Identification of Spanish third graders at risk of math problems: Usefulness of number sense based screening measures

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 Hierarchical linear modeling analyses were conducted for both single and composite measures. All the measures revealed an area under the ROC curve values at or above 0.84, the composite measures ranging from 0.86 to 0.94. When comparing the single and composite measures, the latter revealed a higher classification accuracy for identifying students at risk in third grade than quantity discrimination, missing number, and multi‐digit computation measures, but not for single‐digit computation and place value measures. Finally, significant differences were found between at‐risk and non‐risk students learning growth throughout the school year.

Curriculum-based Measurement for Early Writing Struggles in Kindergarten: A Systematic Review

“…These tools are quick and practical for identifying at-risk students and have high levels of reliability and validity. They are also sensitive to learning growth over time, allowing evaluation of the effectiveness of the intervention (Ardoin, 2006;de León et al, 2021a;de León et al, 2021b;Jiménez et al, 2021).…”

Piloting the Response to Intervention Model in the Canary Islands: Prevention of Reading and Math Learning Disabilities

“…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).…”

“…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,).…”

“…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,). ROC curve analysis revealed Areas Under the Curve (AUCs) from .83 to .87 in 1 st grade, .91 to .96 in 2 nd grade, and .77 to .80 in 3 rd grade (de León et al, 2021;de León, Jiménez, García et al, 2020).…”