08-15

Issue

Vol. 9 No. 7 (2024): Published

Section

Research Articles

License

The journal adopts the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0), which means that anyone can reuse and redistribute the materials for non-commercial purposes as long as you follow the license terms and the original source is properly cited.

Author(s) shall retain the copyright of their work and grant the Journal/Publisher rights for the first publication with the work concurrently licensed since 2023 Vol.8 No.2.

Under this license, author(s) will allow third parties to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content under the condition that the authors are given credit. No permission is required from the authors or the publisher.

This broad license intends to facilitate free access, as well as the unrestricted use of original works of all types. This ensures that the published work is freely and openly available in perpetuity.

By providing open access, the following benefits are brought about:

  • Higher Visibility, Availability and Citations-free and unlimited accessibility of the publication over the internet without any restrictions increases citation of the article.
  • Ease of search-publications are easily searchable in search engines and indexing databases.
  • Rapid Publication – accepted papers are immediately published online.
  • Available for free download immediately after publication at https://esp.as-pub.com/index.php/ESP

 

Copyright Statement

1.The authors certify that the submitted manuscripts are original works, do not infringe the rights of others, are free from academic misconduct and confidentiality issues, and that there are no disputes over the authorship scheme of the collaborative articles. In case of infringement, academic misconduct and confidentiality issues, as well as disputes over the authorship scheme, all responsibilities will be borne by the authors.

2. The author agrees to grant the Editorial Office of Environment and Social Psychology a licence to use the reproduction right, distribution right, information network dissemination right, performance right, translation right, and compilation right of the submitted manuscript, including the work as a whole, as well as the diagrams, tables, abstracts, and any other parts that can be extracted from the work and used in accordance with the characteristics of the journal. The Editorial Board of Environment and Social Psychology has the right to use and sub-licence the above mentioned works for wide dissemination in print, electronic and online versions, and, in accordance with the characteristics of the periodical, for the period of legal protection of the property right of the copyright in the work, and for the territorial scope of the work throughout the world.

3. The authors are entitled to the copyright of their works under the relevant laws of Singapore, provided that they do not exercise their rights in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the Journal.

About Licence

Environment and Social Psychology is an open access journal and all published work is available under the Creative Commons Licence, Authors shall retain copyright of their work and grant the journal/publisher the right of first publication, and their work shall be licensed under the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).

Under this licence, the author grants permission to third parties to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content with attribution to the author. No permission from the author or publisher is required.

This broad licence is intended to facilitate free access to and unrestricted use of original works of all kinds. This ensures that published works remain free and accessible in perpetuity. Submitted manuscripts, once accepted, are immediately available to the public and permanently accessible free of charge on the journal’s official website (https://esp.as-pub.com/index.php/ESP). Allowing users to read, download, copy, print, search for or link to the full text of the article, or use it for other legal purposes. However, the use of the work must retain the author's signature, be limited to non-commercial purposes, and not be interpretative.

Click to download <Agreement on the Licence for the Use of Copyright on Environmental and Social Psychology>.

How to Cite

Khazaleh, A. K., Alnasraween, M. S., ALshraah, F. K. N., Aleid, W. A., & Abzakh, H. O. M. (2024). Obstacles facing teacher of students with learning disabilities in applying curriculum-based measurement at learning disabilities resource rooms. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(7). https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v9i7.6184

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

Ahmed Khaled Khazaleh

Department of Educational Scinences and special Education Al al-Bayt University

Mo'en Salman Alnasraween

Department of Educational Psychology and Psychological and Educational Counselling, Amman Arab University Department of counseling and education psychology, Yarmouk University, 00962, Irbid, Jordan

Faisal Khlaif Naser ALshraah

Department of Basic and Applied Sciences, Al-Balqa Applied University

Wafa’ Aeid Aleid

Department Special Education, Amman Arab University

Hanada Omar Mohammad Abzakh

Department Special Education, Al-Balqa Applied University


DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v9i7.6184


Keywords: learning difficulties, obstacles, curriculum-based measurement, learning difficulties resource rooms

Abstract

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.

Author Biographies

Ahmed Khaled Khazaleh, Department of Educational Scinences and special Education Al al-Bayt University

 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8683-1419

Al al-Bayt University. 

Department of Psychological Sciences, Faculty of Educational Psychological Sciences, , Almfraq, Jordan

Faisal Khlaif Naser ALshraah, Department of Basic and Applied Sciences, Al-Balqa Applied University

fai Faisal Khlaif Naser ALshraah

sal_shr@bau.edu.jo

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5152-6983
Al-balqa Applied University/ Zarqa University college

Wafa’ Aeid Aleid, Department Special Education, Amman Arab University

Wafa’ Aeid Aleidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0104-0963

 

wafaaaleid@aau.edu.jo>

Assistant professor

Special Education department

Educational and psychological department

 

 

Hanada Omar Mohammad Abzakh, Department Special Education, Al-Balqa Applied University

Hanada Omar Mohammad Abzakh ,

orcid.org/0000-0001-5318-4446,

Associate Professor

Al-Balqa Applied University. tymor_6@hotmail.com

References

[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. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508412452750

[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 http://www.progressmonitoring.org/pdf/TR5MathDev.pdf

[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. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0100101

[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. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21779.

[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. https://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/resources/2/Principal/2009/J-F_p30.pdf.

[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. https://doi.org/10.4103/2249-4863.152243.

[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. https://doi.org/1010.1017/jgc.2020.5.

[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. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22473.

[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, https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/etd/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 https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/ 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. https://doi.org /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. https://doi.org/ 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. https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/theses/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.



21 Woodlands Close #02-10 Primz Bizhub Singapore 737854

Email:editorial_office@as-pub.com