![](https://csdnimg.cn/release/download_crawler_static/19899498/bg1.jpg)
184
Brown
CONCLUSION
Meta-analysis offers researchers both at the university and in the classroom one
additional tool for use in helping to describe conflicting empirical results about educating
children (Brown
&
Brown,
1987).
Using the fail-safe
N
requires decisions, and,
as
Sindelar
and Wilson
(1984)
noted, logic and humanism will prevail, sometimes even in contradic-
tion to empirical knowledge. As a result, the merits and shortcomings
of
meta-analysis
and use
of
the fail-safe
N
will prevail as well. The fail-safe
N,
however, is one technique
to help researchers and practitioners estimate the relative degree of stability from meta-
analysis results and will assist professionals to spot potential hucksterism.
REFERENCES
BROWN,
J.
R., &BROWN, L.
J.
(1987). Meta-analysis: Unraveling the mystery of research articles.
The
Volta
CARSON, K. P., SCHRIESHEIM, C. A.,
&
KINICKI,
A.
J.
(1990). The usefulness of the “fail-safe” statistic in
COHEN,
J.
(1969).
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences.
New York: Academic Press.
KAVALE, K.
A. (1984). Potential advantages of the meta-analysis technique for research in special educa-
LIGHT, R.
J.,
81
PILLEMER,
D.
B. (1984).
Summing up: Thescience
of
reviewing research.
Cambridge, MA:
Oxm, R.
G.
(1983).
A
fail-safe Nfor effect
size
in meta-analysis.
Journalof ,%jucationalStatistics,
8,
157-159.
ROSENTHAL,
R.
(1979). The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results.
Psychological Bulletin,
86,
SINDELAR, P. T.,
&
WILSON, R.
J.
(1984). The potential effects of meta-analysis on special education.
Jour-
Review,
89(7), 339-345.
meta-analysis.
Educational and Psychological Measurement,
50,
233-243.
tion.
Journal
of
Special Education,
18,
61-72.
Harvard University Press.
638-641.
nal
of
Speech and Hearing Research,
20,
421-429.
Psychology
in
the Schools
Volume
29,
April
1992
CURRICULUM-BASED MEASURES
OF
WRITTEN EXPRESSION FOR
LEARNING-DISABLED AND NONDISABLED STUDENTS
JODI
T.
WATKINSON
AND
STEVEN
W.
LEE
University
of
Kansas
This study examined differences in written expression between a sample of learning-
disabled and nondisabled middle school students, matched by grade and sex, using
eight curriculum-based measures. All
of
the learning-disabled students had been iden-
tified as having written language deficits as part
of
their handicapping conditions.
The nondisabled students showed superior written expression skills, especially on the
production-independent measures. Implications of these
results
are
discussed in relation
to
psychoeducational assessment, the use of CBM for ongoing assessment of written
expression, and future studies.
Written expression is comprised
of
a complex set
of
learned skills ranging from
handwriting and spelling to the use
of
language
for
persuasive
or
referential functions.
Requests
for
reprints should be sent
to
Steven
W.
Lee, Educational Psychology,
2
Bailey Hall, University
of Kansas, Lawrence,
KS
66045-2338.