Kindergarten screens as tools for the early identification of children at risk for remediation or grade retention

Abstract

This study was designed to compare the capability of three kindergarten screening instruments to correctly predict which children would be recommended for referral to remedial programs or for retention. The instruments used were a screen based on Piagetian theory that was specifically designed for the current study, a published general screening test, and a language-specific screen. The subjects were 95 White, middleclass children approximately 60 months of age at the time of testing. The predictor screens were given prior to kindergarten entry, with the follow-up assessment completed 1 I months later as the children neared the end of kindergarten. The teachers who conducted the follow-up testing were blind to the initial results. The Piagetianbased instrument was found to have poor predictive qualities. Both published instruments, the general-purpose kindergarten screen and a language-specific screen, were found to be predictive of teachers' recommendations regarding referral and retention.

Development and psychometric properties of the Early Development Instrument (EDI): A measure of children's school readiness.

“…Readiness for school and its measurement have received their share of attention in the developmental and educational literature, and several reviews have been produced to highlight the difference in approaches over time (Meisels, 1998(Meisels, , 1999Phillips & Love, 1995;Wenner, 1995).…”

Kindergarten screening: A survey of current practice

“…Given the wide use of this test, it is surprising that technical data were not gathered and included when the test was revised in 1992. One study (Wenner, 1995) found a positive predictive value of .56 with a group of four and five year olds. Since basic psychometric data are lacking, the Brigance can be used only as an informal screening measure; no educational decisions can be based on it (Watson, 1995).…”

Virtudes y defectos en la identificación de las dificultades lectoras

“…Satz y Bajo esta consideración, una revisión de estudios de identificación temprana descubre que se utilizan tres diseños principales. Uno muy frecuente consiste en administrar un instrumento de identificación (es decir, predicción) en el kindergarten y un instrumento de criterio (es decir, rendimiento) en una fecha posterior (Grogan, 1995, Glascoe y Byrne, 1993, Sears y Keogh, 1993, Catts, 1991, Nicolson y Fawcett, 1997, Badian, et al 1990, Wenner, 1995, Näslund, 1990. Las correlaciones que resultan entre estas medidas se evalúan como evidencia de la utilidad de la prueba o el instrumento.…”

“…Algunos estudios cuestionan la precisión de instrumentos identificadores como para clasificar a los alumnos para programas de educación especial. La mala identificación se evita cuando el procedimiento de identificación correctamente selecciona y remite a los niños de riesgo a un programa de intervención temprana, y cuando correctamente excluye de la intervención aquellos niños que no son de riesgo (Wenner, 1995).…”