Tolar Tammy D, Barth Amy E, Fletcher Jack M, Francis David J, Vaughn Sharon
Tammy D. Tolar, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Houston; Amy E. Barth, Department of Special Education, University of Missouri-Columbia; Jack M. Fletcher, and David J. Francis, Department of Psychology, Texas Institute for Measurement, Evaluation and Statistics, and the Texas Center for Learning Disabilities, University of Houston; Sharon Vaughn, Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, University of Texas-Austin, Austin TX.
Learn Individ Differ. 2014 Feb 1;30:46-57. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2013.11.001.
Effective implementation of response-to-intervention (RTI) frameworks depends on efficient tools for monitoring progress. Evaluations of growth (i.e., slope) may be less efficient than evaluations of status at a single time point, especially if slopes do not add to predictions of outcomes over status. We examined progress monitoring slope validity for predicting reading outcomes among middle school students by evaluating latent growth models for different progress monitoring measure-outcome combinations. We used multi-group modeling to evaluate the effects of reading ability, reading intervention, and progress monitoring administration condition on slope validity. Slope validity was greatest when progress monitoring was aligned with the outcome (i.e., word reading fluency slope was used to predict fluency outcomes in contrast to comprehension outcomes), but effects varied across administration conditions (viz., repeated reading of familiar vs. novel passages). Unless the progress monitoring measure is highly aligned with outcome, slope may be an inefficient method for evaluating progress in an RTI context.
响应干预（RTI）框架的有效实施取决于用于监测进展的高效工具。对增长（即斜率）的评估可能不如对单个时间点的状态评估有效，特别是如果斜率对结果的预测没有超过状态的预测。我们通过评估不同进展监测测量-结果组合的潜在增长模型，检验了进展监测斜率在预测中学生阅读结果方面的有效性。我们使用多组模型来评估阅读能力、阅读干预和进展监测管理条件对斜率有效性的影响。当进展监测与结果一致时（即单词阅读流畅性斜率用于预测流畅性结果，而不是理解结果），斜率有效性最大，但效果因管理条件而异（即熟悉段落与新段落的重复阅读）。除非进展监测测量与结果高度一致，否则在RTI背景下，斜率可能是一种评估进展的低效方法。
