Date of Submission


Degree Type


Degree Name

Doctor of Psychology (PsyD)



Department Chair

Robert A. DiTomasso, Ph.D., ABPP

First Advisor

George McCloskey, Ph.D., Chairperson

Second Advisor

Terri Erbacher. Ph.D.

Third Advisor

Gary Lord, Ph.D.


With increasing pressure and accountability for schools to produce higher scores on statewide achievement tests, the use ofCurriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) methods for monitoring student progress, identifYing at-risk students for failing state tests, and providing appropriate interventions to increase student performance could prove to be very beneficial (McGlinchey & Hixson, 2004). Research has indicated that CBM can be an effective tool in predicting success on state-wide reading achievement tests (Shapiro, Keller, Lutz, Santoro, & Hintze, 2006; Wood, 2006; Hintze & Silberglitt, 2005; McGlinchey & Hixson, 2004; Barger, 2003; Shaw & Shaw, 2002; Stage & Jacobsen, 2001). Determining whether or not a student is at-risk for failing the state-wide reading achievement test could prove to be very useful in providing early intervention and influencing educational programming (Shapiro et al.; Hintze & Silberglitt; McGlinchey & Hixson; Stage & Jacobsen). This study seeks to understand the relationship of curriculum-based measures ofreading and performance on state-wide reading assessment. This includes gaining a better understanding of the variability between different CBM reading measures and performance on state-wide reading assessment, such as the strength ofthe relationship. Different CBM measures as predictors were examined. Factors that indicate the reasons why reading CBM is a good predictor of performance for some students and not others was also examined.