特殊教育研究中的循证评估:在评估工具和实证过程中推进证据的使用

Pub Date : 2023-05-17 DOI:10.1177/00144029231171092
Elizabeth Talbott, Andres De Los Reyes, Devin M. Kearns, Jeannette Mancilla‐Martinez, Mo Wang
{"title":"特殊教育研究中的循证评估:在评估工具和实证过程中推进证据的使用","authors":"Elizabeth Talbott, Andres De Los Reyes, Devin M. Kearns, Jeannette Mancilla‐Martinez, Mo Wang","doi":"10.1177/00144029231171092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Evidence-based assessment (EBA) requires that investigators employ scientific theories and research findings to guide decisions about what domains to measure, how and when to measure them, and how to make decisions and interpret results. To implement EBA, investigators need high-quality assessment tools along with evidence-based processes. We advance EBA in three sections in this article. First, we describe an empirically grounded framework, the Operations Triad Model (OTM), to inform EBA decision-making in the articulation of relevant educational theory. Originally designed for interpreting mental health assessments, we describe features of the OTM that facilitate its fusion with educational theory, namely its falsifiability. In turn, we cite evidence to support the OTM's ability to inform hypothesis generation and testing, study design, instrument selection, and measurement validation. Second, we describe quality indicators for interpreting psychometric data about measurement tools, which informs both the development and selection of measures and the process of measurement validation. Third, we apply the OTM and EBA to research in special education in two contexts: (a) empirical research for causal explanation and (b) implementation science research. We provide open data resources to advance measurement validation and conclude with future directions for research.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence-Based Assessment in Special Education Research: Advancing the Use of Evidence in Assessment Tools and Empirical Processes\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth Talbott, Andres De Los Reyes, Devin M. Kearns, Jeannette Mancilla‐Martinez, Mo Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00144029231171092\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Evidence-based assessment (EBA) requires that investigators employ scientific theories and research findings to guide decisions about what domains to measure, how and when to measure them, and how to make decisions and interpret results. To implement EBA, investigators need high-quality assessment tools along with evidence-based processes. We advance EBA in three sections in this article. First, we describe an empirically grounded framework, the Operations Triad Model (OTM), to inform EBA decision-making in the articulation of relevant educational theory. Originally designed for interpreting mental health assessments, we describe features of the OTM that facilitate its fusion with educational theory, namely its falsifiability. In turn, we cite evidence to support the OTM's ability to inform hypothesis generation and testing, study design, instrument selection, and measurement validation. Second, we describe quality indicators for interpreting psychometric data about measurement tools, which informs both the development and selection of measures and the process of measurement validation. Third, we apply the OTM and EBA to research in special education in two contexts: (a) empirical research for causal explanation and (b) implementation science research. We provide open data resources to advance measurement validation and conclude with future directions for research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231171092\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231171092","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

基于证据的评估(EBA)要求研究人员运用科学理论和研究成果来指导对哪些领域进行测量、如何和何时测量以及如何做出决策和解释结果的决策。为了实施EBA,调查人员需要高质量的评估工具以及基于证据的流程。我们将在本文的三个部分中介绍EBA。首先,我们描述了一个基于经验的框架,即运营三元模型(OTM),以告知EBA在阐述相关教育理论方面的决策。最初设计用于解释心理健康评估,我们描述了OTM的特征,促进了它与教育理论的融合,即它的可证伪性。反过来,我们引用证据来支持OTM在假设生成和测试、研究设计、仪器选择和测量验证方面的能力。其次,我们描述了解释有关测量工具的心理测量数据的质量指标,这为测量方法的开发和选择以及测量验证过程提供了信息。第三,我们将OTM和EBA应用于特殊教育的研究,分为两个方面:(a)因果解释的实证研究和(b)实施科学研究。我们提供开放的数据资源,以推进测量验证和总结未来的研究方向。
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
Evidence-Based Assessment in Special Education Research: Advancing the Use of Evidence in Assessment Tools and Empirical Processes
Evidence-based assessment (EBA) requires that investigators employ scientific theories and research findings to guide decisions about what domains to measure, how and when to measure them, and how to make decisions and interpret results. To implement EBA, investigators need high-quality assessment tools along with evidence-based processes. We advance EBA in three sections in this article. First, we describe an empirically grounded framework, the Operations Triad Model (OTM), to inform EBA decision-making in the articulation of relevant educational theory. Originally designed for interpreting mental health assessments, we describe features of the OTM that facilitate its fusion with educational theory, namely its falsifiability. In turn, we cite evidence to support the OTM's ability to inform hypothesis generation and testing, study design, instrument selection, and measurement validation. Second, we describe quality indicators for interpreting psychometric data about measurement tools, which informs both the development and selection of measures and the process of measurement validation. Third, we apply the OTM and EBA to research in special education in two contexts: (a) empirical research for causal explanation and (b) implementation science research. We provide open data resources to advance measurement validation and conclude with future directions for research.
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
×
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