Psychometric Analysis of the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation Assessment

Abstract

This study investigated the psychometrics of the Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation–Screening Test (DELV-S) test using confirmatory factor analysis, item response theory, and differential item functioning (DIF). Responses from 1,764 students in kindergarten through second grade were used in the study, with results indicating that the DELV-S is multidimensional and measures syntactic skills and nonword repetition ability. Item response theory suggested that most items were easy and that the measured skills were most reliable for students who had low language abilities. Standardized effect sizes for DIF suggested small differences existed on syntactic skills between white and minority students. Scores were vertically scaled to produce reference tables to assess performance at specific points in time, as well as growth over time.

Keywords

DELV-S language ability item response theory DIF effect size vertical scaling

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Benjamini

Hochberg

(1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological), 57, 289–300.

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Dunn

L. M.

Dunn

L. M.

(1981). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test–Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.

Haberman

S. J.

(1978). Analysis of qualitative data: Vol. 1. Introductory topics. New York, NY: Academic Press.

Hambleton

R. K.

Jones

R. W.

(1993). Comparison of classical test theory and item response theory and their applications to test development. NCME Instructional Module, 253–262.

Mantel

Haenszel

(1959). Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 22, 719–48.

Meade

A. W.

(2010). A taxonomy of effect size measures for the differential functioning of items and scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 728–743.

Muthen

L. K.

Muthen

B. O.

(2010). Mplus software (Version 6). Los Angeles, CA: Author.

Nunnally

J. C.

Bernstein

I. H.

(1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

10.

Oetting

J. B.

McDonald

J. L.

(2001). Nonmainstream dialect use and specific language impairment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 44, 207–223.

11.

Petscher

Schatschneider

(2011). Validating scores from new assessments: A comparison of classical test theory and item response theory. In Tenenbaum

Eklund

Kamata

(Eds.), Handbook of measurement in sport and exercise psychology (pp. 75-101). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

12.

Reise

S. P.

Morizot

Hays

R. D.

(2007). The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures. Quality of Life Research, 16, 19-31.

13.

Rice

M. L.

Wexler

(1996). Toward tense as a clinical marker of specific language impairment in English-speaking children. Journal of Speech & Hearing Research, 39, 1239–1257.

14.

Semel

E. M.

Wiig

E. H.

Secord

(2003). Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals (CELF-4). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.

15.

Seymour

H. N.

Roeper

T. W.

deVilliers

(2003). Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation, Screening Test examiner’s manual. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

16.

Stockman

I. J.

(2008). Toward validation of a minimal competence phonetic core for African American children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51, 1244–1262.

17.

Swaminathan

Gifford

(1983). Estimation of parameters in the three-parameter latent trait model. In Weiss

D. J.

Bock

R. D.

(Eds.), New horizons in testing: latent trait test theory and computerized adaptive testing (pp. 13–30). New York, NY: Academic Press.

18.

Patton-Terry

Connor

Petscher

Conlin

C. R.

(in press). Dialect variation and reading: Is change in Non-mainstream American English use related to reading achievement in first and second grade? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research.

19.

Washington

J. A.

Craig

H. K.

(1992). Performances of low-income, African American preschool and kindergarten children on the Peabody Picture Test–Revised. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 23, 329–333.