Sarah J. Conoyer, Kyle Wagner, Kristen K. Janssen, Jeremy D. Jewell, Elizabeth L. W. McKenney
{"title":"基础科学课程测量的探索:两种词汇匹配形式的考察","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":"{\"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}","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}
Exploring Curriculum-Based Measurement in Elementary Science: Investigating Two Vocabulary-Matching Formats
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.