2021
DOI: 10.1002/pits.22525
View full text |Buy / Rent full text
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: This study aimed to explore the utility of a math curriculum‐based measurement (M‐CBM) to identify Spanish‐speaking students at risk of math failure in third grade. The M‐CBM includes a set of number sense based single and composite screening for third graders. The study's sample included 236 Spanish third‐graders from the Canary Islands tested in the fall, winter, and spring. Reliability and validity of all measures were explored, finding adequate indexes. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) and Hierarch… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

1
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(3 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
(60 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The IPAM includes three alternate forms (i.e., fall, winter, and spring) of five screening measures: Quantity discrimination (QD), multi-digit computation (MC), missing number (MN), single-digit computation (SC), and place value (PV). The validity and reliability of the IPAM have been widely analyzed (de León et al, 2021;de León, Jiménez, García et al, 2020;de León, Jiménez, & Hernández-Cabrera, 2020). The IPAM has shown adecuate indexes of alternate-form reliability (1 st r = .77 to .80; 2 nd r = .71 to .82; 3 rd r = .86 to .90) concurrent (1 st r = .69; 2 nd r = .71; 3 rd r = .56) and predictive validity (1 st r = .61 to .64; 2 nd r = .59 to .69; 3 rd r = .46 to .51) (de León et al, 2021;de León, Jiménez, García et al, 2020).…”
Section: Student Math Outcomes and Instrumentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The IPAM includes three alternate forms (i.e., fall, winter, and spring) of five screening measures: Quantity discrimination (QD), multi-digit computation (MC), missing number (MN), single-digit computation (SC), and place value (PV). The validity and reliability of the IPAM have been widely analyzed (de León et al, 2021;de León, Jiménez, García et al, 2020;de León, Jiménez, & Hernández-Cabrera, 2020). The IPAM has shown adecuate indexes of alternate-form reliability (1 st r = .77 to .80; 2 nd r = .71 to .82; 3 rd r = .86 to .90) concurrent (1 st r = .69; 2 nd r = .71; 3 rd r = .56) and predictive validity (1 st r = .61 to .64; 2 nd r = .59 to .69; 3 rd r = .46 to .51) (de León et al, 2021;de León, Jiménez, García et al, 2020).…”
Section: Student Math Outcomes and Instrumentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The validity and reliability of the IPAM have been widely analyzed (de León et al, 2021;de León, Jiménez, García et al, 2020;de León, Jiménez, & Hernández-Cabrera, 2020). The IPAM has shown adecuate indexes of alternate-form reliability (1 st r = .77 to .80; 2 nd r = .71 to .82; 3 rd r = .86 to .90) concurrent (1 st r = .69; 2 nd r = .71; 3 rd r = .56) and predictive validity (1 st r = .61 to .64; 2 nd r = .59 to .69; 3 rd r = .46 to .51) (de León et al, 2021;de León, Jiménez, García et al, 2020). Confirmatory Factor Analysis were performed to explore the IPAM construct validity, showing adequate fit indexes: χ 2 , p > .05; TLI ≥ .95; CFI ≥ .95; RMSA ≤ .06; SRMS ≤ .08 (de León, Jiménez, & Hernández-Cabrera, 2020;Jiménez & de León, 2017a;Jiménez & de León, 2017b,).…”
Section: Student Math Outcomes and Instrumentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation