SPED 311 Curriculum Based Assessment I

Description of student:
Max is a four-year-old male student in a PPCD classroom. Max is under IDEA for
speech and NCEC (non categorical early childhood). He is very attached to his four-yearold sister who also has speech impairments, but is at a higher level intellectually. Socially
and emotionally Max is very loving and likes a lot of attention from his peers and
teachers. He has a unique social relationship with his sister and becomes anxious when
she leaves the room. Max plays with typically developing peers along with his PPCD
classmates as well. Max does not see himself as different.
Maxs adaptive behavior includes being able to put his jacket on, going to the
restroom and washing hands independently. His academic skills are a little lower than the
average four year old, but he still has basic understanding of numbers, colors and letters.
Max is able to match a number, color or letter to the corresponding number, color or
letter. Max learns over time with repetition. Max can trace all of the letters in his name
with ease, but struggles holding the pencil correctly and knowing the order of the letters
without support. His fine motor skills are developing through cutting, writing and moving
objects on the SmartBoard. Max is a wonderful young boy who has outstanding potential.
Objective:
Texas Pre-K Guidelines: PIV.B. 2.
Child writes own name (first name or frequent nickname), not necessarily with full
correct spelling or well-formed letters.
Objective: Max will write his name on daily assignments with correct pencil grip and
correct letters formed after given the verbal prompt write your name with 80%

accuracy over three trials.

Measurement tool: Hybrid

Directions: After Max has completed an assignment, give the verbal prompt Write your
name and then analyze how Max writes his name on his assignment with the chart
below.
Trial 1: 3/23

Trial 2: 3/25

Trial 3: 4/2

Picks up and Holds pencil

correctly on first attempt

Writes name within 5 seconds of

prompt

Forms M correctly

Forms A correctly

Forms X correctly

Total

4/5

4/5

5/5

Correct: +
Partially correct: ~ (corrects pencil grip, forms correct letter backwards)
Incorrect: Administration Discussion:
I administered the CBM after Max completed his table work over the course of
three different classes. Each day the students complete some kind of table work and either
the teacher or the student writes their name on the back of the assignment depending

upon the childs skill level. Max is expected to attempt to write his name on the back of
his assignments each day. For trial 1, I told Max to write his name on the back of his
assignment. Max picked up his pencil incorrectly, but then corrected his grip before
beginning to write his name within five seconds of my verbal prompt. Max then preceded
to form all letters of his name correctly. For trial 2, I told Max to write his name on the
back of his assignment. Max picked up his pencil correctly, but then refused to write his
name for about one minute. Once he was told if eh did not write his name he would not
receive computer time, he began writing his name and once again formed all letters
correctly. For trial 3, I once again told Max to write his name on the back of his
assignment for that day. Max picked up his pencil correctly, began writing immediately
and formed all letters correctly. I praised Max for his outstanding work.
This assessment went as expected and was very easy to record during a typical
class setting. The student does a great job at forming the letters in their personal name,
but does not form other letters with such accuracy. The measurement tool was only
measuring progress on a small skill since Max has a very short name. The strength of this
is tool is that it could easily be given to another person and be used with ease. The hybrid
allows there to be more than a yes or a no on each skill. Therefore, if the student corrects
what they began to do incorrect, the hybrid allows progress to be seen for that skill. In
order to make this tool more effective, it may be better to pull Max aside to test his
knowledge on how to write his name in an assessment setting. This could improve his
attention to the task because he would not be worried about computer time after he
completes his table work. This tool could also be used for all letters of the alphabet to test
a broader range of letters.

Discussion with Mentor:

When discussing the results with my mentor teacher, she believed the results were
accurate with what she expected. She stated Max had become very fluent at writing his
name, but sometimes will refuse because it was written for him for so long. She said that
they have been working on him complying with what is asked of him and the results
seemed to show he was working in a positive direction toward that goal. We both agreed
this tool could be used in the future and we both how it could be used in a daily setting
with Max. This allows for accurate data since it is in the same time and setting. She also
thought this tool could be used for other students in her class by adapting the letters on
the chart. I agree that this is a chart that will be used for her other students in the future.

Future Teaching:
Max mastered the objective given to him by having 86.7% accuracy on the skills
of writing his name. I think in the future it will be important to give reinforcement when
Max writes his name without any verbal prompt and within five seconds if given a verbal
prompt. This skill will become an expectation after Max completes his table work. I also
think this rubric could be adapted for Max to learn how to write all of the letters of the
alphabet to enhance his letter writing skills. This will require a set time for letter writing,
which may be best once a week instead of once a day. Overall, Max has proven to be very
fluent at writing his name and can now be challenged with more letters of the alphabet.