Predicting Risk for Comorbid Reading and Mathematics Disability Using Fluency-Based Screening Assessments

IF 1.9 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
BrittanyLee N. Martin, Lynn S. Fuchs
{"title":"Predicting Risk for Comorbid Reading and Mathematics Disability Using Fluency-Based Screening Assessments","authors":"BrittanyLee N. Martin,&nbsp;Lynn S. Fuchs","doi":"10.1111/ldrp.12278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The first purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence of risk for comorbid reading and mathematics disabilities (RMD) at start of first grade, when measured in a representative sample of 3,062 students with first-grade fluency measures (word reading; computation). The second purpose was to examine the utility of these measures for predicting RMD status within a sample of 577 students when RMD status was assessed at the end of second grade in terms of reading and math accuracy. When set at or below the 16th percentile, first-grade risk for RMD was two times more common than chance; at or below the 7th percentile, it was five times more common. Logistic regression showed that the two first-grade fluency measures accurately distinguished students with and without RMD in second grade; however, when cut scores were set to capture 85% of students with RMD, false positives were high. Overall, the results provide support for the use of fluency measures as an initial gating procedure in first grade, but additional gating steps appear necessary in the screening process to reduce false positives.</p>","PeriodicalId":47426,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities Research & Practice","volume":"37 2","pages":"100-112"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Disabilities Research & Practice","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ldrp.12278","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The first purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence of risk for comorbid reading and mathematics disabilities (RMD) at start of first grade, when measured in a representative sample of 3,062 students with first-grade fluency measures (word reading; computation). The second purpose was to examine the utility of these measures for predicting RMD status within a sample of 577 students when RMD status was assessed at the end of second grade in terms of reading and math accuracy. When set at or below the 16th percentile, first-grade risk for RMD was two times more common than chance; at or below the 7th percentile, it was five times more common. Logistic regression showed that the two first-grade fluency measures accurately distinguished students with and without RMD in second grade; however, when cut scores were set to capture 85% of students with RMD, false positives were high. Overall, the results provide support for the use of fluency measures as an initial gating procedure in first grade, but additional gating steps appear necessary in the screening process to reduce false positives.

Abstract Image

使用基于流利度的筛查评估预测合并症阅读和数学障碍的风险
本研究的第一个目的是检查一年级开始时共病阅读和数学障碍(RMD)风险的流行程度,当在3062名具有一年级流利性测量的学生的代表性样本中测量时(单词阅读;计算)。第二个目的是检验这些措施在577名学生样本中预测RMD状态的效用,当RMD状态在二年级结束时被评估为阅读和数学准确性。当设定在或低于第16百分位时,RMD的一级风险是偶然性的两倍;在第7个百分位或以下,这种情况要多出5倍。Logistic回归结果显示,两项一年级流利度测量准确区分了二年级有和没有RMD的学生;然而,当削减分数设定为捕获85%的RMD学生时,误报率很高。总体而言,研究结果支持在一年级学生中使用流利度测量作为初始筛选程序,但在筛选过程中需要额外的筛选步骤以减少误报。
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
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
21
×
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