These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15493235)

  • 1. Writing performance assessments: how important is extended time?
    Crawford L; Helwig R; Tindal G
    J Learn Disabil; 2004; 37(2):132-42. PubMed ID: 15493235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect on performance of timely feedback on state writing assessments.
    Crehan KD; Curfman M
    Psychol Rep; 2003 Jun; 92(3 Pt 1):1015-21. PubMed ID: 12841478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. An Analysis of First-Grade Writing Profiles and Their Relationship to Compositional Quality.
    Coker DL; Ritchey KD; Uribe-Zarain X; Jennings AS
    J Learn Disabil; 2018; 51(4):336-350. PubMed ID: 28498726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of narrative and expository writing in students with and without language-learning disabilities.
    Koutsoftas AD; Gray S
    Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch; 2012 Oct; 43(4):395-409. PubMed ID: 22411493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Do sixth-grade writers need process strategies?
    Torrance M; Fidalgo R; Robledo P
    Br J Educ Psychol; 2015 Mar; 85(1):91-112. PubMed ID: 25583519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Timed essay writing: implications for high-stakes tests.
    Gregg N; Coleman C; Davis M; Chalk JC
    J Learn Disabil; 2007; 40(4):306-18. PubMed ID: 17713130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Discourse complexity of college writers with and without disabilities: a multidimensional analysis.
    Gregg N; Coleman C; Stennett RB; Davis M
    J Learn Disabil; 2002; 35(1):23-38, 56. PubMed ID: 15490898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Diagnosing written language disabilities using the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Educational Achievement-Revised and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test.
    Brown MB; Giandenoto MJ; Bolen LM
    Psychol Rep; 2000 Aug; 87(1):197-204. PubMed ID: 11026413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Methods for evaluating educational programs: does Writing Center participation affect student achievement?
    Bredtmann J; Crede CJ; Otten S
    Eval Program Plann; 2013 Feb; 36(1):115-23. PubMed ID: 23070048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Written expression of students with and without learning disabilities: differences across the grades.
    Houck CK; Billingsley BS
    J Learn Disabil; 1989 Nov; 22(9):561-7, 572. PubMed ID: 2809408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Automated essay scoring and the future of educational assessment in medical education.
    Gierl MJ; Latifi S; Lai H; Boulais AP; De Champlain A
    Med Educ; 2014 Oct; 48(10):950-62. PubMed ID: 25200016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Examining rating quality in writing assessment: rater agreement, error, and accuracy.
    Wind SA; Engelhard G
    J Appl Meas; 2012; 13(4):321-35. PubMed ID: 23270978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. School is fun at recess: informal analyses of written language for students with learning disabilities.
    Gregg N; Mather N
    J Learn Disabil; 2002; 35(1):7-22. PubMed ID: 15490897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Investigating the technical adequacy of curriculum-based measurement in written expression for students who are deaf or hard of hearing.
    Cheng SF; Rose S
    J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ; 2009; 14(4):503-15. PubMed ID: 19564174
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The evaluation of students' reflective writing for evidence of critical thinking.
    Kennison MM
    Nurs Educ Perspect; 2006; 27(5):269-73. PubMed ID: 17036685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluating the impact of feedback on elementary aged students' fluency growth in written expression: a randomized controlled trial.
    Truckenmiller AJ; Eckert TL; Codding RS; Petscher Y
    J Sch Psychol; 2014 Dec; 52(6):531-48. PubMed ID: 25432270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of reading-writing patterns and performance of students with and without reading difficulties.
    Fidalgo R; Torrance M; Arias-Gundín O; Martínez-Cocó B
    Psicothema; 2014; 26(4):442-8. PubMed ID: 25340889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Using a Scoring Rubric to Assess the Writing of Bioethics Students.
    Stoddard HA; Labrecque CA; Schonfeld T
    Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 2016 Apr; 25(2):301-11. PubMed ID: 26957455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Universal screening with automated essay scoring: Evaluating classification accuracy in grades 3 and 4.
    Wilson J
    J Sch Psychol; 2018 Jun; 68():19-37. PubMed ID: 29861028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Potential scoring and predictive bias in interim and summative writing assessments.
    Reed DK; Mercer SH
    Sch Psychol; 2023 Jul; 38(4):215-224. PubMed ID: 36548064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.