国际读写能力测量的结构有效性:对跨文化阅读障碍的影响。

IF 1.3 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science Pub Date : 2022-12-19 DOI:10.1007/s41809-022-00115-x
Gairanlu Pamei, Zebedee Rui En Cheah, Catherine McBride
{"title":"国际读写能力测量的结构有效性:对跨文化阅读障碍的影响。","authors":"Gairanlu Pamei, Zebedee Rui En Cheah, Catherine McBride","doi":"10.1007/s41809-022-00115-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Construct validity is essential to evaluate the generalizability of findings on literacy and dyslexia. Operational definitions of reading literacy determine the measurement method, yielding territory or country-wide literacy rates. This practice echoes the norm in diagnosis and prevalence estimates of dyslexia. International Large-Scale Assessments (ILSA) of literacy such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) compare countries' performances in relation to how well their students are reading. In this paper, we reexamine the validity claims and evidence using the examples of countries in Southeast Asia-Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand, purported to have high proportions of poor readers. The challenge of characterizing reading performance and designing suitable measures for valid international comparisons is similar across phases of reading development and proficiency. The importance of the specificity of scripts and languages for reading abilities and impairments is highlighted. We suggest ways in which researchers can approach the assessment of reading proficiency from a cross-cultural and an interdisciplinary perspective. These can foster contextual caveats for generating and interpreting evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":55640,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science","volume":" ","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9762670/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Construct validity of international literacy measures: implications for dyslexia across cultures.\",\"authors\":\"Gairanlu Pamei, Zebedee Rui En Cheah, Catherine McBride\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s41809-022-00115-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Construct validity is essential to evaluate the generalizability of findings on literacy and dyslexia. Operational definitions of reading literacy determine the measurement method, yielding territory or country-wide literacy rates. This practice echoes the norm in diagnosis and prevalence estimates of dyslexia. International Large-Scale Assessments (ILSA) of literacy such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) compare countries' performances in relation to how well their students are reading. In this paper, we reexamine the validity claims and evidence using the examples of countries in Southeast Asia-Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand, purported to have high proportions of poor readers. The challenge of characterizing reading performance and designing suitable measures for valid international comparisons is similar across phases of reading development and proficiency. The importance of the specificity of scripts and languages for reading abilities and impairments is highlighted. We suggest ways in which researchers can approach the assessment of reading proficiency from a cross-cultural and an interdisciplinary perspective. These can foster contextual caveats for generating and interpreting evidence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55640,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-15\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9762670/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41809-022-00115-x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41809-022-00115-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

结构有效性对于评估扫盲和阅读障碍研究结果的可推广性至关重要。阅读能力的操作性定义决定了测量方法,从而得出地区或国家范围内的识字率。这种做法与诵读困难的诊断和患病率估算中的常规做法如出一辙。国际大规模扫盲评估(ILSA),如国际学生评估项目(PISA),根据各国学生的阅读情况来比较各国的表现。在本文中,我们以东南亚国家--印度尼西亚、马来西亚和泰国为例,重新审视了这些国家的有效性主张和证据。在阅读能力发展和熟练程度的各个阶段,描述阅读能力的特点和设计合适的测量方法进行有效的国际比较所面临的挑战是相似的。我们强调了文字和语言的特殊性对阅读能力和障碍的重要性。我们建议研究人员如何从跨文化和跨学科的角度来评估阅读能力。这些方法可以为生成和解释证据提供背景注意事项。
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
Construct validity of international literacy measures: implications for dyslexia across cultures.

Construct validity is essential to evaluate the generalizability of findings on literacy and dyslexia. Operational definitions of reading literacy determine the measurement method, yielding territory or country-wide literacy rates. This practice echoes the norm in diagnosis and prevalence estimates of dyslexia. International Large-Scale Assessments (ILSA) of literacy such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) compare countries' performances in relation to how well their students are reading. In this paper, we reexamine the validity claims and evidence using the examples of countries in Southeast Asia-Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand, purported to have high proportions of poor readers. The challenge of characterizing reading performance and designing suitable measures for valid international comparisons is similar across phases of reading development and proficiency. The importance of the specificity of scripts and languages for reading abilities and impairments is highlighted. We suggest ways in which researchers can approach the assessment of reading proficiency from a cross-cultural and an interdisciplinary perspective. These can foster contextual caveats for generating and interpreting evidence.

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
Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science
Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
22
期刊最新文献
The effect of bilingualism and multicultural experience on social-cognitive processing: a meta-analytic review Interference of the inclusive language in the creation of the memory trace during the reading comprehension of texts Distributed embodiment of the Persian term dæqi:qæn in forward gestures The effect of linguistic medium on metaphor directionality: written standard Arabic versus oral colloquial Arabic Decoding orthography vs. mastering strategy: an exploratory study finds better opposite-orientation task transfer for monoliterates than for biliterates
×
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