A Validation Of The Dyslexia Adult Screening Test (DAST) in A Post Secondary Population.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Scott Linner Aimsweb Trainer Aimsweb support
Advertisements

Interpreting Test Results For Grades K-8. What tests will my child take? Students are assessed through: DIBELS (Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy.
Learning Disabilities According to the National Advisory Committee on Handicapped Children in 1967, a learning disability is a “disorder of one or more.
Northern Ontario Assessment and Resource Centre Alana Holmes, Ph.D., C.Psych Robert Silvestri M.Ed., Ph.D. candidate.
Children’s subjective well-being Findings from national surveys in England International Society for Child Indicators Conference, 27 th July 2011.
Gili Rechany M.A. BCBA Shema Kolainu – Hear Our Voices January 6, 2005
The Children’s Psychological Processes Scale (CPPS)
Intelligence tests Wechsler Tests Info on David Wechsler.
Measuring Intelligence Binet-Simon Intelligence Scale –mental age Terman –intelligence quotient (IQ) –IQ=MA/CA x 100 Standardized Intelligence Tests –Stanford-Binet.
1 Assessing Intelligence Module Intelligence Assessing Intelligence  The Origins of Intelligence Testing  Modern Tests of Mental Abilities  Principles.
Thinking, Language and Intelligence. Cognition Mental Activities Acquiring, retaining and using knowledge THINKING!
Stanford-Binet IV Description: –Point-scale (contrast with age-scale of previous editions) –Test composite (M=100, SD=16) –4 areas & scores (M=100, SD=16)
Chapter 7 Correlational Research Gay, Mills, and Airasian
INTELLIGENCE AND PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING. KEY CONCEPTS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING Psychological test: a standardized measure of a sample of a person’s behavior.
Intelligence.
What is Intelligence? Definition: 3 main characteristics 1) 2) 3)
Screening for dyslexia, dyspraxia and visual stress in HE S.A. Nichols, J.S. McLeod, J.M. Brown, L.J. Smith, F. Summerfield, R.L. Holder * Centre for Inclusive.
REGIONAL CONFERENCE ON HIGHER EDUCATION- COMMUNITY-INDUSTRY ENGAGEMENT.
Test Validity S-005. Validity of measurement Reliability refers to consistency –Are we getting something stable over time? –Internally consistent? Validity.
Athleticism, like intelligence, is many things
Grand Designs: Creating Inclusive Learning Materials Jennie Young PAD (Specific Learning Difficulties) SpLD Tutor.
Intelligence Smart, How? Different Strokes Take a Test How do we measure it? Where do you get yours?
The Language, Phonology and Reading Connection: Implications for Teaching Practice Dr Valerie Muter Great Ormond St Hospital for Children May 2009.
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales
LECTURE 06B BEGINS HERE THIS IS WHERE MATERIAL FOR EXAM 3 BEGINS.
Principles of Test Construction
Statistics and Quantitative Analysis Chemistry 321, Summer 2014.
Comparing two sample means Dr David Field. Comparing two samples Researchers often begin with a hypothesis that two sample means will be different from.
Unit 11. * intelligence: * aggregate or global capacity * to act purposefully * to think rationally * to deal effectively with the environment * fluid.
Assessing Intelligence
Assessing Intelligence. Why was intelligence tests created? Is it better to separate students into ability groups or to have mainstreamed classes? Why?
Review of Basic Tests & Measurement Concepts Kelly A. Powell-Smith, Ph.D.
MethodMethod References Introduction Kindergarten predictors of reading skills Papadimitriou Artemis, Vlachos Filippos, University of Thessaly
Do Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Predict Dementia at 1- and 2- Year Follow-Up? Findings from the Development of Screening Guidelines and Diagnostic.
INTELLIGENCE Mental quality consisting of the ability to learn from experience, solve problems, and use knowledge to adapt to new situations.
I NTELLIGENCE Unit 11. W HAT IS I NTELLIGENCE ?  Intelligence  ability to learn from experience, solve problems, and use knowledge to adapt to new situations.
Origins of Intelligence Testing  Intelligence Test  a method of assessing an individual’s mental aptitudes and comparing them to those of others, using.
Dyslexia: To Screen or Not to Screen Wendy Stovall, Ed.S., Keri Horn, Ed.S., Amber Broadway, Ed.S., & Mary Bryant, Ed.S. Crowley’s Ridge Education Service.
Variables It is very important in research to see variables, define them, and control or measure them.
 Three Criteria: Inadequate classroom achievement (after intervention) Insufficient progress Consideration of exclusionary factors  Sources of Data.
Testing & Intelligence Principal Types of Tests –Personality –Mental ability Intelligence tests – potential for general mental ability Aptitude – potential.
Chapter 6 - Standardized Measurement and Assessment
Steven W. Evans, Christine Brady, Lee Kern, Christiana Andrews and the CARS Research Team Measurement Development and Inclusion Criteria: Developing Meaningful.
Chapter 21prepared by Elizabeth Bauer, Ph.D. 1 Ranking Data –Sometimes your data is ordinal level –We can put people in order and assign them ranks Common.
Intelligence.
What makes us smart? Or not so smart?
Intelligence does moderately correlate with brain size Remember: experience alters the brain Rats in stimulating environments develop thicker.
Testing Intelligence. ARE YOU OVER-TESTED?  Your age group is the most tested group in the history of the United States.
Reliability EDUC 307. Reliability  How consistent is our measurement?  the reliability of assessments tells the consistency of observations.  Two or.
UNIT Standardization and Technical Properties n Standardization Sample n Reliability Studies Internal Consistency Reliabilities at Decision-Making Points.
Myers PSYCHOLOGY Seventh Edition in Modules Module 31 Assessing Intelligence James A. McCubbin, Ph.D. Clemson University Worth Publishers.
Educational Research Chapter 8. Tools of Research Scales and instruments – measure complex characteristics such as intelligence and achievement Scales.
Chapter 7 Criterion-Referenced Measurement PoorSufficientBetter.
Literacy, Intelligence, and Academic Achievement Zembar and Blume Middle Childhood Development: A Contextual Approach, First Edition ©2009 Pearson Education,
Reading Skills Assessment Dr. Denise P. Gibbs, Director Alabama Scottish Rite Foundation Learning Centers
RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY Dr. Rehab F. Gwada. Control of Measurement Reliabilityvalidity.
Vocab Unit 11. = a method of assessing an individual's mental aptitudes and comparing them with those of others, using numerical scores.
Unit 11 Vocabulary Individual Differences and Intelligence.
Understanding Learning Disability Documentation
SATS Information Evening
DIBELS.
Selecting the Best Measure for Your Study
Causation & Experimental Design
Learning Skill Disorders
Reliability and Validity
Test Validity.
Myers EXPLORING PSYCHOLOGY (6th Edition in Modules)
Unit 11: Testing and Individual Differences
Assessing Intelligence
Relationship between Standardized and Classroom-based Assessment
Presentation transcript:

A Validation Of The Dyslexia Adult Screening Test (DAST) in A Post Secondary Population

Dyslexia Adult Screening Test DAST  Developed by Fawcett & Nicholson in UK  Published by Psych corp 1998  Normative data collected on 550 “normal” students & 618 adults (age 17-65).  ?  ? # Dyslexic subjects-No reference at all.  At Risk Quotient (ARQ) calculated based on performance on 11 subtests

The Dyslexia Adult Screening Test (17+ yrs)

DAST cut-offs  ARQ of.7 or more = slightly at risk  ARQ of 1 or more = highly at risk Fawcett & Nicholson used the cut off of 1.0 in their normative study!

Problems with initial norms  “Dyslexic Student” data consists of only 15 people  Dyslexia validated by ADI: ACID pattern on WAIS; spelling, nonsense passage reading & previous hx dyslexia.  ARQ calculated dividing by 9 instead of 11  How well can DAST accurately identify Dyslexic students based on this limited sample?

Current study  LOTF project in Ontario, Canada  Improve services & supports for “Dyslexic” students in post-secondary.  Pilot students had to meet rigorous diagnostic criteria for inclusion:  2 std dev difference between measure of intellectual potential & achievement &/or specific information processing skill, + consistent history

Subjects  117 “well validated” Pilot students  122 volunteer controls  Sex ratio equal in Pilot students, but 75% of controls were female.  Mean age of two groups equal

Results Using.7 as cut off (mild risk):  85% of Dyslexics correctly identified  15% missed. 3 subjects had ARQ < 0.01  25% “controls” identified as mild risk Using 1.0 (high risk) as cut off:  74% Dyslexics correctly identified  15% controls identified as high risk

Hit rate by subtest( ARQ>.99) DAST subtestDyslexic students (N=117) Incidence (%) Control Students (N=122) Incidence (%) Rapid Naming One Minute reading Postural stability Phonemic Segmentation minute spelling Backward Digit span Nonsense passage Non-verbal reasoning minute writing Verbal fluency Semantic fluency

Information about control subjects  Recruited from first-year courses, posters, and work-study student population  Completed self-rating scales & DAST  Correlation between self-rated reading pleasure and ARQ=.40  Correlation between self-rated reading skills and ARQ=.52

Relationship Between Pleasure from Reading and ARQ (Control gp only) R 2 = Self-rated reading enjoyment (1=very pleasurable; 5=no pleasure) At Risk Quotient (ARQ) Highly at risk cut off

Relationship Between Self-rated Reading Skills and ARQ (control gp only) R 2 = Self-rated Reading skill (1=strongest; 5=poorest) At Risk Quotient (ARQ) Highly at risk cut off

Self-reported Academic Weaknesses (Control group) Area of academic difficulty Percentage who endorsed Math43.4% Study skills26.2% Memory21.3% Spelling18% No area of difficulty16.4% Organizational skills11.5% Reading9%

ARQ scores for control subjects who reported reading problems ARQ

Recalculation of DAST  Remove postural stability (least consistent & lowest inter-rater agreement)  Remove subtests with largest group overlap  Remove subjects with NVLD  Recalculate ARQ based on 7 subtests

Recalculated DAST (Excluding subtests 3, 8 & 11 + NVLD) Using.7 as cut off (mild risk):  88 % of Dyslexics correctly identified  12 % missed.  27 % “controls” identified as mild risk Using 1.0 (high risk) as cut off:  77 % Dyslexics correctly identified  17 % controls identified as high risk

Conclusions  DAST in present form is not acceptable as screening for LD  Good screening test should identify almost ALL of true Dyslexic subjects. This does not.  Removal of subtests with questionable discriminate validity improves hit rate slightly, but still misses 12% of Dyslexic students  Relationship between ARQ & criterion variables (such as self-rated reading skill) an issue

Suggestions  Investigation of IQ-ARQ correlation  Establish criterion validity of ARQ & subtests in non-disabled control group  Recalculation of normative scores and cut offs using larger Dyslexic sample.  Don’t throw the baby out with the….