Exploring Curriculum-Based Measurement in Elementary Science: Investigating Two Vocabulary-Matching Formats

IF 1.2 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Sarah J. Conoyer, Kyle Wagner, Kristen K. Janssen, Jeremy D. Jewell, Elizabeth L. W. McKenney
{"title":"Exploring Curriculum-Based Measurement in Elementary Science: Investigating Two Vocabulary-Matching Formats","authors":"Sarah J. Conoyer, Kyle Wagner, Kristen K. Janssen, Jeremy D. Jewell, Elizabeth L. W. McKenney","doi":"10.1177/15345084231179442","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As content literacy intervention is expanded in schools, data-based decision-making practices need to also advance, especially in the areas of science. Vocabulary-matching curriculum-based measures (VM-CBM) may allow educators to identify students needing additional support in science vocabulary to assist with using and comprehending disciplinary language. Typically, VM-CBMs have been given in a one-page format, but there has been little investigation of modified presentation of VM items. Participants were 77 fourth grade students from a U.S. Midwestern rural school district. Students from four different classrooms were administered either typical one-page or multipage VM-CBM forms. Multipage forms produced strong alternate form reliability (r = .92, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [.85, .96]). Typical forms produced a moderate reliability coefficient (r = .58, 95% CI = [.32, .76]). Regarding concurrent validity, multipage forms were also strongly correlated (r = .71, 95% CI = [.50, .84]; r = .72, 95% CI = [.51, .85]) while typical forms were weakly correlated (r = .40, 95% CI = [.10, .64]; r = .47, 95% CI = [.17, .69]) with a standardized state science assessment. The multipage format appears promising; however, further item level analysis is needed to determine the most efficient way to screen and support students in elementary science literacy.","PeriodicalId":46264,"journal":{"name":"ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION","volume":"48 1","pages":"211 - 216"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-15","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/10.1177/15345084231179442","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

As content literacy intervention is expanded in schools, data-based decision-making practices need to also advance, especially in the areas of science. Vocabulary-matching curriculum-based measures (VM-CBM) may allow educators to identify students needing additional support in science vocabulary to assist with using and comprehending disciplinary language. Typically, VM-CBMs have been given in a one-page format, but there has been little investigation of modified presentation of VM items. Participants were 77 fourth grade students from a U.S. Midwestern rural school district. Students from four different classrooms were administered either typical one-page or multipage VM-CBM forms. Multipage forms produced strong alternate form reliability (r = .92, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [.85, .96]). Typical forms produced a moderate reliability coefficient (r = .58, 95% CI = [.32, .76]). Regarding concurrent validity, multipage forms were also strongly correlated (r = .71, 95% CI = [.50, .84]; r = .72, 95% CI = [.51, .85]) while typical forms were weakly correlated (r = .40, 95% CI = [.10, .64]; r = .47, 95% CI = [.17, .69]) with a standardized state science assessment. The multipage format appears promising; however, further item level analysis is needed to determine the most efficient way to screen and support students in elementary science literacy.
基础科学课程测量的探索:两种词汇匹配形式的考察
随着学校内容扫盲干预的扩大,基于数据的决策实践也需要推进,尤其是在科学领域。基于词汇匹配课程的测量(VM-CBM)可以让教育工作者识别出需要在科学词汇方面获得额外支持的学生,以帮助他们使用和理解学科语言。通常,VM CBM是以一页的格式给出的,但对VM项目的修改表示的研究很少。参与者是来自美国中西部农村学区的77名四年级学生。来自四个不同教室的学生接受了典型的一页或多页VM-CBM表格的管理。多阶段表格产生了很强的替代表格可靠性(r=.92,95%置信区间[CI]=[.85,.96])。典型表格产生了中等的可靠性系数(r=.58,95%可信区间=[.32,.76])。关于并发有效性,多页形式也与标准化的国家科学评估强相关(r=.71,95%CI=[0.50,.84];r=.72,95%CI=[51,.85]),而典型形式与标准化国家科学评估弱相关(r=.40,95%CI=[10,.64];r=.47,95%CI=[17,.69])。多页格式似乎很有前景;然而,还需要进一步的项目层面分析,以确定筛选和支持学生基础科学素养的最有效方法。
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