Agreement and Coverage of Indicators of Response to Intervention.
Purpose: Agreement across methods for identifying students as inadequate responders or as learning disabled is often poor. We report (1) an empirical examination of final status (postintervention benchmarks) and dual-discrepancy growth methods based on growth during the intervention and final status...
| Publicado en: | Topics in Language Disorders Vol. 34; no. 1; pp. 74 - 90 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , , |
| Formato: | research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Jan-Mar2014
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=107889585&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 107889585 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 02718294 TLD jtl: Topics in Language Disorders issn: 02718294 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jan-Mar2014 vid: 34 iid: 1 pid: 5086 pub: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins place: Baltimore, Maryland artinfo: ui: 107889585 94655656 10.1097/TLD.0000000000000004 107889585 ppf: 74 ppct: 16 formats: tig: atl: Agreement and Coverage of Indicators of Response to Intervention. aug: au: Fletcher, Jack M. Stuebing, Karla K. Barth, Amy E. Miciak, Jeremy Francis, David J. Denton, Carolyn A. affil: Texas Institute of Measurement, Evaluation, and Statistics and Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston sug: subj: Clinical Indicators Utilization Early Intervention Learning Disorders Diagnosis Patient Identification Methods Human Benchmarking Utilization Computer Simulation Utilization Correlational Studies Psychometrics Reliability and Validity Educational Measurement Utilization Reference Values Clinical Assessment Tools Utilization Eligibility Determination Education, Special Repeated Measures Language Tests ab: Purpose: Agreement across methods for identifying students as inadequate responders or as learning disabled is often poor. We report (1) an empirical examination of final status (postintervention benchmarks) and dual-discrepancy growth methods based on growth during the intervention and final status for assessing response to intervention and (2) a statistical simulation of psychometric issues that may explain low agreement. Methods: After a Tier 2 intervention, final status benchmark criteria were used to identify 104 inadequate and 85 adequate responders to intervention, with comparisons of agreement and coverage for these methods and a dual-discrepancy method. Factors affecting agreement were investigated using computer simulation to manipulate reliability, the intercorrelation between measures, cutoff points, normative samples, and sample size. Results: Identification of inadequate responders based on individual measures showed that single measures tended not to identify many members of the pool of 104 inadequate responders. Poor to fair levels of agreement for identifying inadequate responders were apparent between pairs of measures. In the simulation, comparisons across 2 simulated measures generated indices of agreement (κ) that were generally low because of multiple psychometric issues inherent in any test. Conclusions: Expecting excellent agreement between 2 correlated tests with even small amounts of unreliability may not be realistic. Assessing outcomes based on multiple measures, such as level of curriculum-based measure performance and short norm-referenced assessments of fluency, may improve the reliability of diagnostic decisions. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|