When the United States Congress passed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act in 2004 (IDEIA 2004), local educational agencies (LEA) were permitted to use a Response-to-Intervention (RTI) approach for identifying children with possible learning disabilities for special education. Furthermore, IDEIA 2004 no longer required LEAs to establish an IQ-achievement discrepancy for determining a Specific Learning Disability (SLD). Although federal law no longer mandates the need for an IQachievement discrepancy for determining an SLD, most school psychologists continue to employ this approach for the assessment of children at-risk for SLD. Furthermore, some researchers suggest that although the IQ-achievement discrepancy model may not be the best approach for identifying children at-risk for SLD, school psychologists should continue to use intelligence tests as part of the assessment process. The current paper (a) provides a brief review of the IQ-achievement discrepancy model, (b) reviews concerns of using intelligence tests within a RTI framework, and (c) reviews some of the major criticisms regarding the IQ-achievement discrepancy model.
When the United States Congress passed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act in 2004 (IDEIA 2004), local educational agencies (LEA) were permitted to use a Response-to-Intervention (RTI) approach for identifying children with possible learning disabilities for special education. Furthermore, IDEIA 2004 no longer required LEAs to establish an IQ-achievement discrepancy for determining a Specific Learning Disability (SLD). Although federal law no longer mandates the need for an IQachievement discrepancy for determining an SLD, most school psychologists continue to employ this approach for the assessment of children at-risk for SLD. Furthermore, some researchers suggest that although the IQ-achievement discrepancy model may not be the best approach for identifying children at-risk for SLD, school psychologists should continue to use intelligence tests as part of the assessment process. The current paper (a) provides a brief review of the IQ-achievement discrepancy model, (b) reviews concerns of using intelligence tests within a RTI framework, and (c) reviews some of the major criticisms regarding the IQ-achievement discrepancy model.
In 1944, Levinson and Sanford created a scale to measure anti-Semitism. Their data showed that the scale had sound psychometric qualities, with a reliability of .96 to .98. Shaw and Wright later stated that the scale was too long for use in some research studies. In the current study, a shorter version (32 items; 38.5% reduction) was created and examined. A high level of internal consistency reliability (r(tt) = .98) was maintained. A test-retest reliability coefficient of .91 was obtained over four weeks. A minimum residual factor analysis with Tandem Criteria rotation found two factors. This shortened Levinson and Sanford Anti-Semitism Scale could be used in research situations with less administration and scoring time. The shorter version still requires further research in terms of validity and social desirability.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.