Moving the Needle on Evaluating Multivariate Screening Accuracy

The assessment of screening accuracy and setting of cut points for a universal screener have traditionally been evaluated using logistic regression analysis. This analytic technique has been frequently used to evaluate the trade-offs in correct classification with misidentification of individuals who are at risk of performing poorly on a later outcome. Although useful statistically, coefficients from a multiple logistic regression can be difficult to explain to practitioners as it pertains to classification decisions. Moreover, classifications based on multivariate assessments are challenging to understand how performance on one assessment compensates for performance on another. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate and compare the use of logistic regression with classification and regression tree (CART) models in the identification of students who are at risk of reading comprehension difficulties. Data consisted of 986 Grade 1 students and 887 Grade 2 students who were administered a screening assessment at the middle of the school year as well as the 10th edition of the Stanford Achievement Test. Results indicated that CART performs comparably with logistic regression and may assist researchers and practitioners in explaining classification rules to parents and educators.

Replicating Criterion Validity in Science Content for the Combination of Critical Content Monitoring and Sentence Verification Technique

The purpose of the research was to replicate commonality analysis for two measures: critical content monitoring and sentence verification technique. Participants were 967 fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-grade students across seven public primary schools in a southeastern U.S. district. The predictor variables were administered as benchmarks 3 times in an academic year. Predictor scores were compared with science content test and reading comprehension scores from the Stanford Achievement Test–Tenth Edition abbreviated online form and a statewide accountability test. Commonality analysis results indicated that scores from both critical content monitoring and sentence verification technique added unique variance to explanatory models, replicating previous findings. In most cases, critical content monitoring scores provided the greatest percentage of unique and common variance to model explanations.

Effects of PowerPoint Presentations on Reading Comprehension of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students in Iranian Exceptional High Schools

It is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore the role of PowerPoint presentation on reading comprehension of deaf and hard of hearing (D/HH) students in schools. Based on different studies, PowerPoint, a common multimedia tool, has a crucial role in teaching and learning through providing a suitable understanding of the text and motivating students. The present study aimed to examine the predictive effects of PowerPoint presentations on reading comprehension of D/HH students. As reported in the literature, reading levels of deaf high school students are equal to those of fourth grade hearing students. Therefore, a visual computer-mediated approach was implemented to monitor the reading comprehension progress of 20 D/HH students in Iranian high schools. The reading comprehension of the experimental and control groups were compared by conducting the Stanford Achievement Test and applying paired t-tests. Our findings indicated a significant difference between the mean reading comprehension scores of the two groups.

VALIDITY OF TWO GENERAL OUTCOME MEASURES OF SCIENCE AND SOCIAL STUDIES ACHIEVEMENT

The present research expanded validity findings for a structured formative<br />assessment measure of content learning that was administered online and known<br />as critical content monitoring. The study also evaluated the potential for additional<br />measures, including sentence verification technique and written retell, to explain<br />variance in student achievement in science and social studies classrooms. Participants were fifth-grade students (N=51) enrolled in a public primary school in the southeastern U.S. Three predictor variables (i.e. critical content monitoring, sentence verification technique and written retell) were correlated with content test scores from the nationally representative standardized achievement test (i.e. Stanford Achievement Test-Tenth Edition abbreviated online form) and a statewide accountability test. Pearson correlations for critical content monitoring and the Stanford tests across science (r=.55) and social studies (r=.63) were moderately strong and similar in magnitude with other reported correlations for academic language measures in the literature. Correlations for critical content monitoring were descriptively larger than those between the standardized tests and sentence verification technique and written retell. Commonality analyses indicated that both critical content monitoring and sentence verification technique added unique variance to explanatory models. Limitations and implications were discussed

Who are We Assessing? Determining State-Wide Participation Rates for Students with Disabilities

The purpose of this study was to examine the rate of participation of students with disabilities in a large-scale norm-referenced assessment. Hawaii uses the Stanford Achievement Test (Stanford 8) to assess 86% of public school students in grades 3, 6, 8, and 10. We found that roughly 66% of all students with disabilities were assessed in 1995. Fairly precise participation rates of students with disabilities in norm-referenced tests can be identified using state assessment and demographic databases, but there is difficulty identifying characteristics of those not assessed. Cross-sectional data are included for preliminary evaluation of mean reading score performance for high incidence categories (mild mental retardation, specific learning disabled, emotional impairment, and nondisabled groups) based on 1994 and 1995 data.