| Abstract: | Curriculum‐based measures have been validated for use in evaluating reading, mathematics, and writing skills (Marston, 1989). Despite its common use by school psychologists (Wilson & Reschly, 1996), the relationship between the Woodcock Johnson‐Revised and curriculum‐based measures of writing has not been evaluated. This study investigated the relationship between the Woodcock Johnson‐Revised Writing Samples subtest and alternate curriculum‐based measures of written expression. In addition, the sensitivity of the measures to the effects of a short group writing intervention was assessed. Forty‐five third and fourth graders participated in an intervention that consisted of brainstorming ideas, presenting those ideas on a dry‐erase board, and writing a complete sentence on paper with writing quality feedback before completing a CBM (curriculum‐based measurement) writing passage. Numbers of words written as well as five alternate measures of writing samples were used to assess the effects of the intervention. The intervention had a positive effect on total words written. Total punctuation marks, simple sentences, and words in complete sentences emerged as the best predictors of the Woodcock Johnson‐Revised Writing Samples subtest scores in regression analyses. The implications of the analyses, limitations of the study, and directions for future research are discussed. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Psychol Schs 41: 291–300, 2004. |
