Systematic Review of Curriculum-Based Measurement with Students Who Are Deaf
Clicks: 141
ID: 116591
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Popular Article
30.0
/100
141 views
16 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
PopularRanked #12 of 21 articles by views in the journal of deaf studies and deaf education
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract. This review systematically identified and compared the technical adequacy (reliability and validity evidence) of reading curriculum-based measurement
Abstract Quality Issue:
This abstract appears to be incomplete or contains metadata (18 words).
Try re-searching for a better abstract.
| Reference Key |
athesystematic
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Lam, Elizabeth A;McMaster, Kristen L;Rose, Susan; |
| Journal | the journal of deaf studies and deaf education |
| Year | Year not found |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
|
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.