Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this presentation is to evaluate the psychometric validity of a Spanish translated version of a family involvement questionnaire (FELP). Quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted. Preliminary findings indicate the FELP is a reliable and valid measure for assessing family early literacy practices for Spanish-speaking families. Session attendees will learn about the validation of a self-report questionnaire. The benefits of analyzing item functioning will be discussed.
INTRODUCTION
-Research supports that family involvement in literacy activities is strongly related to child achievement (Evans et al., 2000).
-Researchers have determined that indicators of a rich home environment include parent and guardians’ responsiveness to their children’s early literacy abilities, involvement with their children in language and literacy-based activities and routines, and the provision of literacy materials (Hart & Risley, 1995; Roberts et al., 2005; Sénéchal et al., 1998).
-Much of the research on emergent literacy skills and parent involvement focus on English speaking and middle class
families (see reviews: Fan & Chen, 2001; Manz et al., 2010, Mattingly et al., 2002) despite that the Spanish-speaking population is the fastest growing student population in United States schools (NCES, 2004).
-Although this population is growing rapidly, there are few studies investigating the relationship between Spanish-speaking
parents and their young children’s emergent literacy skills (see reviews: Fan & Chen, 2001; Manz et al., 2010, Mattingly et al., 2002).
-The present study utilizes a mixed-methods design to evaluate the psychometric properties of this translated version of
the FELP questionnaire in order to assess whether this is an appropriate measure of family practices and beliefs for a Hispanic and Spanish-speaking population. The aim of the study is to answer the following questions:
1 ∙ Does the original factor structure of the FELP remain consistent for a Spanish-speaking sample of parents of preschool and kindergarten age children? 2 ∙ Are the FELP factors/items relevant for a Spanish-speaking sample? 3 ∙ Does item functioning differ among diverse subgroups?
DISCUSSION 1 ∙ Results indicate the FELP has good reliability and validity for Spanish-speaking parents of preschool age children. 2 ∙ Exploratory factor analysis of the FELP yielded support for a four-factor model, which did not align with the original theoretical construct of the FELP. 3 ∙ Internal consistency of the FELP was excellent. Cronbach’s alpha ranged between .93 to .94. 4 ∙ This study also provides support for the construct validity of the FELP for parents of preschool age children. Rasch analysis revealed that the threshold for all four factors was in
the appropriate order. This means the thresholds increased in a positive direction as the category label increased. 5 ∙ The people mean measure for Expectations was the highest at 4.35, which is almost 4 and a half a standard deviation above the mean of the items. This demonstrates that
people typically endorsed many positive items for the Expectation factor, which ask parent’s about their beliefs about their children’s future education. The high mean measures for this scale suggest that most people positively endorsed those items. This finding is not surprising given that you might expect parents to believe positively about their children’s academic future.
6 ∙ Rasch analysis supported the reliability findings from the factor analysis. 7 ∙ Rasch analysis demonstrates that response patterns did not vary significantly (with the exception of one item) by primary language spoken in the home for the four factors.
Limitations: ◦ Small sample size. ◦ All students recruited from preschool setting. ◦ Ratings can be subjective when using a Likert-scale.
Future Research: ◦ Conduct evaluation again with a larger sample size. ◦ Include preschool age children who may not be attending a formal preschool setting in an effort to include a more diverse sample in future studies. ◦ Evaluate DIF between other subgroups (e.g., income, ethnicity). ◦ Compare the family measures to child outcome data with a diverse population.
References: Andrich, D. (1978). A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika, 43, 561–73. Evans, M.A., Shaw, D., & Bell, M. (2000). Home literacy activities and their influence on early literacy skills. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54(2), 65-75. Fan, X., & Chen, M. (2001). Parental Involvement and Students’ Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 1-22. Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing. Manz, P. H., Hughes, C., Barnabas, E., Bracaliello, C., & Ginsburg-Block, M. (2010). A descriptive review and meta-analysis of family-based emergent literacy interventions: To what extent is the research applicable
to low-income, ethnic-minority or linguistically-diverse young children? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 409-431. Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149 –74. Mattingly, D. J., Prislin, R., McKenzie, T. L., Rodriguez, J. L., & Kayzar, B. (2002). Evaluating evaluations: The case of parent involvement programs. Review of Educational Research, 72(4), 549-576. Roberts, J., Jurgens, J., & Burchinal, M. (2005). The role of home literacy practices in preschool children's language and emergent literacy skills. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48(2), 345-359. Sénéchal, M., Lefevre, J., Thomas, E. M., & Daley, K. E. (1998). Differential effects of home literacy experiences on the development of oral and written language. Reading Research Quarterly, 33(1), 96–116.
METHOD Participants
• 81 parents of preschool and kindergarten age children from preschool and kindergarten class in Orlando, Florida. • Education: 51% Bachelors or higher, 30% HS or Some College, 19% No HS Diploma. • Income: 68% under the poverty level, 32% above the poverty level. • Ethnicity: 100% Hispanic (61% from Puerto Rico, 14% from Mexico, 14% from countries in the Caribbean Sea, and 11% from South American countries. • Language: 56.% Spanish, 42% Spanish and
English, and 2% English. • Parents completed the FELP questionnaire. Instrumentation • The FELP is a research-developed questionnaire (Likert Scale).
• There are 5 factors: Skill Building, Interactive Reading/ Enjoyment, Modeling and Monitoring, Expectations, and Child Skill. • Parental Behaviors: Skill Building, Interactive Reading/ Enjoyment, and Modeling and Monitoring. • Parental Beliefs: Expectations and Child Skill.
• Exploratory Factor Analysis used to obtain factors (majority Caucasian middle-class families) revealed the FELP had 5 robust factors with adequate alpha coefficients ranging from .77 to .87.
Family Early Literacy Practices Questionnaire: A Validation Study for ELLs
Results
Data Entered Data Analyzed
Data Collected
Data Analysis -Exploratory factor analysis
• Examine the factor structure of the FELP.
-Reliability • Internal consistency
coefficients (Cronbach’s alphas) and item-total correlations of the total scale and subscales of the FELP.
-Rasch Analysis
• Examine the construct of the FELP.
• The Rating Scale Model (RSM), used to test the unidimensionality of each hypothesized factor (Andrich, 1978; Masters, 1982).
• DIF was used to evaluate the item response pattern among diverse subgroups. An acceptable range for the t value is between -2 to 2 (Bond & Fox, 2007).
FELP Questionnaire
Skill Building (n=10)
.92
.94 Expectations (n=7)
Child Skills (n=6)
Interactive Reading / Enjoyment (n=8)
.86
4
Dr. Laura Bailet and Dr. Cynthia Zettler-Greeley
Nemours BrightStart! Dyslexia Initiative
Jacksonville, FL
Kandia Lewis and Dr. Marika Ginsburg-Block
University of Delaware Newark, DE
FELP Factor Structure – Original
F1-SB F2-IR F3-MM F4- Ex F5-CS
Item Examples I teach my child letter sounds.
I try to make reading a fun time for my child.
I make sure my child sees me reading.
I am confident that my child will receive a good education.
Compared to other children his/her age, my child is just as good or better at reading new words.
I teach my child to read words.
I let my child select the books when we read together.
I read to myself. I am confident that my child will complete high school.
Compared to other children his/her age, my child is just as good or better at identifying the sounds of letters.
Rasch Analysis Summary Statistics
Item Response Pattern
Person Factor Separation Reliability Real RMSE Model RMSE Mean Measure
Skill Building 2.57 .87 .43 .38 1.13
Interactive Reading/ Enjoyment
3.70 .93 .32 .30 .29
Expectations 1.90 .78 1.10 1.00 4.35
Child Skill 2.72 .88 .69 .62 1.16
Item Factor Separation Reliability Real RMSE Model RMSE Mean Measure
Skill Building 3.34 .92 .15 .14 .00
Interactive Reading/ Enjoyment
5.21 .96 .14 .13 .00
Expectations 6.45 .98 .31 .30 .00
Child Skill 3.80 .94 .19 .18 .00
RESULTS Factor Loadings – Structure Matrix
FELP ITEMS SB IR CS EX
FELP18 – I teach my child the names of letters. .880
FELP19 – I teach my child letter sounds. .868
FELP21 – I encourage my child to write. .832
FELP20 – I teach my child to read words. .760
FELP28 – I work with my child on skills that he/she learned in school.
.724
FELP7 – I help my child with writing. .713
FELP3 – I sing songs with my child. .683
FELP5 – I work on spelling words with my child. .669
FELP24 – I correct my child’s mistakes in reading. .637
FELP4 – I show my child how to sound out words. .619
FELP29 – I praise my child for his/her efforts in reading. .602
FELP12 – I ask my child to read to me. .579
FELP32 – I teach my child about words that start with the same sound (e.g. Peter Piper).
.536
FELP31 – I rhyme words with my child (e.g. cat, bat, sat). .451
FELP15 – I read to my child. .801
FELP14 – I let my child select the books when we read together. .772
FELP11 – I try to make reading a fun time for my child. .745
FELP26 – I have my child repeat a story to me in his/her own words.
.738
FELP9 – I tell my child stories. .732
FELP10 – I encourage my child to read. .721
FELP25 – I make sure my child sees me reading. .712
FELP22 – I read the same books to my child over and over. .702
FELP16 – I read to myself. .692
FELP13 – I talk with my child about stories he/she has read or heard.
.687
FELP23 – I ask my child to try to read store signs and labels. .668
FELP6 – I ask my child questions about the books that we read. .668
FELP30 – My child asks an adult to read with him/her. .588
FELP17 – My spouse or partner reads to himself/herself. .569
FELP27 – I provide books for my child to read. .562
FELP2 – I set aside quiet time for my child to read. .504
FELP8 – I ask my child to write cards or letters to family members.
.440
FELP1 – I take my child to the library or bookstore. .366
FELP35 – Compared to other children his/her age, my child is just as good or better at identifying the sounds of letters.
.890
FELPQ38 – Compared to other children his/her age, my child is just as good or better at spelling words.
.855
FELPQ34 – Compared to other children his/her age, my child is just as good or better at naming the letters of the alphabet.
.851
FELPQ37 – Compared to other children his/her age, my child is just as good or better at understanding and discussing a storybook that was read to him/her.
.841
FELP36 – Compared to other children his/her age, my child is just as good or better at reading new words.
.839
FELP33 – Compared to other children his/her age, my child is just as good or better at using and understanding words in conversation.
.791
FELPQ43 – I am confident that my child will continue education beyond high school.
.962
FELPQ42 – I am confident that my child will complete high school.
.951
FELPQ45 – I am confident that my child will have a steady job after finishing his/her schooling.
.948
FELPQ41 – I am confident that my child will succeed in school. .905
FELPQ44 – I am confident that my child will finish college. .872
FELPQ40 – I am confident that my child will receive a good education.
.731
FELPQ39 – I am confident that my child will have the motivation to complete schooling.
.668
Reliability Statistics
Factor Means, Std. Deviation, Cronbach’s Alpha, Item Correlation
FELP M(SD) α Item-total r
F1 – Skill Building (14 items)
3.85 (.83)
.931 .30-.83
F2 – Interactive Reading/ Enjoyment (18 items)
3.21
(.88)
.939 .16-.78
F3 –Expectations (7 items)
4.70 (.59)
.947 .52-.95
F4 – Child Skill (6 items)
3.68 (.94)
.938 .65-.81
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
1 F
EL
P1
2 F
EL
P2
6 F
EL
P6
8 F
EL
P8
9 F
EL
P9
10
FE
LP
10
11
FE
LP
11
13
FE
LP
13
14
FE
LP
14
15
FE
LP
15
16
FE
LP
16
17
FE
LP
17
22
FE
LP
22
23
FE
LP
23
25
FE
LP
25
26
FE
LP
26
27
FE
LP
27
30
FE
LP
30
t-va
lue
Item
Interactive Reading/Enjoyment Language
Spanish
English
Both
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3 F
EL
P3
4 F
EL
P4
5 F
EL
P5
7 F
EL
P7
12
FE
LP
12
18
FE
LP
18
19
FE
LP
19
20
FE
LP
20
21
FE
LP
21
24
FE
LP
24
28
FE
LP
28
29
FE
LP
29
31
FE
LP
31
32
FE
LP
32
t-va
lue
Item
Skill Building Language
Spanish
English
Both
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
6 F
EL
P6
33
FE
LP
33
34
FE
LP
34
35
FE
LP
35
36
FE
LP
36
37
FE
LP
37
38
FE
LP
38
t-va
lue
Item
Child Skill Language
Spanish
English
Both
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
6 F
EL
P6
39
FE
LP
39
40
FE
LP
40
41
FE
LP
41
42
FE
LP
42
43
FE
LP
43
44
FE
LP
44
45
FE
LP
45
t-va
lue
Item
Expectations Language
Spanish
English
Both
