Suppr超能文献

通过进度监测斜率预测中年级学生的阅读成果。

Predicting reading outcomes with progress monitoring slopes among middle grade students.

作者信息

Tolar Tammy D, Barth Amy E, Fletcher Jack M, Francis David J, Vaughn Sharon

机构信息

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.

出版信息

Learn Individ Differ. 2014 Feb 1;30:46-57. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2013.11.001.

Abstract

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.

摘要

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。

相似文献

1
Predicting reading outcomes with progress monitoring slopes among middle grade students.
Learn Individ Differ. 2014 Feb 1;30:46-57. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2013.11.001.
2
Advancing Stage 2 Research on Measures for Monitoring Kindergarten Reading Progress.
J Learn Disabil. 2018 Jan/Feb;51(1):85-104. doi: 10.1177/0022219416688171. Epub 2017 Jan 13.
3
Monitoring early first-grade reading progress: a comparison of two measures.
J Learn Disabil. 2014 May-Jun;47(3):254-70. doi: 10.1177/0022219412454455. Epub 2012 Aug 30.
4
Examining Predictive Validity of Oral Reading Fluency Slope in Upper Elementary Grades Using Quantile Regression.
J Learn Disabil. 2018 Nov/Dec;51(6):565-577. doi: 10.1177/0022219417719887. Epub 2017 Jul 30.
5
Psychometric Properties of Maze Tasks in Middle School Students.
Assess Eff Interv. 2012 Jun;37(3):131-146. doi: 10.1177/1534508411413913. Epub 2011 Jul 13.
6
Growth on sublexical fluency progress monitoring measures in early kindergarten and relations to word reading acquisition.
J Sch Psychol. 2020 Apr;79:43-62. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2020.01.003. Epub 2020 Apr 9.
7
Using Arabic word identification fluency to monitor first-grade reading progress.
Dyslexia. 2014 May;20(2):167-74. doi: 10.1002/dys.1472. Epub 2013 Dec 27.
8
The utility and accuracy of oral reading fluency score types in predicting reading comprehension.
J Sch Psychol. 2011 Feb;49(1):107-29. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2010.09.004. Epub 2010 Oct 20.
9
The effects of varied practice on the oral reading fluency of fourth-grade students.
J Sch Psychol. 2019 Dec;77:24-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2019.10.003. Epub 2019 Nov 20.

引用本文的文献

1
Assessment of Specific Learning Disabilities and Intellectual Disabilities.
Assessment. 2024 Jan;31(1):53-74. doi: 10.1177/10731911231194992. Epub 2023 Sep 6.
2
Executive Functions and Response to Intervention: Identification of Students Struggling with Reading Comprehension.
Learn Disabil Q. 2019 Feb;42(1):17-31. doi: 10.1177/0731948717749935. Epub 2018 Jan 23.
3
CBM maze-scores as indicators of reading level and growth for seventh-grade students.
Read Writ. 2018;31(3):627-648. doi: 10.1007/s11145-017-9803-8. Epub 2017 Nov 18.
4
Examining Predictive Validity of Oral Reading Fluency Slope in Upper Elementary Grades Using Quantile Regression.
J Learn Disabil. 2018 Nov/Dec;51(6):565-577. doi: 10.1177/0022219417719887. Epub 2017 Jul 30.
5
Cognitive Attributes of Adequate and Inadequate Responders to Reading Intervention in Middle School.
School Psych Rev. 2014 Dec;43(4):407-427. doi: 10.17105/SPR-13-0052.1.

本文引用的文献

1
Structural Model Evaluation and Modification: An Interval Estimation Approach.
Multivariate Behav Res. 1990 Apr 1;25(2):173-80. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4.
2
Reading skill components and impairments in middle school struggling readers.
Read Writ. 2013 Aug;26(7):1059-1086. doi: 10.1007/s11145-012-9406-3.
4
Psychometric Properties of Maze Tasks in Middle School Students.
Assess Eff Interv. 2012 Jun;37(3):131-146. doi: 10.1177/1534508411413913. Epub 2011 Jul 13.
5
The importance of measuring growth in response to intervention models: Testing a core assumption.
Learn Individ Differ. 2008;18(3):308-315. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2008.04.005.
6
Differences in the Relationship of Oral Reading Fluency and High-Stakes Measures of Reading Comprehension.
Assess Eff Interv. 2010 Mar;35(2):67-77. doi: 10.1177/1534508409339917.
9
Floor effects associated with universal screening and their impact on the early identification of reading disabilities.
J Learn Disabil. 2009 Mar-Apr;42(2):163-76. doi: 10.1177/0022219408326219. Epub 2008 Dec 19.
10
Form effects on the estimation of students' oral reading fluency using DIBELS.
J Sch Psychol. 2008 Jun;46(3):315-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2007.06.003. Epub 2007 Jul 25.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验