Reliability of Ratings of an English Language Arts Curriculum With the Curriculum Evaluation Guidelines

IF 1.2 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Matthew K. Burns, Heba Z. Abdelnaby, Jonie B. Welland, Katherine A. Graves, Kari Kurto
{"title":"Reliability of Ratings of an English Language Arts Curriculum With the Curriculum Evaluation Guidelines","authors":"Matthew K. Burns, Heba Z. Abdelnaby, Jonie B. Welland, Katherine A. Graves, Kari Kurto","doi":"10.1177/15345084241271926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The current study examined the reliability of The Reading League Curriculum-Evaluation Guidelines (CEGs), which were developed to help school-based teams rate the presence of red flags when considering adopting specific literacy curricula. Coders ( n = 30) independently used the CEGs to evaluate a free online English language arts curriculum. The results indicated strong internal consistency ( a = 0.96) and high interrater reliability ( H<jats:sub>M</jats:sub> = .91, 95% CI = .89 to .93, p &lt; .01). Overall, the CEGs hold the potential as a psychometrically sound tool for evaluating reading curricula. Limitations and implications for practice and research are discussed.","PeriodicalId":46264,"journal":{"name":"ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15345084241271926","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The current study examined the reliability of The Reading League Curriculum-Evaluation Guidelines (CEGs), which were developed to help school-based teams rate the presence of red flags when considering adopting specific literacy curricula. Coders ( n = 30) independently used the CEGs to evaluate a free online English language arts curriculum. The results indicated strong internal consistency ( a = 0.96) and high interrater reliability ( HM = .91, 95% CI = .89 to .93, p < .01). Overall, the CEGs hold the potential as a psychometrically sound tool for evaluating reading curricula. Limitations and implications for practice and research are discussed.
根据《课程评价指南》对英语语言艺术课程评分的可靠性
本研究考察了《阅读联盟课程评价指南》(CEG)的可靠性,该指南旨在帮助校本团队在考虑采用特定的读写课程时评定是否存在 "红旗"。编码员(n = 30)独立使用 CEGs 评估免费在线英语语言艺术课程。结果表明,内部一致性强(a = 0.96),译者间可靠性高(HM = .91, 95% CI = .89 to .93, p <.01)。总之,CEGs 有可能成为一种心理测量学上可靠的阅读课程评估工具。本文讨论了其局限性以及对实践和研究的影响。
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
ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION
ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
×
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