阅读障碍风险的早期检测:开发由教师管理的简易筛查。

IF 1.6 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
Learning Disability Quarterly Pub Date : 2021-08-01 Epub Date: 2020-06-19 DOI:10.1177/0731948720931870
Jack M Fletcher, David J Francis, Barbara R Foorman, Christopher Schatschneider
{"title":"阅读障碍风险的早期检测:开发由教师管理的简易筛查。","authors":"Jack M Fletcher, David J Francis, Barbara R Foorman, Christopher Schatschneider","doi":"10.1177/0731948720931870","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many states now mandate early screening for dyslexia, but vary in how they address these mandates. There is confusion about the nature of screening versus diagnostic assessments, risk versus diagnosis, concurrent versus predictive validity, and inattention to indices of classification accuracy as the basis for determining risk. To help define what constitutes a screening assessment, we summarize efforts to develop short (3-5 min), teacher-administered screens that used multivariate strategies for variable selection, item response theory to select items that are most discriminating at a threshold for predicting risk, and statistical decision theory. These methods optimize prediction and lower the burden on teachers by reducing the number of items needed to evaluate risk. A specific goal of these efforts was to minimize decision errors that would result in the failure to identify a child as at risk of dyslexia/reading problems (false negatives) despite the inevitable increase in identifications of children who eventually perform in the typical range (false positives). Five screens, developed for different periods during kindergarten, Grade 1, and Grade 2, predicted outcomes measured later in the same school year (Grade 2) or in the subsequent year (Grade 1). The results of this approach to development are applicable to other screening methods, especially those that attempt to predict those children at risk of dyslexia prior to the onset of reading instruction. Without reliable and valid early <i>predictive</i> screening measures that reduce the burden on teachers, early intervention and prevention of dyslexia and related reading problems will be difficult.</p>","PeriodicalId":47365,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disability Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8475291/pdf/nihms-1634667.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Early Detection of Dyslexia Risk: Development of Brief, Teacher-Administered Screens.\",\"authors\":\"Jack M Fletcher, David J Francis, Barbara R Foorman, Christopher Schatschneider\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0731948720931870\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Many states now mandate early screening for dyslexia, but vary in how they address these mandates. There is confusion about the nature of screening versus diagnostic assessments, risk versus diagnosis, concurrent versus predictive validity, and inattention to indices of classification accuracy as the basis for determining risk. To help define what constitutes a screening assessment, we summarize efforts to develop short (3-5 min), teacher-administered screens that used multivariate strategies for variable selection, item response theory to select items that are most discriminating at a threshold for predicting risk, and statistical decision theory. These methods optimize prediction and lower the burden on teachers by reducing the number of items needed to evaluate risk. A specific goal of these efforts was to minimize decision errors that would result in the failure to identify a child as at risk of dyslexia/reading problems (false negatives) despite the inevitable increase in identifications of children who eventually perform in the typical range (false positives). Five screens, developed for different periods during kindergarten, Grade 1, and Grade 2, predicted outcomes measured later in the same school year (Grade 2) or in the subsequent year (Grade 1). The results of this approach to development are applicable to other screening methods, especially those that attempt to predict those children at risk of dyslexia prior to the onset of reading instruction. Without reliable and valid early <i>predictive</i> screening measures that reduce the burden on teachers, early intervention and prevention of dyslexia and related reading problems will be difficult.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47365,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Learning Disability Quarterly\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8475291/pdf/nihms-1634667.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Learning Disability Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948720931870\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/6/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Disability Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948720931870","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/6/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

现在,许多州都强制要求对阅读障碍进行早期筛查,但在如何执行这些强制要求方面却各不相同。在筛查评估与诊断评估、风险评估与诊断评估、并发有效性与预测有效性的性质上存在混淆,而且不重视将分类准确性指数作为确定风险的基础。为了帮助界定什么是筛查评估,我们总结了在开发由教师主持的简短(3-5 分钟)筛查方面所做的努力,这些筛查使用多变量策略来选择变量,使用项目反应理论来选择在预测风险阈值上最具区分度的项目,以及使用统计决策理论。这些方法优化了预测,并通过减少评估风险所需的项目数量减轻了教师的负担。这些工作的一个具体目标是最大限度地减少决策失误,因为决策失误会导致无法识别有阅读障碍/阅读问题风险的儿童(假阴性),尽管最终表现在典型范围内的儿童的识别率不可避免地会增加(假阳性)。在幼儿园、一年级和二年级的不同时期开发的五种筛查方法可以预测同一学年(二年级)或下一年(一年级)的测量结果。这种开发方法的结果适用于其他筛查方法,尤其是那些试图在开始阅读教学之前预测那些有阅读障碍风险的儿童的方法。如果没有可靠有效的早期预测性筛查方法来减轻教师的负担,就很难对阅读障碍和相关阅读问题进行早期干预和预防。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Early Detection of Dyslexia Risk: Development of Brief, Teacher-Administered Screens.

Many states now mandate early screening for dyslexia, but vary in how they address these mandates. There is confusion about the nature of screening versus diagnostic assessments, risk versus diagnosis, concurrent versus predictive validity, and inattention to indices of classification accuracy as the basis for determining risk. To help define what constitutes a screening assessment, we summarize efforts to develop short (3-5 min), teacher-administered screens that used multivariate strategies for variable selection, item response theory to select items that are most discriminating at a threshold for predicting risk, and statistical decision theory. These methods optimize prediction and lower the burden on teachers by reducing the number of items needed to evaluate risk. A specific goal of these efforts was to minimize decision errors that would result in the failure to identify a child as at risk of dyslexia/reading problems (false negatives) despite the inevitable increase in identifications of children who eventually perform in the typical range (false positives). Five screens, developed for different periods during kindergarten, Grade 1, and Grade 2, predicted outcomes measured later in the same school year (Grade 2) or in the subsequent year (Grade 1). The results of this approach to development are applicable to other screening methods, especially those that attempt to predict those children at risk of dyslexia prior to the onset of reading instruction. Without reliable and valid early predictive screening measures that reduce the burden on teachers, early intervention and prevention of dyslexia and related reading problems will be difficult.

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
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: Learning Disability Quarterly publishes high-quality research and scholarship concerning children, youth, and adults with learning disabilities. Consistent with that purpose, the journal seeks to publish articles with the potential to impact and improve educational outcomes, opportunities, and services.
×
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