无义词流畅性与基于课程的阅读测试对自然拼读教学反应的比较。

Ethan R Van Norman, Peter M Nelson, David C Parker
{"title":"无义词流畅性与基于课程的阅读测试对自然拼读教学反应的比较。","authors":"Ethan R Van Norman,&nbsp;Peter M Nelson,&nbsp;David C Parker","doi":"10.1037/spq0000237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Student response to instruction is a key piece of information that school psychologists use to make instructional decisions. Curriculum-based measures (CBMs) are the most commonly used and researched family of academic progress-monitoring assessments. There are a variety of reading CBMs that differ in the type and specificity of skills they assess. The purpose of this study was to determine the degree to which the CBM of oral reading (CBM-R) progress-monitoring data differed from nonsense-word fluency (NWF) progress-monitoring data in the presence of a common intervention. We used multivariate multilevel modeling to compare growth trajectories from CBM-R and NWF progress-monitoring data from a geographically diverse sample of 3,000 1st-grade students receiving Tier-2 phonics interventions. We also evaluated differences in sensitivity to improvement and reliability of improvement from each measure. Improvement on CBM-R was statistically, but not practically, significantly greater than NWF. Although CBM-R was not as direct a measure of decoding, it still captured student response to phonics instruction similarly to NWF. NWF demonstrated slightly better sensitivity to growth, but CBM-R yielded more reliable growth estimates. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":88124,"journal":{"name":"School psychology quarterly : the official journal of the Division of School Psychology, American Psychological Association","volume":"33 4","pages":"573-581"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of nonsense-word fluency and curriculum-based measurement of reading to measure response to phonics instruction.\",\"authors\":\"Ethan R Van Norman,&nbsp;Peter M Nelson,&nbsp;David C Parker\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/spq0000237\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Student response to instruction is a key piece of information that school psychologists use to make instructional decisions. Curriculum-based measures (CBMs) are the most commonly used and researched family of academic progress-monitoring assessments. There are a variety of reading CBMs that differ in the type and specificity of skills they assess. The purpose of this study was to determine the degree to which the CBM of oral reading (CBM-R) progress-monitoring data differed from nonsense-word fluency (NWF) progress-monitoring data in the presence of a common intervention. We used multivariate multilevel modeling to compare growth trajectories from CBM-R and NWF progress-monitoring data from a geographically diverse sample of 3,000 1st-grade students receiving Tier-2 phonics interventions. We also evaluated differences in sensitivity to improvement and reliability of improvement from each measure. Improvement on CBM-R was statistically, but not practically, significantly greater than NWF. Although CBM-R was not as direct a measure of decoding, it still captured student response to phonics instruction similarly to NWF. NWF demonstrated slightly better sensitivity to growth, but CBM-R yielded more reliable growth estimates. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":88124,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"School psychology quarterly : the official journal of the Division of School Psychology, American Psychological Association\",\"volume\":\"33 4\",\"pages\":\"573-581\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"School psychology quarterly : the official journal of the Division of School Psychology, American Psychological Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000237\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2018/6/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"School psychology quarterly : the official journal of the Division of School Psychology, American Psychological Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000237","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/6/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

学生对教学的反应是学校心理学家用来制定教学决策的关键信息。课程为基础的措施(CBMs)是最常用和研究的学术进步监测评估家族。有各种各样的阅读CBMs,在评估技能的类型和特异性上有所不同。本研究的目的是确定口语阅读CBM (CBM- r)进展监测数据与无义词流畅性(NWF)进展监测数据在共同干预下的差异程度。我们使用多变量多水平模型来比较来自CBM-R和NWF进展监测数据的生长轨迹,这些数据来自3,000名接受二级语音干预的一年级学生的地理不同样本。我们还评估了每项措施对改善的敏感性和改善的可靠性的差异。CBM-R的改善在统计学上明显大于NWF。虽然CBM-R不是解码的直接测量,但它仍然像NWF一样捕获了学生对语音教学的反应。NWF对增长的敏感性稍好,但CBM-R对增长的估计更可靠。(PsycINFO数据库记录(c) 2018 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comparison of nonsense-word fluency and curriculum-based measurement of reading to measure response to phonics instruction.

Student response to instruction is a key piece of information that school psychologists use to make instructional decisions. Curriculum-based measures (CBMs) are the most commonly used and researched family of academic progress-monitoring assessments. There are a variety of reading CBMs that differ in the type and specificity of skills they assess. The purpose of this study was to determine the degree to which the CBM of oral reading (CBM-R) progress-monitoring data differed from nonsense-word fluency (NWF) progress-monitoring data in the presence of a common intervention. We used multivariate multilevel modeling to compare growth trajectories from CBM-R and NWF progress-monitoring data from a geographically diverse sample of 3,000 1st-grade students receiving Tier-2 phonics interventions. We also evaluated differences in sensitivity to improvement and reliability of improvement from each measure. Improvement on CBM-R was statistically, but not practically, significantly greater than NWF. Although CBM-R was not as direct a measure of decoding, it still captured student response to phonics instruction similarly to NWF. NWF demonstrated slightly better sensitivity to growth, but CBM-R yielded more reliable growth estimates. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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