当前位置: X-MOL 学术Assessment for Effective Intervention › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Universal Screening Methods and Models: Diagnostic Accuracy of Reading Assessments
Assessment for Effective Intervention Pub Date : 2018-12-28 , DOI: 10.1177/1534508418819797
Kalie VanMeveren 1 , David Hulac 2 , Sarah Wollersheim-Shervey 3
Affiliation  

Reading screening assessments help educators identify students who are at risk of reading and determine the need for intervention and supports. However, some schools screen and assess students more often than needed, and the additional information does not improve the accuracy of decisions. This may be especially true for students at the upper elementary grades who have already taken high-stakes tests. This exploratory study evaluated how accurately a variety of screening measures predicted performance on a high-stakes end of year test for fourth- and fifth-grade students. Results of this study indicated that previous scores on the statewide assessment and computer-adaptive assessment best predicted student performance on a high-stakes reading test (Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment—Third Edition). When comparing screening models, a two-gate approach appeared to be the best method for identifying student risk.

中文翻译:

通用筛查方法和模型:阅读评估的诊断准确性

阅读筛选评估可帮助教育工作者识别有阅读风险的学生,并确定是否需要干预和支持。然而,一些学校比需要的更频繁地筛选和评估学生,额外的信息并不能提高决策的准确性。对于已经参加过高风险考试的高年级学生来说尤其如此。这项探索性研究评估了各种筛选措施对四年级和五年级学生在高风险期末考试中预测表现的准确程度。这项研究的结果表明,以前的全州评估和计算机自适应评估的分数最能预测学生在高风险阅读测试(明尼苏达综合评估 - 第三版)中的表现。在比较筛选模型时,
更新日期:2018-12-28
down
wechat
bug