Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading
Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading
Technical Report ft 1106Diagnostic Efficiency ofeasyCBM Reading: OregonBitnara Jasmine ParkDaniel Andersonp Sliawn IrvinJulie AlonzoGerald TindalUnive Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading ersity of OregonDBRTbehavioral research & teachingPublished byBehavioral Research and TeachingUniversity of Oregon • 175 Education5262 University of Oregon • Eugene. OR 97403-5262Phone: 541-346-3535 • Fax: 541-346-5689http://bft.uoregon.eduNote: Funds for this data set used to generate this report c Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading ome from a federal grant awarded to the uo from the Institute for Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education: Reliability and Validity EvidenceDiagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading
for Progress Measures in Reading (Award s R324A100014 funded from June 2010 - June 2012) and from the Institute for Education Sciences. U.S. DepartmenTechnical Report ft 1106Diagnostic Efficiency ofeasyCBM Reading: OregonBitnara Jasmine ParkDaniel Andersonp Sliawn IrvinJulie AlonzoGerald TindalUnive Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading funded from 2007-2011).Copyright £ 2011. Behavioral Research and Teaching. All rights reserved. This publication, or parts thereof, may not be used or reproduced 111 any manner without written permission.The University of Oregon is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex. age. marital stams. disability, publicDiagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading
assistance status, veteran status, or sexual orientation. This document IS available in alternative formats upon request.AbstractWithin a response to Technical Report ft 1106Diagnostic Efficiency ofeasyCBM Reading: OregonBitnara Jasmine ParkDaniel Andersonp Sliawn IrvinJulie AlonzoGerald TindalUnive Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading eener.Students identified as al-risk arc provided with an intervention intended to increase achievement. Tn the following technical report, we describe a process for choosing appropriate cut-points on the benchmark scrcener and then apply this process to the casyCBM* reading benchmark tests using a Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading sample from three districts in Oregon. The most appropriate cut-point may vary' dramatically by the population assessed and the criterion used to estaDiagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading
blish “true” risk. The diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM’ is evaluated with respect to the cut-points and the overall effectiveness of the measures to Technical Report ft 1106Diagnostic Efficiency ofeasyCBM Reading: OregonBitnara Jasmine ParkDaniel Andersonp Sliawn IrvinJulie AlonzoGerald TindalUnive Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading for each of seven different subgroups, when n > 50.Diagnostic Efficiency: Oregonp. iDiagnostic Efficiency of easyCBM Reading: OregonThe purpose of this technical report is twofold: (a) to describe the process of determining and evaluating cut-score placement on formative assessments and (b) to pres Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading ent results from a diagnostic efficiency analysis of the easyCBNf* reading benchmark assessments in grades 3-8. First, we discuss the importance of cuDiagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading
t-score placement - even for ionnative measures - and describe the use of relatively simple statistics that can help educators evaluate how well a choTechnical Report ft 1106Diagnostic Efficiency ofeasyCBM Reading: OregonBitnara Jasmine ParkDaniel Andersonp Sliawn IrvinJulie AlonzoGerald TindalUnive Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading ovide or withhold services for an individual student is nearly entirely dependent on the cut-score. Thus, we argue that cut-score placement should be made with careful consideration of the consequences that will follow. Second, we present results from a diagnostic efficiency analysis of the easyCBM* Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading reading benchmark assessments in grades 3-8. For the purpose of this analysis, decisions were made regarding the cut-points (see methods section forDiagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading
decision rules). We are carefill to point out. however, that the most optimal cut-point may not be the same across states or districts. Further, settiTechnical Report ft 1106Diagnostic Efficiency ofeasyCBM Reading: OregonBitnara Jasmine ParkDaniel Andersonp Sliawn IrvinJulie AlonzoGerald TindalUnive Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading ors setting the cut scores and the resources available to address student needs as identified by the cut scores.Setting Cut-ScoresWithin a response to intervention (RTI) framework, benchmark screening tests are given to all students periodically throughout the year (e.g.. fall, winter, and spring). Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading These benchmark tests are designed to identify' a specific subgroup of students who are “at-risk." From a testdevelopment perspective, it is criticalDiagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading
to examine how well the test differentiates between students who are and are nor at-risk. From a test administration perspective, it is equally criticTechnical Report ft 1106Diagnostic Efficiency ofeasyCBM Reading: OregonBitnara Jasmine ParkDaniel Andersonp Sliawn IrvinJulie AlonzoGerald TindalUnive Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading evant criterion, many educators and researchers alike look to state-test performance as a means of identifying which students are at-risk. Educators may then want to know. “At what level do my students need to perform to be considered a ‘safe-bet■ to pass the state-test?” A variety of simple analyse Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading s may answer this question. For example, educators may look at their state test data at the end of the year and examine students* average performanceDiagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading
on the benchmark for only those students who passed the state test. The score closest to the average performance may then be used as the cut-score forTechnical Report ft 1106Diagnostic Efficiency ofeasyCBM Reading: OregonBitnara Jasmine ParkDaniel Andersonp Sliawn IrvinJulie AlonzoGerald TindalUnive Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading go unanswered. For instance:(QI) How well is the measure and corresponding cut-point actually classifying students as at-risk?(Q2) How is the measure and corresponding cut-point actually classifying students who are nor ar-risk?Generally, two statistics address each of these questions. The first qu Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading estion is answered byevaluating what are referred to as the “sensitivity" and "positive predictive power” of the cutscore. The second question is addrDiagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading
essed by evaluating the "specificity** and "negative predictive power” of the cut-score. The two statistics relating to each question are closely linkTechnical Report ft 1106Diagnostic Efficiency ofeasyCBM Reading: OregonBitnara Jasmine ParkDaniel Andersonp Sliawn IrvinJulie AlonzoGerald TindalUnive Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading r should not be made without careful consideration of the costs of misclassifications in one direction or another. In RTI, the cost of misclassifying students into the safe-bet category- is likely much greater than the cost of misclassifying students into the at-risk category. Students incoưectly cl Diagnostic efficiency of easyCBM reading assified as being at-riskTechnical Report ft 1106Diagnostic Efficiency ofeasyCBM Reading: OregonBitnara Jasmine ParkDaniel Andersonp Sliawn IrvinJulie AlonzoGerald TindalUniveTechnical Report ft 1106Diagnostic Efficiency ofeasyCBM Reading: OregonBitnara Jasmine ParkDaniel Andersonp Sliawn IrvinJulie AlonzoGerald TindalUniveGọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook