An Examination of Construct Validity for the EARLI Numeracy Skill Measures

References

• Ackerman, T. A. (1994). Using multidimensional item response theory to understand what items are measuring. Applied Measurement in Education, 7, 255–278.
   Google Scholar
• Ackerman, T. A. (1991, April). A didactic explanation of item bias, item impact, and item validity from a multidimensional perspective. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
   Google Scholar
• Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• AERA, APA, & NCME. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, Joint Committee on Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (U.S.), & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Brenneman, K., Stevenson-Boyd, J. S., & Frede, E. (2009). Math and science in preschool: Policies and practice. Preschool Policy Matters (p. 19). New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research.
   Google Scholar
• Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bolen, & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 445–455). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Byrne, B. N. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Correra, J., Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (1999). Young children's understanding of division: The relationship between division terms in a noncomputational task. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 321–329.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Champlain, A., & Gessaroli, M. E. (1998). Assessing the dimensionality of item response matrices with small sample sizes and short test lengths. Applied Measurement in Education, 11, 231–253.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Champlain, A. F., & Tang, K. L. (1997). CHIDIM: A FORTRAN program for assessing the dimensionality of binary item responses based on McDonald's nonlinear factor analytic model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 174–178.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Champlain, A. F., & Gessaroli, M. E. (1996, April). Assessing the dimensionality of item response matrices with small sample sizes and short test lengths. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New York, NY.
   Google Scholar
• DiPerna, J. C., Morgan, P. L., & Lei, P. (2007). Development of early arithmetic, reading, and learning indicators for head start (EARLI Project). Semi-annual performance report to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families. University Park: Pennsylvania State University, College of Education.
   Google Scholar
• DiPerna, J. C., Lei, P.-W., & Morgan, P. L. (2009). Development of early arithmetic, reading, and learning indicators for head start (EARLI Project). Final performance report to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families (Award No. 90YF0047/01). University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University.
   Google Scholar
• Elias, S., Hattie, J., & Douglas, G. (1998, April). An assessment of various item response model and structural equation model fit indices to detect unidimensionality. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Diego, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Finch, H., & Habing, B. (2007). Performance of DIMTEST- and NOHARM-based statistics for testing unidimensionality. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31, 292–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Floyd, R. G., Hojnoski, R. L., & Key, J. (2006). Preliminary evidence of technical adequacy of the Preschool Numeracy Indicators. School Psychology Review, 35, 627–644.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Froelich, A. G. (2000). Assessing unidimensionality of test items and some asymptotics of parametric item response theory ( Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Statistics.
   Google Scholar
• Gessaroli, M. E. (1994). The assessment of dimensionality via local and essential independence: A comparison in theory and practice. In D. Laveault, B. D. Zumbo, M. E. Gessaroli, & M. W. Boss (Eds.), Modern theories in measurement: Problems and issues. Ottawa: University of Ottawa.
   Google Scholar
• Gessaroli, M. E., & De Champlain, A. F. (1996). Using an approximate chi-square statistic to test the number of dimensions underlying the responses to a set of items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 157–179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godwin, W. L., & Driscoll, L. A. (1980). Handbook for measurement and evaluation in early childhood education: Issues, measures, and methods. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Guttman, L. A. (1944). A basis for scaling qualitative data. American Sociological Review, 91, 139–150.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, B., & Risley, T. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday lives of American children. Baltimore: Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Hattie, J. (1985). Methodology review: Assessing unidimensionality of tests and items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 139–164.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochstedt, K. S., Lei, P. W., DiPerna, J. C., & Morgan, P. L. (2010). Examining the dimensionality of EARLI literacy skill scores using nonlinear factor analysis. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(5), 395–406.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsieh, M. (2010). Assess unidimensionality of computerized reading comprehension and math tests. International Journal of Intelligent Technology and Applied Statistics, 3(1), 93–105.
   Google Scholar
• Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jang, E. E., & Roussos, L. (2007). An investigation into the dimensionality of TOEFL using conditional covariance-based nonparametric approach. Journal of Educational Measurement, 44, 1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, H. R. (1994). New techniques for the dimensionality assessment of standardized test data. ( Doctoral dissertation). Dissertation Abstracts International. (55–12B, 5598)
   Google Scholar
• Krosbergen, E. H., & Van Luit, J. E. H. (2003). Mathematics interventions for children with special educational needs. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 97–114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, R. P. (1967). Nonlinear factor analysis (Psychometric Monographs, No. 15). Richmond, VA: Psychometric Corporation. Retrieved from http://www.psychometrika.org/journal/online/MN15.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performance as scientific inquiry into scoring meaning. American Psychologist, 9, 741–749.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Methe, S. A., Begeny, J. C., & Leary, L. L. (2011). Development of conceptually focused early numeracy skill indicators. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 36(4), 230–242. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1534508411414150
   Google Scholar
• Monahan, P., Stump, T. E., Finch, H., & Hambleton, R. K. (2007). Bias of exploratory and cross-validated DETECT index under unidimensionality. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31, 483–503.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2010). Mplus user's guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
   Google Scholar
• NAEYC & National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of Education. (2002). Early learning standards: Creating the conditions for success. Joint position statement. Washington, DC: Authors.
   Google Scholar
• Nandakumar, R. (1991). Traditional dimensionality vs. essential dimensionality. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 99–117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nandakumar, R., Yu, F., Li, H., & Stout, W. (1998). Assessing unidimensionality of polytomous data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 99–115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Education Goals Panel. (1998). Principles and recommendations for early childhood assessments. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Norwalk, K. E., DiPerna, J. C., & Lei, P. (2014). Confirmatory factor analysis of the early arithmetic, reading, and learning indicators (EARLI). Journal of School Psychology, 52(1), 83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, T. (2006). Detecting DIF across different language and gender groups in the MELAB essay test using the logistic regression method. Spaan Fellow Working Papers in Second or Foreign Language Assessment, 4, 81–96.
   Google Scholar
• Penfield, R. D., & Algina, J. (2006). A generalized DIF effect variance estimator for measuring unsigned differential test functioning in mixed format tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43(4), 295–312. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.2006.00018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raju, N., Van der Linden, W., & Fleer, P. (1995). An IRT-based internal measure of test bias with applications for differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 353–368.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Cook, K. F., Crane, P. K., Teresi, J. A. … Cella, D. (2007). Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks. Medical Care, 45, 22–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reid, E. E., Morgan, P. L., DiPerna, J. C., & Lei, P. W. (2006). Development of measures to assess young children's early academic skills: Preliminary findings from a Head Start–university partnership. Insights on Learning Disabilities, 3(2), 25–38.
   Google Scholar
• Roussos, L. A., & Ozbek, O. (2006). Formulation of the DETECT population parameter and evaluation of DETECT estimator bias. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43(30), 215–243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shore, T. H., Thornton, G. C., III., & Shore, L. M. (1990). Construct validity of two categories of assessment center dimension ratings. Personnel Psychology, 43, 101–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snow, C. E., Barns, W. S., Chandler, J., Goodman, I. F., & Hemphill. (1991). Unfulfilled expectations: Home and school influences on literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.
   Google Scholar
• Stein, M., Silbert, J., & Carnine, D. (1997). Designing effective mathematics instruction: A direct instruction approach (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Stout, W. (1987). A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait unidimensionality. Psychometrika, 52, 589–617.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stout, W. F., Douglas, J., Junker, B., & Roussos, L. A. (1993). DIMTEST manual (W. F. Stout, Ed.). Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL.
   Google Scholar
• Thissen, D. (1991). MULTILOG: Multiple category item analysis and test scoring using item response theory [Computer software]. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software.
   Google Scholar
• Tindal, G., & Haladyna, T. M. (2002). Large-scale assessment programs for all students: Validity, technical adequacy, and implementation. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Tate, R. (2003). A comparison of selected empirical methods for assessing the structure of responses to test items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 159–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2005). Head Start: Further developments could allow results of new test to be used for decision making. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Wainer, H., & Wang, X. (2001). Using a new statistical model for testlets to score TOEFL (TOEFL Technical Report No. 16). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
   Google Scholar
• Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child Development, 69, 848–872.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. J., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III tests of cognitive abilities and achievement. Chicago: Riverside
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, J., & Stout, W. (1999). The theoretical DETECT index of dimensionality and its application to approximate simple structure. Psychometrika, 64, 213–249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimowski, M. F., Muraki, E., Mislevy, R. J., & Bock, R. D. (1996). BILOG-MG: Multiple-group IRT analysis and test maintenance for binary items. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
   Google Scholar