A systematic review of functional numeracy measures for 9–12 -year-olds: Validity and reliability evidence

Hakkarainen, Airi; Cordier, Reinie; Parsons, Lauren; Yoon, Sangwon; Laine, Anu; Aunio, Pirjo; Speyer, Renée

doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2023.102172

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous reviews have summarised some assessments of children's mathematical skills, but only up to age 6 years with standardisations to the UK population only (Dockrell et al, 2017). Other reviews have taken a more global perspective but have focused on teacherimplemented assessments for older children, aged 9-12 years (Hakkarainen et al, 2023). As such, it is currently unclear which mathematical assessments have been developed, validated, and produce reliable indications of children's skills in early childhood.…”

Section: Defining Mathematical Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…'Gold Standard' measurement tools typically have undergone extensive development and are widely accepted as the best measurement tools currently available. However, in the field of mathematical learning and development, these 'Gold Standards' are infrequently available in many countries and cultures (Hakkarainen et al, 2023).…”

Section: Criterion Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on this evidence, measurement tools with the most promising psychometric properties will be identified. Such synthesises are important for supporting researchers, educators, and other stakeholders to select measurement tools that are most suitable for assessing children's mathematical skills over time, including in response to interventions, and for identifying children with or at-risk of MLD (Hakkarainen et al, 2023).…”

Section: Current Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To support this process, future research should also work towards a commonly accepted definition of the structure of early mathematics (Devlin et al, 2022), and thus which skills should be included in 'Gold Standard' measurement tools. Future research should also work towards open-access measurement tools that can be used by practitioners (Hakkarainen et al, 2023) and other researchers in low-resource contexts (Pitchford & Outhwaite, 2016).…”

Section: Limitation and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Measuring Mathematical Skills in Early Childhood: A Systematic Review of the Psychometric Properties of Early Maths Assessments and Screeners

Outhwaite,

Aunio,

Leung

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Successful early mathematical development is vital to children’s later education, employment, and wellbeing outcomes. However, established measurement tools are infrequently used to, i) assess children’s mathematical skills and ii) identify children with or at-risk of mathematical learning difficulties. In response, this pre-registered systematic review aimed to provide an overview of measurement tools that have been evaluated for their psychometric properties for measuring the mathematical skills of children aged 0-8 years. The reliability and validity evidence reported for the identified measurement tools were then synthesised, including in relation to common acceptability thresholds. Overall, 37 mathematical assessments and 22 screeners were identified. In addressing the first aim, most measurement tools were categorised as child-direct measures delivered individually with a trained assessor in a paper-based format. In addressing the second aim, the synthesis revealed four key findings. First, the majority of the identified measurement tools have not been evaluated for all aspects of reliability and validity, and only seven measurement tools met the common acceptability thresholds for more than two areas of psychometric evidence. Second, only three screeners demonstrated an acceptable ability to distinguish between typically developing children and those with or at-risk of mathematical learning difficulties. Third, although five mathematical assessments and six screeners included evaluations of predictive validity, none met the common acceptability threshold. Finally, only eight mathematical assessments and one screener were found to align with external measurement tools. Building on this current evidence and improving measurement quality is vital for raising methodological standards in mathematical learning and development research.

show abstract

Section: Defining Mathematical Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Criterion Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Current Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Limitation and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Measuring Mathematical Skills in Early Childhood: A Systematic Review of the Psychometric Properties of Early Maths Assessments and Screeners

Outhwaite,

Aunio,

Leung

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Understanding the beliefs held by teachers is anticipated to influence the caliber of their instructional practices positively. This understanding can enable teachers to tailor their teaching approaches following individual students' unique requirements, thus fostering each learner's holistic development [23]. Teachers' beliefs significantly impact the learning objectives, explicitly enhancing student competency.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teachers' Belief in Ethnomathematics-Based Numeracy Learning Scale: A Rasch Model Analysis

Astuti,

Wijaya,

Hanum

2024

TEM Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teachers’ beliefs are a teacher's subjective perspective about teaching practices in the classroom, which influence the actions and decisions that will be taken in facilitating student learning activities. A scale can serve as an effective tool for assessing teachers' beliefs in ethnomathematics-based numeracy learning. This study aims to evaluate teachers' belief in ethnomathematics-based numeracy learning scale. The data analysis will employ the Rasch model and involve 75 mathematics teachers from junior high schools in Central Java. The teachers' belief in an ethnomathematics-based numeracy learning scale was initially subjected to content validation by three experts. The cumulative percentage outcomes are according to the four dimensions, namely teachers' beliefs about numeracy, teachers' beliefs about the role of ethnomathematics in numeracy learning, teachers' beliefs about ethnomathematics-based numeracy teaching, and teachers' beliefs about ethnomathematics-based numeracy learning, amount to 90.28% for a total of 20 items. Following this, the researchers utilized the Rasch model analysis to investigate teachers' belief in an ethnomathematics-based numeracy learning scale. The analysis involved the use of ten measurement features. Based on the results, it was deemed imperative to remove 30 individuals to maintain adherence to the predetermined criteria. Subsequently, the data obtained from the remaining 45 participants was analyzed using the Rasch model. The study of 20 teachers’ belief items yielded three items, necessitating the exclusion of the privacy construct. The results indicate that the 17 questions possess robustness, validity, and reliability, rendering them suitable for assessing teachers' beliefs in ethnomathematics-based numeracy learning.

show abstract

Measuring Mathematical Skills in Early Childhood: a Systematic Review of the Psychometric Properties of Early Maths Assessments and Screeners

Outhwaite,

Aunio,

Leung

et al. 2024

Educ Psychol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Successful early mathematical development is vital to children’s later education, employment, and wellbeing outcomes. However, established measurement tools are infrequently used to (i) assess children’s mathematical skills and (ii) identify children with or at-risk of mathematical learning difficulties. In response, this pre-registered systematic review aimed to provide an overview of measurement tools that have been evaluated for their psychometric properties for measuring the mathematical skills of children aged 0–8 years. The reliability and validity evidence reported for the identified measurement tools were then synthesised, including in relation to common acceptability thresholds. Overall, 41 mathematical assessments and 25 screeners were identified. Our study revealed five main findings. Firstly, most measurement tools were categorised as child-direct measures delivered individually with a trained assessor in a paper-based format. Secondly, the majority of the identified measurement tools have not been evaluated for aspects of reliability and validity most relevant to education measures, and only 15 measurement tools met the common acceptability thresholds for more than two areas of psychometric evidence. Thirdly, only four screeners demonstrated an acceptable ability to distinguish between typically developing children and those with or at-risk of mathematical learning difficulties. Fourthly, only one mathematical assessment and one screener met the common acceptability threshold for predictive validity. Finally, only 11 mathematical assessments and one screener were found to concurrently align with other validated measurement tools. Building on this current evidence and improving measurement quality is vital for raising methodological standards in mathematical learning and development research.

show abstract

A systematic review of functional numeracy measures for 9–12 -year-olds: Validity and reliability evidence

Cited by 4 publications

References 34 publications

Measuring Mathematical Skills in Early Childhood: A Systematic Review of the Psychometric Properties of Early Maths Assessments and Screeners

Measuring Mathematical Skills in Early Childhood: A Systematic Review of the Psychometric Properties of Early Maths Assessments and Screeners

Teachers' Belief in Ethnomathematics-Based Numeracy Learning Scale: A Rasch Model Analysis

Measuring Mathematical Skills in Early Childhood: a Systematic Review of the Psychometric Properties of Early Maths Assessments and Screeners

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About