Is a Phone‐Based Language and Literacy Assessment a Reliable and Valid Measure of Children's Reading Skills in Low‐Resource Settings?

IF 3.9 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Reading Research Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-06-14 DOI:10.1002/rrq.511
Shauna‐Marie Sobers, Hannah L. Whitehead, Konan Nana Anicet N'Goh, Mary‐Claire Ball, Fabrice Tanoh, Hermann Akpé, Kaja K. Jasińska
{"title":"Is a <scp>Phone‐Based</scp> Language and Literacy Assessment a Reliable and Valid Measure of Children's Reading Skills in <scp>Low‐Resource</scp> Settings?","authors":"Shauna‐Marie Sobers, Hannah L. Whitehead, Konan Nana Anicet N'Goh, Mary‐Claire Ball, Fabrice Tanoh, Hermann Akpé, Kaja K. Jasińska","doi":"10.1002/rrq.511","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Technology‐based remote research methods are increasingly widespread, including learning assessments in child development and education research. However, little is known about whether technology‐based remote assessments remain as valid and reliable as in‐person assessments. We developed a low‐cost phone‐based language and literacy assessment for primary‐school children in low‐resource communities in rural Côte d'Ivoire using voice calls and SMS. We compared the reliability and validity of this phone‐based assessment to an established in‐person assessment. A total of 685 5th grade children completed language (phonological awareness, vocabulary, language comprehension) and literacy (letter, word, pseudoword, passage reading, and comprehension) tasks in‐person and by phone. Reliability (internal consistency) and predictive validity were high across in‐person and phone‐based tasks. Children's performance across in‐person and phone‐based assessments was moderately to strongly correlated. Phonological awareness and vocabulary skills measured in‐person and by phone significantly predicted in‐person and phone‐based letter, word, and pseudoword reading. Oral language and decoding skills measured in‐person and by phone significantly predicted in‐person and phone‐based passage reading and comprehension. Our phone‐based assessment was a reliable and valid measure of language and reading and feasible for low‐resource settings. Low‐cost technologies offer significant potential to measure children's learning remotely, increasing the inclusion of remote and low‐resource populations in education research.","PeriodicalId":48160,"journal":{"name":"Reading Research Quarterly","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reading Research Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.511","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract Technology‐based remote research methods are increasingly widespread, including learning assessments in child development and education research. However, little is known about whether technology‐based remote assessments remain as valid and reliable as in‐person assessments. We developed a low‐cost phone‐based language and literacy assessment for primary‐school children in low‐resource communities in rural Côte d'Ivoire using voice calls and SMS. We compared the reliability and validity of this phone‐based assessment to an established in‐person assessment. A total of 685 5th grade children completed language (phonological awareness, vocabulary, language comprehension) and literacy (letter, word, pseudoword, passage reading, and comprehension) tasks in‐person and by phone. Reliability (internal consistency) and predictive validity were high across in‐person and phone‐based tasks. Children's performance across in‐person and phone‐based assessments was moderately to strongly correlated. Phonological awareness and vocabulary skills measured in‐person and by phone significantly predicted in‐person and phone‐based letter, word, and pseudoword reading. Oral language and decoding skills measured in‐person and by phone significantly predicted in‐person and phone‐based passage reading and comprehension. Our phone‐based assessment was a reliable and valid measure of language and reading and feasible for low‐resource settings. Low‐cost technologies offer significant potential to measure children's learning remotely, increasing the inclusion of remote and low‐resource populations in education research.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于手机的语言和读写能力评估是低资源环境下儿童阅读技能的可靠和有效的衡量标准吗?
基于技术的远程研究方法越来越广泛,包括儿童发展和教育研究中的学习评估。然而,人们对基于技术的远程评估是否仍然像面对面评估一样有效和可靠知之甚少。我们为Côte科特迪瓦农村资源匮乏社区的小学生开发了一种基于低成本电话的语言和读写能力评估方法,使用语音电话和短信。我们将这种基于电话的评估的可靠性和有效性与既定的面对面评估进行了比较。共有685名五年级儿童亲自或通过电话完成了语言(语音意识、词汇、语言理解)和读写(字母、单词、假词、短文阅读和理解)任务。在面对面和基于电话的任务中,可靠性(内部一致性)和预测效度都很高。儿童的表现在面对面和基于电话的评估中具有中等到强烈的相关性。语音意识和词汇技能通过面对面和电话测量,显著预测了面对面和基于电话的字母、单词和假词阅读。面对面和通过电话测量的口语和解码技能显著预测了面对面和基于电话的文章阅读和理解。我们基于电话的评估是一种可靠和有效的语言和阅读测量方法,对于资源匮乏的环境也是可行的。低成本技术为衡量儿童远程学习提供了巨大的潜力,增加了教育研究中对偏远和资源匮乏人口的包容。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: For more than 40 years, Reading Research Quarterly has been essential reading for those committed to scholarship on literacy among learners of all ages. The leading research journal in the field, each issue of RRQ includes •Reports of important studies •Multidisciplinary research •Various modes of investigation •Diverse viewpoints on literacy practices, teaching, and learning
期刊最新文献
Civic Place Literacies: Tracing Urban Migrant Girls' Democratic Meaning‐Making Through Virtual Transnational Practitioner Research Chronotopes of Transnational Literacies: How Youth Live and Imagine Social Worlds in their Digital Media Practices Fair or Foul? Interrogating the Role of Baseball Knowledge in Studies of Knowledge and Comprehension “It's Like They Are Using Our Data Against Us.” Counter‐Cartographies of AI Literacy To Become an Object Among Objects: Generative Artificial “Intelligence,” Writing, and Linguistic White Supremacy
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1