Curriculum-based measurement of basic arithmetic competence: Do different booklets represent the same ability?

IF 0.6 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Christin Varnauer, Sarah Chromik, Philipp Doebler, Jörg-Tobias Kuhn
{"title":"Curriculum-based measurement of basic arithmetic competence: Do different booklets represent the same ability?","authors":"Christin Varnauer, Sarah Chromik, Philipp Doebler, Jörg-Tobias Kuhn","doi":"10.31244/jero.2022.01.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An important prerequisite of progress monitoring as one source to support instructional decision-making is the existence of equivalent booklets. This study assesses this prerequisite with respect to a German elementary school math curriculum-based measurement instrument (LVD-M 2-4; Strathmann & Klauer, 2012). Every second week of a 19-weeks period, n = 108 third and n = 109 fourth graders (regular instruction) completed one of ten parallel booklets, each containing 24 arithmetic tasks. Analyses with (generalized) linear mixed models showed that in both grades the between-booklet variance was so small in relation to the between student variance that it was practically irrelevant. This corresponds to the key assumption of the binomial model that equivalent scores from different booklets reflect the same ability. While item difficulty varied within some of the tasks, the effect was insubstantial in comparison with the variance between students. These findings were replicated in two intervention samples of an RTI study. The parallel booklets can therefore be regarded as equivalent for typical applied purposes. Implications of these findings for curriculum-based measurement and booklet design are discussed.","PeriodicalId":44888,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Educational Research Online-JERO","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Educational Research Online-JERO","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31244/jero.2022.01.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

An important prerequisite of progress monitoring as one source to support instructional decision-making is the existence of equivalent booklets. This study assesses this prerequisite with respect to a German elementary school math curriculum-based measurement instrument (LVD-M 2-4; Strathmann & Klauer, 2012). Every second week of a 19-weeks period, n = 108 third and n = 109 fourth graders (regular instruction) completed one of ten parallel booklets, each containing 24 arithmetic tasks. Analyses with (generalized) linear mixed models showed that in both grades the between-booklet variance was so small in relation to the between student variance that it was practically irrelevant. This corresponds to the key assumption of the binomial model that equivalent scores from different booklets reflect the same ability. While item difficulty varied within some of the tasks, the effect was insubstantial in comparison with the variance between students. These findings were replicated in two intervention samples of an RTI study. The parallel booklets can therefore be regarded as equivalent for typical applied purposes. Implications of these findings for curriculum-based measurement and booklet design are discussed.
基于课程的基本算术能力测量:不同的小册子代表相同的能力吗?
作为支持教学决策的一个来源,进度监测的一个重要先决条件是存在等效的小册子。本研究针对德国小学数学课程测量仪器(LVD-M 2-4;Strathmann和Klauer,2012)评估了这一前提条件。在19周的时间里,每第二周,n=108名三年级和n=109名四年级学生(常规教学)完成十本平行小册子中的一本,每本小册子包含24项算术任务。用(广义)线性混合模型进行的分析表明,在两个年级中,小册子之间的方差相对于学生之间的方差非常小,因此实际上无关紧要。这与二项式模型的关键假设相对应,即不同小册子的同等分数反映了相同的能力。虽然一些任务中的项目难度各不相同,但与学生之间的差异相比,效果并不显著。在RTI研究的两个干预样本中重复了这些发现。因此,对于典型的应用目的,平行的小册子可以被视为等效的。讨论了这些发现对基于课程的测量和小册子设计的启示。
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
Journal for Educational Research Online-JERO
Journal for Educational Research Online-JERO EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
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