Diagnostic Accuracy of Early Numeracy Curriculum-Based Measurements in Screening for First Grade Students at Risk for Failure in Mathematics

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Rahma Saleh Hadid Al-Uraimi , Mahmoud Mohamed Emam , Yousof Abdelqader Abu Shindy

Abstract

Abstract This study aims to examine the accuracy of three Early Numeracy Curriculum-Based Measurements (EN-CBMs). The measures were designed to assess three different skills of number knowledge, including number identification (NI), missing number (MN), and quantity discrimination (QD). The measures were applied to a sample comprising 149 first-grade students from Sharqia South Governorate. The results showed that the ENCBMs have good internal consistency as indicated by Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients ranging between 0.81 and 0.97. In addition, the measures showed good alternate forms reliability as indicated by correlations coefficients ranging between 0.72 and 0.97. The validity of the measures was assessed by both content and face validity. Content validity was based on the use of specification tables. Face validity exhibited 100% approval by a panel of experts. Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (ROC) analysis was used to examine the diagnostic accuracy of the EN-CBMs, using the Learning Disabilities Diagnostic Inventory (LDDI) as the outcome measure. Sensitivity values ranged from 0.80 to 0.91, specificity ranged from 0.65 to 0.70, Positive Predictive Value (PPV) ranged from 0.47 to 0.57, Negative Predictive Value (NPV) ranged from 0.89 to 0.91, and diagnostic accuracy ranged from 0.69 to 0.74. Overall, results showed that EN-CBM can predict can screen for students at risk for failure in mathematics.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

Diagnostic accuracy
Early Numeracy Curriculum-Based Measurement
Screening
Failing mathematics

Section
Articles in Arabic

References

المراجع
إمام، محمود كاظم، علي المحرزي، راشد والمخمري، صالح. (2017). تقنين قائمة تشخيص صعوبات التعلّم النوعية لدى تلاميذ الصفوف من 1-6 في سلطنة عمان. مجلة التربية الخاصة، 5(20)، 8-137. جامعة الزقازيق، كلية التربية.

إمام، محمود محمد المعمري، وطفة الشوربجي، سحر كاظم، علي مهدي المنذري، ريا حمدان، أحمد حسن القارسي جلال والمسكري، زيانة. (2013). التشخيص للعلاج أم العلاج للتشخيص: مدخل الاستجابة للعلاج في تشخيص الطلاب ذوي صعوبات القراءة في سلطنة عمان. مجلة كلية التربية، 2، 27-52 . جامعة بني سويف.

دائرة الإحصاء والمؤشرات. (2016). الكتاب السنوي للإحصاءات التعليمية. سلطنة عمان: وزارة التربية والتعليم.

الزغلول، عماد عبد الرحيم. (2009). مبادئ علم النفس التربوي. عمّان، دار المسيرة للنشر والتوزيع والطباعة.

الشحي، صفية بنت عبد الله. (2016). الدقة التشخيصية لقياسات العمليات الحسابية القائمة على المنهج في فرز التلاميذ المعرّضين لصعوبات تعلُّم الرياضيات في الصف الرابع الأساسي. رسالة ماجستير غير منشورة. سلطنة عمان، جامعة السلطان قابوس.

عبد المؤمن، علي معمر. (2008). مناهج البحث في العلوم الاجتماعية الأساسيات والتقنيات والأساليب. القاهرة، المجموعة العربية للتدريب والنشر.

عمر، محمود أحمد فخرو، حصّة عبدالرحمن السبيعي، تركي وتركي، آمنه عبد الله. (2010). القياس النفسي والتربوي. عمّان، دار المسيرة للنشر والتوزيع والطباعة.

عودة، أحمد. (1999). القياس والتقويم في العملية التدريسية. إربد، دار الأمل.

مجيد، سوسن شاكر. (2007). أسس بناء الاختبارات والمقاييس النفسية والتربوية. عمّان، ديبونو للطباعة والنشر والتوزيع.

مجيد، سوسن شاكر. (2010). الاختبارات النفسية. نماذج. عمّان، دار صفاء للنشر والتوزيع.

محاسنة، ابراهيم محمد. (2013). القياس النفسي في ظل النظرية التقليدية والنظرية الحديثة. عمّان، دار جرير للنشر والتوزيع.

المديرية العامة للتقويم التربوي. (2015). وثيقة تقويم تعلم التلاميذ مواد المجال الثاني للصفوف 1-4. سلطنة عمان: وزارة التربية والتعليم.

Abu-Hamour, B., Al-Hmouz, H., & Kenana, M. (2013). The effect of short vowelization on curriculum-based measurement of reading fluency and comprehension in Arabic. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 18(2), 181-197.

Brassard, M., & Boehm, A., (2007). Preschool assessment: Principles and practices. New York, The Guilford Press.

Clarke, B., & Shinn, M. R. (2004). A preliminary investigation into the identification and development of early mathematics curriculum-based measurement. School Psychology Review, 33(2), 234.

Clarke, B., Baker, S., Smolkowski, K., & Chard, D. J. (2008). An Analysis of Early Numeracy Curriculum-Based Measurement Examining the Role of Growth in Student Outcomes. Remedial and Special Education, 29(1), 46-57.

Clarke, B., Nese, J. F., Alonzo, J., Smith, J. L. M., Tindal, G., Kame’enui, E. J., & Baker, S. K. (2011). Classification accuracy of easy CBM first-grade mathematics measures: Findings and implications for the field. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 36(4), 243-255. ‏

Dowker, A. (2005). Early identification and intervention for students with mathematics difficulties. Journal of learning disabilities, 38(4), 324-332. ‏

Emam, M. M., & Kazem, A. M. (2016). Visual motor integration as a screener for responders and non-responders in preschool and early school years: implications for inclusive assessment in Oman. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 20(10), 1109-1121.

Emam, M., Al-Maamary, W., Mohamed, A., Kazem, A., (2012). Development of an optimal framework for the identification and intervention of reading disabilities in key stage 1 school in Oman. A strategic project manuscript (unpublished), Oman, Sultan Qaboos University.

Floyd, R. G., Hojnoski, R., & Key, J. (2006). Preliminary evidence of the technical adequacy of the preschool numeracy indicators. School Psychology Review, 35(4), 627.

Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2001). Principles for sustaining research-based practice in the schools: A case study. Focus on Exceptional Children, 33(6), 1. ‏

Hampton, D. D., Lembke, E. S., Lee, Y. S., Pappas, S., Chiong, C., & Ginsburg, H. P. (2012). Technical adequacy of early numeracy curriculum-based progress monitoring measures for kindergarten and first-grade students. Assessment for Effective Intervention. 37(2) 118-126.

Hanley, J. A., & McNeil, B. J. (1982). The Meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology, 143, 29-36.

Hojnoski, R. L., Silberglitt, B., & Floyd, R. G. (2009). Sensitivity to growth over time of the preschool numeracy indicators with a sample of preschoolers in Head Start. School Psychology Review, 38(3), 402-418.

Hosp, M. K., Hosp, J. L., & Howell, K. W. (2016). The ABCs of CBM: A practical guide to curriculum-based measurement, 117-141. Guilford Publications.

Johnson, E. S., Jenkins, J. R., & Petscher, Y. (2010). Improving the accuracy of a direct route screening process. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 35(3), 131-140. ‏ ‏‏

Laracy, S. D., Hojnoski, R. L., & Dever, B. V. (2016). Assessing the Classification Accuracy of Early Numeracy Curriculum-Based Measures Using Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve Analysis. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 41(3), 172-183.

Lee, Y. S., Lembke, E., Moore, D., Ginsburg, H. P., & Pappas, S. (2012). Item-level and construct evaluation of early numeracy curriculum-based measures. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 37(2), 107-117. ‏

Methe, S. A., Begeny, J. C., & Leary, L. L. (2011). Development of conceptually focused early numeracy skill indicators. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 36(4), 230-242. ‏

‏National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. US Department of Education.

Purpura, D. J., Reid, E. E., Eiland, M. D., & Baroody, A. J. (2015). Using a brief preschool early numeracy skills screener to identify young children with mathematics difficulties. School Psychology Review, 44(1), 41-59.

Riley-Heller, N., Kelly-Vance, L., & Shriver, M. (2005). Curriculum-based measurement: Generic vs. curriculum-dependent probes. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 21(1), 141-162.

Tindal, G. (2013). Curriculum-based measurement: A brief history of nearly everything from the 1970s to the present. ISRN Education, 1, 1-29.

Youngstrom, E. A. (2014). A primer on receiver operating characteristic analysis and diagnostic efficiency statistic for pediatric psychology: We are ready ROC. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 39, 204-221.