National test data indicate that some students do not perform well in writing, suggesting a need to identify students at risk for poor performance. Research supports Written Expression Curriculum-Based Measurement (WE-CBM) as an indicator of writing proficiency, but it is less commonly used in practice. This study examined the usability of WE-CBM compared with Reading Curriculum-Based Measurement (R-CBM). Participants included 162 teachers who were given examples of WE-CBM and R-CBM and then completed a usability measure for both curriculum-based measurement (CBM) types. Teachers not only rated WE-CBM as usable but also rated R-CBM significantly higher in usability, with no significant differences in acceptability. Practical implications that may inform modifications to WE-CBM are discussed.