特定学习障碍识别:识别方法和数据重要吗?

IF 1.6 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
Kathrin E. Maki, Sarah R. Adams
{"title":"特定学习障碍识别:识别方法和数据重要吗?","authors":"Kathrin E. Maki, Sarah R. Adams","doi":"10.1177/0731948719826296","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Specific learning disabilities (SLD) identification has consistently been shown to be problematic; however, research has largely focused on SLD identification using test scores only. The present study, therefore, examined SLD identification decisions across identification methods and student evaluation data levels, including test scores, background information, and observations. Participants included 461 school psychologists who were randomly assigned to one of 12 conditions to make identification decisions. Results indicated that response to intervention (RtI) methods resulted in greater identification consistency than ability-achievement discrepancy while pattern of strengths and weaknesses (PSW) resulted in lower identification consistency than ability-achievement discrepancy. However, background information and observation data did not impact SLD identification consistency. Implications for practice and research are also discussed.","PeriodicalId":47365,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disability Quarterly","volume":"43 1","pages":"63 - 74"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0731948719826296","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Specific Learning Disabilities Identification: Do the Identification Methods and Data Matter?\",\"authors\":\"Kathrin E. Maki, Sarah R. Adams\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0731948719826296\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Specific learning disabilities (SLD) identification has consistently been shown to be problematic; however, research has largely focused on SLD identification using test scores only. The present study, therefore, examined SLD identification decisions across identification methods and student evaluation data levels, including test scores, background information, and observations. Participants included 461 school psychologists who were randomly assigned to one of 12 conditions to make identification decisions. Results indicated that response to intervention (RtI) methods resulted in greater identification consistency than ability-achievement discrepancy while pattern of strengths and weaknesses (PSW) resulted in lower identification consistency than ability-achievement discrepancy. However, background information and observation data did not impact SLD identification consistency. Implications for practice and research are also discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47365,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Learning Disability Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"63 - 74\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0731948719826296\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Learning Disability Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948719826296\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Disability Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948719826296","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

摘要

特定学习障碍的识别一直被证明是有问题的;然而,研究主要集中在仅使用考试成绩识别SLD上。因此,本研究考察了不同识别方法和学生评估数据水平的SLD识别决策,包括考试成绩、背景信息和观察结果。参与者包括461名学校心理学家,他们被随机分配到12种条件中的一种,以做出识别决定。结果表明,干预反应(RtI)方法导致的识别一致性高于能力成就差异,而优势和劣势模式(PSW)导致的识别连贯性低于能力成就差异。然而,背景信息和观测数据并不影响SLD识别的一致性。还讨论了对实践和研究的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Specific Learning Disabilities Identification: Do the Identification Methods and Data Matter?
Specific learning disabilities (SLD) identification has consistently been shown to be problematic; however, research has largely focused on SLD identification using test scores only. The present study, therefore, examined SLD identification decisions across identification methods and student evaluation data levels, including test scores, background information, and observations. Participants included 461 school psychologists who were randomly assigned to one of 12 conditions to make identification decisions. Results indicated that response to intervention (RtI) methods resulted in greater identification consistency than ability-achievement discrepancy while pattern of strengths and weaknesses (PSW) resulted in lower identification consistency than ability-achievement discrepancy. However, background information and observation data did not impact SLD identification consistency. Implications for practice and research are also discussed.
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