New Instrument, Old Problem for Early Identification

Lichtenstein, Robert

doi:10.1177/001440298204900110

Cited by 11 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The data presented in this paper indicate that the Early Screening Inventory is a valid and reliable developmental screening instrument, and that it meets all of the criteria for screening tests presented earlier. Moreover, the short-term predictive validity data of the ESI compare favorably with the validity data concerning other developmental screening instruments that meet these criteria-the Denver Developmental Screening Test (Camp, et al, 1977), the McCarthy Screening Test (McCarthy, 1978), and the Minneapolis Preschool Screening Instrument (Lichtenstein, 1982); the longitudinal data available from these tests are not comparable with those reported for the ESI.…”

Section: Summary and Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting school performance with the early screening inventory

1984

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Criteria are proposed for defining and selecting preschool developmental screening instruments. These criteria include the purpose, breadth, and psychometric properties of screening tests. The Early Screening Inventory (ESI) is a developmental screening instrument designed to satisfy these criteria. The test samples developmental, rather than school achievement, abilities and focuses on performance in a wide range of developmental areas. The results of several reliability and validity studies performed on the ESI are presented, demonstrating that the ESI predicts school performance with moderate to excellent accuracy through the end of second grade. The usefulness and limitations of the ESI in predicting school performance from kindergarten to grade four are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Summary and Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting school performance with the early screening inventory

1984

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…DIAL and Minneapolis Preschool Screening Instrument (Lichtenstein, 1980) results were compared to teachers' judgments of children's need for special education (Lichtenstein, 1982) for 428 children age 4-1 to 5-4. DIAL sensitivity was .54; MPSI sensitivity was .63; specificity rates for both the DIAL and MPSI were .93.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preschool Screening Using the Parent's Preschool Development Inventory Report

1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study describes the use of a parent report Preschool Development Inventory (PDI) in preschool screening. The PDI obtains the parent's report of the child's present development and possible problems. PDI results for three and four-year-olds seen for screening at public schools (N = 220) were analyzed to determine (a) the occurrence of low General Development Scale scores and various symptoms and behavior problems, and (b) the relationship of PDI results indicating problems to subsequent placement in early childhood/special education. Eleven percent of children obtained a low General Development Scale score on the PDI, while fourteen percent had one or more symptoms or behavior problems that could constitute a major obstacle to learning reported. Validity of the PDI for predicting early childhood/special education placement was determined via a sensitivity/specificity analysis: Sensitivity was .68; positive predictive power was .41.

show abstract

Preschool Screening: A Review of the Evidence

Feightner¹

1990

Preventing Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New Instrument, Old Problem for Early Identification

Cited by 11 publications

References 2 publications

Predicting school performance with the early screening inventory

Predicting school performance with the early screening inventory

Preschool Screening Using the Parent's Preschool Development Inventory Report

Preschool Screening: A Review of the Evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About