Evaluating a gated screening approach for identifying risk in kindergarten mathematics.

IF 3.9 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Gena Nelson, Derek B. Kosty, Jessica Turtura, Christian T. Doabler, Benjamin Clarke
{"title":"Evaluating a gated screening approach for identifying risk in kindergarten mathematics.","authors":"Gena Nelson, Derek B. Kosty, Jessica Turtura, Christian T. Doabler, Benjamin Clarke","doi":"10.1037/spq0000630","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of the present study was to examine the diagnostic accuracy of different universal screening approaches for identifying mathematics difficulties in kindergarteners. We used extant data from 2,010 kindergarten students from 23 schools across two states. First, we identified the diagnostic accuracy of two individual screeners: (a) a set of three curriculum-based measures (CBM) and (b) a diagnostic measure, the Number Sense Brief (NSB). Then, we determined the diagnostic accuracy of a gated screening approach considering both the CBM and NSB. The criterion measure was a norm-referenced mathematics achievement test. The results indicated that area under the curve values met or exceeded .80 for both individual screeners; however, the number of false positives was high. The gated screening approach yielded fewer false positives at the expense of increasing false negatives. Directions for future research and the practical implications of the results for screening in kindergarten mathematics are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":44991,"journal":{"name":"School Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"School Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000630","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to examine the diagnostic accuracy of different universal screening approaches for identifying mathematics difficulties in kindergarteners. We used extant data from 2,010 kindergarten students from 23 schools across two states. First, we identified the diagnostic accuracy of two individual screeners: (a) a set of three curriculum-based measures (CBM) and (b) a diagnostic measure, the Number Sense Brief (NSB). Then, we determined the diagnostic accuracy of a gated screening approach considering both the CBM and NSB. The criterion measure was a norm-referenced mathematics achievement test. The results indicated that area under the curve values met or exceeded .80 for both individual screeners; however, the number of false positives was high. The gated screening approach yielded fewer false positives at the expense of increasing false negatives. Directions for future research and the practical implications of the results for screening in kindergarten mathematics are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
评估用于识别幼儿园数学风险的门控筛查方法。
本研究旨在考察不同的通用筛查方法在识别幼儿园学生数学困难方面的诊断准确性。我们使用了来自两个州 23 所学校 2 010 名幼儿园学生的现有数据。首先,我们确定了两种个别筛查方法的诊断准确性:(a) 一套基于课程的三项测量(CBM)和 (b) 一项诊断测量--数感简测(NSB)。然后,我们确定了一种同时考虑 CBM 和 NSB 的筛选方法的诊断准确性。标准测量是常模参照数学成绩测验。结果表明,两种筛查方法的曲线下面积值都达到或超过了 0.80;然而,假阳性的数量却很高。有门筛查法的假阳性人数较少,但假阴性人数却有所增加。本文讨论了未来研究的方向以及研究结果对幼儿园数学筛查的实际意义。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
School Psychology
School Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.30%
发文量
56
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信