![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
Letter-name identification has been widely used as part of early screening to identify children who might be at risk for future word reading difficulty. The goal of the present study was to examine whether a reduced set of letters could have similar diagnostic accuracy rather than a full set (i.e., 26 letters) when used as a screen. First, we examined whether a hierarchical scale existed among letters by using a Mokken scale analysis. Then, we contrasted diagnostic accuracy among the 5, 10, 15, and 20 easiest letters, with all 26 letters by using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and indices of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive power, and negative predictive power. Results demonstrated that a hierarchical scale existed among items in the letter-name knowledge test. In addition, assessing students on the easiest 15 letters was not statistically distinguished from all 26 letters in diagnostic accuracy. The implications of the results for the use of a Mokken scale analysis in educational research are discussed.
Keywords Mokken scale analysis, letter name knowledge, screening
References
Section:
|
Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar | |
|
American Institute for Research . (2007). Reading First state APR data. Author. Google Scholar | |
|
Feuerman, M., Miller, A. R. (2008). Relationships between statistical measures of agreement: Sensitivity, specificity and kappa. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 14, 930–933. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Foorman, B., Torgesen, J., Crawford, E., Petscher, Y. (2009). Assessments to guide reading instruction in K-12: Decisions supported by the new Florida system. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 35(5), 13–19. Google Scholar | Medline | |
|
Foorman, B. R., Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J. (2004). Texas Primary Reading Inventory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar | |
|
Foorman, B. R., Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Carlson, C. D., Chen, D., Mouzaki, A., . . . Taylor, R. H. (1998). Technical report: Texas Primary Reading Inventory (1998 ed.). Houston, TX: Center for Academic and Reading Skills and University of Houston. Google Scholar | |
|
Foulin, J. N. (2005). Why is letter-name knowledge such a good predictor of learning to read? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 18, 129–155. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Good, R. H., Kaminski, R. A., Smith, S., Laimon, D., Dill, S. (2001). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (5th ed.). Eugene: University of Oregon. Google Scholar | |
|
Hanley, J. A., McNeil, B. J. (1983). A method for comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology, 148, 830-843. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Invernizzi, M., Meier, J. D., Swank, L., Juel, C. (1999). Phonological awareness literacy screening. Charlottesville: University of Virginia. Google Scholar | |
|
Jenkins, J. R., Hudson, R. F., Johnson, E. S. (2007). Screening for at-risk readers in a response to intervention framework. School Psychology Review, 36, 582-600. Google Scholar | ISI | |
|
Johnson, E. S., Jenkins, J. R., Petscher, Y., Catts, H. W. (2009). How can we improve the accuracy of screening instruments? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24, 174–185. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Kempen, G. I. J. M., Myers, A. M., Powell, L. E. (1995). Hierarchical structure in ADL and IADL: Analytical assumptions and applications for clinicians and researchers. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 48, 1299–1305. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Kim, Y.-S., Petscher, Y., Foorman, B., Zhou, C. (2010). The contributions of phonological awareness and letter-name knowledge to letter sound acquisition—A cross-classified multilevel model approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 313-326. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Lonigan, C. J. (2006). Development, assessment, and promotion of pre-literacy skills. Early Education and Development, 17, 91–14. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Lonigan, C. J., Burgess, S. R., Anthony, J. L. (2000). Development of emergent literacy and early reading skills in preschool children: Evidence from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 36, 596–613. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Lonigan, C. J., Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A. (2007). TOPEL: Test of Preschool Early Literacy. Austin, TX: PRO-ED. Google Scholar | |
|
Madden, R., Gardner, E. F., Collins, C. S. (1983). Stanford Early School Achievement Test. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Google Scholar | |
|
McBride-Chang, C. (1999). The ABCs of the ABCs: The development of letter-name and letter-sound knowledge. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 45, 285-308. Google Scholar | ISI | |
|
McCardle, P., Scarborough, H. S., Catts, H. W. (2001). Predicting, explaining, and preventing children’s reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, 16, 230–239. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Meijer, R. R., Sijtsma, K., Smid, N. G. (1990). Theoretical and empirical comparison of the Mokken and Rasch approach to IRT. Applied Psychological Measurement, 3, 283–298. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Mokken, R. J., Lewis, C., Sijtsma, K. (1986). Rejoinder to “The Mokken Scale: A critical discussion.” Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 279-285. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Mokken, R. J. (1997). Nonparametric models for dichotomous responses. In van der Linden, W. J., Hambleton, R. K. (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 351–367). New York, NY: Springer. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Molenaar, I. W., Sijtsma, K. (2000). User’s manual MSP5 for Windows. Groningen, The Netherlands: IEC ProGAMMA. Google Scholar | |
|
Moorer, P., Suurmeijer, Th. P. B. M., Foets, M., Molenaar, I. W. (2001). Psychometric properties of the RAND-36 among three chronic diseases (multiple sclerosis, rheumatic diseases, and COPD) in the Netherlands. Quality of Life Research, 10, 637–645. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
National Center on Response to Intervention . (2010). Screening tools chart. Washington, DC: Author. Google Scholar | |
|
National Research Council . (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Nunnally, J. C., Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar | |
|
O’Connor, R. E., Jenkins, J. R. (1999). The prediction of reading disabilities in kindergarten and first grade. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 159–197. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Petscher, Y., Kim, Y.-S., Foorman, B. R. (2011). The importance of predictive power in early screening assessments: Implications for placement in the RTI framework. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 36(3), 158-166. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Rathvon, N. (2004). Early reading assessment: A practitioner’s handbook. New York, NY: Guilford. Google Scholar | |
|
Reid, D. K., Hresko, W. P., Hammill, D. D. (1981). The Test of Early Reading Ability. Austin, TX: Pro-ED. Google Scholar | |
|
Scanlon, D. M., Vellutino, F. R. (1997). A comparison of the instructional backgrounds and cognitive profiles of poor, average, and good readers who were initially identified as at risk of reading failure. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 191–215. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Scarborough, H. S. (1998). Predicting the future achievement of second graders with reading disabilities: Contributions of phonemic awareness, verbal memory, rapid naming, and IQ. Annals of Dyslexia, 48, 115–136. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Schatschneider, C., Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Carlson, C. D., Foorman, B. R. (2004). Kindergarten prediction of reading skills: A longitudinal comparative analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 265–282. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Share, D. L. (2004). Knowing letter names and learning letter sounds: A causal connection. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 88, 213–233. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Sijtsma, K. (1998). Methodology review: Nonparametric IRT approaches to the analysis of dichotomous items scores. Applied Psychological Measurment, 22, 3-31. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Speece, D. H., Mills, C., Ritchey, K. D., Hillman, E. (2003). Initial evidence that letter fluency tasks are valid indicators of early reading skill. Journal of Special Education, 36, 223–233. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Swets, J. A. (1988). Measuring the diagnostic accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science, 240, 1285–1293. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Texas Primary Reading Inventory (TPRI; 2006–2008). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar | |
|
Treiman, R., Kessler, B. (2003). The role of letter names in the acquisition of literacy. In Kail, R. (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 31, pp. 105–135). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Van Boxel, Y. J. J. M., Roest, F. H. J., Bergen, M. P., Stam, H. J. (1995). Dimensionality and hierarchical structure of disability measurement. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 76, 1552–1555. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Watson, R. (1996). The Mokken scaling procedure (MSP) applied to the measurement of feeding difficulty in elderly people with dementia. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 33, 385-393. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Watson, R., Deary, I., Austin, E. (2007). Are personality trait items reliably more or less “difficult”? Mokken scaling of the NEO-FFI. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1460–1469. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Woodcock, R., Mather, N., Schrank, F. A. (1997). Woodcock Johnson III Diagnostic Reading Battery. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Publishing. Google Scholar |
