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. (Contains 5 tables.)