Specific Learning Disability Identification in an RtI Method: Do Measures of Cognitive Ability Matter?

IF 1.9 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Learning Disabilities Research & Practice Pub Date : 2022-09-16 DOI:10.1111/ldrp.12292
Daniel B. Hajovsky, Kathrin E. Maki, Steven R. Chesnut, Courtenay A. Barrett, Matthew K. Burns
{"title":"Specific Learning Disability Identification in an RtI Method: Do Measures of Cognitive Ability Matter?","authors":"Daniel B. Hajovsky,&nbsp;Kathrin E. Maki,&nbsp;Steven R. Chesnut,&nbsp;Courtenay A. Barrett,&nbsp;Matthew K. Burns","doi":"10.1111/ldrp.12292","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study examined the extent to which cognitive ability index scores predicted multidisciplinary teams’ (MDT) SLD identification within a response-to-intervention (RtI) method after accounting for RtI slope and norm-referenced achievement scores. Results showed that four achievement composite scores (i.e., basic reading, reading comprehension, math computation, and math problem solving) and two cognitive ability index scores (i.e., crystallized ability, working memory) predicted MDT-determined SLD, explaining 81% of the variance. The inclusion of academic achievement and cognitive ability index scores predicted MDT-determined SLD with 90% accuracy; cognitive ability index scores only increased specificity (sensitivity = 95%; specificity = 79%). RtI slope did not predict MDT-determined SLD, which was a required component of the evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":47426,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities Research & Practice","volume":"37 4","pages":"280-293"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Disabilities Research & Practice","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ldrp.12292","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This study examined the extent to which cognitive ability index scores predicted multidisciplinary teams’ (MDT) SLD identification within a response-to-intervention (RtI) method after accounting for RtI slope and norm-referenced achievement scores. Results showed that four achievement composite scores (i.e., basic reading, reading comprehension, math computation, and math problem solving) and two cognitive ability index scores (i.e., crystallized ability, working memory) predicted MDT-determined SLD, explaining 81% of the variance. The inclusion of academic achievement and cognitive ability index scores predicted MDT-determined SLD with 90% accuracy; cognitive ability index scores only increased specificity (sensitivity = 95%; specificity = 79%). RtI slope did not predict MDT-determined SLD, which was a required component of the evaluation.

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
RtI方法中的特定学习障碍识别:认知能力的测量重要吗?
本研究考察了认知能力指数得分在多大程度上预测了多学科团队(MDT)在干预反应(RtI)方法中的SLD识别,并考虑了RtI斜率和常模参考成绩得分。结果表明,四个成就综合得分(即基础阅读、阅读理解、数学计算和数学问题解决)和两个认知能力指数得分(即结晶能力、工作记忆)预测了MDT决定的SLD,解释了81%的方差。纳入学业成绩和认知能力指数得分预测MDT确定SLD的准确率为90%;认知能力指数评分只增加了特异性(敏感性=95%;特异性=79%)。RtI斜率不能预测MDT确定的SLD,这是评估的必要组成部分。
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
2.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Issue Information (Aims and Scope, Subscription and copyright info, TOC and Editorial Board) Considering Social Validity in Special Education Research The Impact of Gender, Accommodations, and Disability on the Academic Performance of Canadian University Students with LD and/or ADHD Language Proficiency and the Relation to Word-Problem Performance in Emergent Bilingual Students with Mathematics Difficulties Universal and Specific Services for University Students with Specific Learning Disabilities: The Relation to Study Approach, Academic Achievement, and Satisfaction
×
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