Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Learning Disabilities
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
0022219408326219v1
42/2/163    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Catts, H. W.
Right arrow Articles by Mendoza, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Catts, H. W.
Right arrow Articles by Mendoza, K.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Floor Effects Associated With Universal Screening and Their Impact on the Early Identification of Reading Disabilities

Hugh W. Catts

University of Kansas, catts{at}ku.edu

Yaacov Petscher

Florida State University, Florida Center for Reading Research

Christopher Schatschneider

Florida State University, Florida Center for Reading Research

Mindy Sittner Bridges

University of Kansas

Katherin Mendoza

Florida Center for Reading Research

Response to intervention (RTI) holds great promise for the early identification and prevention of reading disabilities. The success of RTI rests in part on the accuracy of universal screening tools used within this framework. Despite advancements, screening instruments designed to identify children at risk for reading disabilities continue to have limited predictive validity. In this study, the authors examined a common screening instrument for the presence of floor effects and investigated the impact that these effects have on the predictive validity of the instrument. Longitudinal data (kindergarten to third grade) from a large cohort of children were used. These data included children's performance on five measures from the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) and two reading achievement outcome measures. The results showed that DIBELS measures were characterized by floor effects in their initial administrations and that these effects reduced the predictive validity of the measures. The implications of these findings for early identification are discussed.

Key Words: response to intervention • floor effects • DIBELS

This version was published on March 1, 2009

Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 42, No. 2, 163-176 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0022219408326219
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?