认知诊断性阅读理解评估的初步效度证据。

IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Journal of Learning Disabilities Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1177/00222194221121340
Ben Seipel, Patrick C Kennedy, Sarah E Carlson, Virginia Clinton-Lisell, Mark L Davison
{"title":"认知诊断性阅读理解评估的初步效度证据。","authors":"Ben Seipel,&nbsp;Patrick C Kennedy,&nbsp;Sarah E Carlson,&nbsp;Virginia Clinton-Lisell,&nbsp;Mark L Davison","doi":"10.1177/00222194221121340","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As access to higher education increases, it is important to monitor students with special needs to facilitate the provision of appropriate resources and support. Although metrics such as the \"reading readiness\" ACT (formerly American College Testing) of provide insight into how many students may need such resources, they do not specify <i>why</i> a student may need support or how to provide that support. Increasingly, students are bringing reading comprehension struggles to college. Multiple-choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment-College (MOCCA-College) is a new diagnostic reading comprehension assessment designed to identify who is a poor comprehender and also diagnose <i>why</i> they are a poor comprehender. Using reliability coefficients, receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis, and correlations, this study reports findings from the first year of a 3-year study to validate the assessment with 988 postsecondary students who took MOCCA-College, a subset of whom also provided data on other reading assessments (i.e., ACT, <i>n</i> = 377; Scholastic Aptitude Test [SAT], <i>n</i> = 192; and Nelson-Denny Reading Test [NDRT], <i>n</i> = 78). Despite some limitations (e.g., the sample is predominantly females from 4-year institutions), results indicate that MOCCA-College has good internal reliability, and scores are correlated with other reading assessments. Through a series of analyses of variance (ANOVAs), we also report how students identified by MOCCA-College as good and poor comprehenders differ in terms of demographics, cognitive processes used while reading, overall comprehension ability, and scores on admissions tests. Findings are discussed in terms of using MOCCA-College to help gauge which students may be at risk of reading comprehension difficulties, identify why they may be struggling, and inform directions in actionable instructional changes based on comprehension processing data.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":"56 1","pages":"58-71"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"MOCCA-College: Preliminary Validity Evidence of a Cognitive Diagnostic Reading Comprehension Assessment.\",\"authors\":\"Ben Seipel,&nbsp;Patrick C Kennedy,&nbsp;Sarah E Carlson,&nbsp;Virginia Clinton-Lisell,&nbsp;Mark L Davison\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00222194221121340\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>As access to higher education increases, it is important to monitor students with special needs to facilitate the provision of appropriate resources and support. Although metrics such as the \\\"reading readiness\\\" ACT (formerly American College Testing) of provide insight into how many students may need such resources, they do not specify <i>why</i> a student may need support or how to provide that support. Increasingly, students are bringing reading comprehension struggles to college. Multiple-choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment-College (MOCCA-College) is a new diagnostic reading comprehension assessment designed to identify who is a poor comprehender and also diagnose <i>why</i> they are a poor comprehender. Using reliability coefficients, receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis, and correlations, this study reports findings from the first year of a 3-year study to validate the assessment with 988 postsecondary students who took MOCCA-College, a subset of whom also provided data on other reading assessments (i.e., ACT, <i>n</i> = 377; Scholastic Aptitude Test [SAT], <i>n</i> = 192; and Nelson-Denny Reading Test [NDRT], <i>n</i> = 78). Despite some limitations (e.g., the sample is predominantly females from 4-year institutions), results indicate that MOCCA-College has good internal reliability, and scores are correlated with other reading assessments. Through a series of analyses of variance (ANOVAs), we also report how students identified by MOCCA-College as good and poor comprehenders differ in terms of demographics, cognitive processes used while reading, overall comprehension ability, and scores on admissions tests. Findings are discussed in terms of using MOCCA-College to help gauge which students may be at risk of reading comprehension difficulties, identify why they may be struggling, and inform directions in actionable instructional changes based on comprehension processing data.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48189,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Learning Disabilities\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"58-71\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Learning Disabilities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194221121340\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194221121340","RegionNum":2,"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

摘要

随着接受高等教育机会的增加,监测有特殊需要的学生,以便提供适当的资源和支持是很重要的。尽管诸如“阅读准备”ACT(以前的美国大学考试)之类的指标提供了有多少学生可能需要这些资源的见解,但它们并没有具体说明学生为什么需要支持或如何提供支持。越来越多的学生将阅读理解问题带到了大学。多项选择在线因果理解评估-学院(MOCCA-College)是一种新的诊断性阅读理解评估,旨在识别谁是理解能力差的人,并诊断他们理解能力差的原因。本研究采用信度系数、接受者-工作特征曲线分析和相关性分析,报告了一项为期3年的研究的第一年的结果,以验证参加MOCCA-College的988名大专学生的评估,其中一部分学生还提供了其他阅读评估的数据(即ACT, n = 377;学术能力倾向测试[SAT], n = 192;Nelson-Denny Reading Test [NDRT], n = 78)。尽管存在一些局限性(例如,样本主要是来自四年制院校的女性),但结果表明,MOCCA-College具有良好的内部信度,得分与其他阅读评估相关。通过一系列方差分析(anova),我们还报告了MOCCA-College确定的学生在人口统计学、阅读时使用的认知过程、整体理解能力和入学考试分数方面的差异。研究结果讨论了使用MOCCA-College来帮助评估哪些学生可能面临阅读理解困难的风险,确定他们可能挣扎的原因,并根据理解处理数据为可操作的教学变化提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
MOCCA-College: Preliminary Validity Evidence of a Cognitive Diagnostic Reading Comprehension Assessment.

As access to higher education increases, it is important to monitor students with special needs to facilitate the provision of appropriate resources and support. Although metrics such as the "reading readiness" ACT (formerly American College Testing) of provide insight into how many students may need such resources, they do not specify why a student may need support or how to provide that support. Increasingly, students are bringing reading comprehension struggles to college. Multiple-choice Online Causal Comprehension Assessment-College (MOCCA-College) is a new diagnostic reading comprehension assessment designed to identify who is a poor comprehender and also diagnose why they are a poor comprehender. Using reliability coefficients, receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis, and correlations, this study reports findings from the first year of a 3-year study to validate the assessment with 988 postsecondary students who took MOCCA-College, a subset of whom also provided data on other reading assessments (i.e., ACT, n = 377; Scholastic Aptitude Test [SAT], n = 192; and Nelson-Denny Reading Test [NDRT], n = 78). Despite some limitations (e.g., the sample is predominantly females from 4-year institutions), results indicate that MOCCA-College has good internal reliability, and scores are correlated with other reading assessments. Through a series of analyses of variance (ANOVAs), we also report how students identified by MOCCA-College as good and poor comprehenders differ in terms of demographics, cognitive processes used while reading, overall comprehension ability, and scores on admissions tests. Findings are discussed in terms of using MOCCA-College to help gauge which students may be at risk of reading comprehension difficulties, identify why they may be struggling, and inform directions in actionable instructional changes based on comprehension processing data.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
3.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Journal of Learning Disabilities (JLD), a multidisciplinary, international publication, presents work and comments related to learning disabilities. Initial consideration of a manuscript depends upon (a) the relevance and usefulness of the content to the readership; (b) how the manuscript compares to other articles dealing with similar content on pertinent variables (e.g., sample size, research design, review of literature); (c) clarity of writing style; and (d) the author"s adherence to APA guidelines. Articles cover such fields as education, psychology, neurology, medicine, law, and counseling.
期刊最新文献
Derivational Morphology Training in French-Speaking 9- to 14- Year-Old Children and Adolescents With Developmental Dyslexia: Does It Improve Morphological Awareness, Reading, and Spelling Outcome Measures? Graph Out Loud: Pre-Service Teachers' Data Decisions and Interpretations of CBM Progress Graphs. What Environments Support Reading Growth Among Current Compared With Former Reading Intervention Recipients? A Multilevel Analysis of Students and Their Schools. Ongoing Teacher Support for Data-Based Individualization: A Meta-Analysis and Synthesis. The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act: Clarifying the Relationship Between Free Appropriate Public Education and Least Restrictive Environment
×
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