The Loleva Oral and Written Language TestPsychometric Properties

  1. Peralbo, Manuel
  2. Mayor Cinca, María Ángeles
  3. Zubiauz de Pedro, Begoña
  4. Risso, Alicia
  5. Fernández Amado, María Luz
  6. Tuñas, Alejandro
Revista:
The Spanish Journal of Psychology

ISSN: 1138-7416

Año de publicación: 2015

Volumen: 18

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1017/SJP.2015.15 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: The Spanish Journal of Psychology

Resumen

LolEva, a computerized test for ages 3 to 8 years old, identifies issues in the development of skills that can lead to reading acquisition difficulties. Its structure captures two distinct areas: Phonological Awareness (PA, seven subtests: rhyme, identification-addition-omission of syllable and phoneme at the beginning and end of a word), and Initial Reading Competence (IRC, six subtests: reading uppercase and lowercase letters, simple words, complex words, and pseudowords, and word segmentation). With results collected in a sample of 341 children with the target ages and attending public or private schools, the alpha coefficient was .94 for PA, and .92 for IRC. Factor analysis indicated three factors are present (performance on PA and IRC, and word reading times), together explaining 75% of variance, providing evidence to support the construct validity of the test. On the other hand, analysis of variance showed significant differences for year-in-school variable for PA subscale, F(4, 336) = 191.385, p < .001, ?2p = .695, 1�ß = 1.0, as well as for IRC subscale, both in number of correct answers, which increased as schooling progressed: F(4, 336) = 197.897, p < .001, ?2p = .702, 1�ß = 1.0, and task completion time, which decreased as education progressed: F(4, 335) = 47.048, p < .001, ?2p = .360, 1�ß = 1.0. Also, PA repeated measures analysis revealed that was easier Identification than Addition and Omission , F(2, 672) = 31.639, p < .001, ?2p = .086, 1�ß = 1.0, syllable-related tasks than phoneme-related task, F(1, 336) = 229.000, p < .001, ?2p = .405, 1�ß = 1.0, and syllable or phoneme at the end of the word than at the beginning, F(1, 336) = 59.201, p < .001, ?2p = .150, 1�ß = 1.0. Moreover, all items were examined and indexes of difficulty and discrimination were obtained.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Adams M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: Bolt.
  • Alegría J. (2006). Por un enfoque psicolingüístico del aprendizaje de la lectura y sus dificultades –20 años después [Support for a psycholinguistic approach to reading acquisition and reading difficulties – 20 years later]. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 29, 93–111. http://dx.doi. org/10.1174/021037006775380957
  • Anthony J. L., Williams J. M., Durán L. K., Gillam S. L., Liang L., Aghara R., ... Landry S. H. (2011). Spanish phonological awareness: Dimensionality and sequence of development during the preschool and kindergarten years. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 857–876. http://dx.doi. org/10.1037/a0025024
  • Brady S. A., & Shankweiler D. R. (Eds.) (1991). Phonological processes in literacy. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Bryant P., & Bradley L. (1985). Childhood reading problems. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
  • Caravolas M., Lervåg A., Defior S., Málková G. S., & Hulme C. (2013). Different patterns, but equivalent predictors, of growth in reading in consistent and inconsistent orthographies. Psychological Science, 24, 1398–1407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797612473122
  • Cardinal R. N., & Aitken M. R. F. (2006). ANOVA for the behavioural sciences researcher. New Jersey, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Carrillo M. S., & Marín J. (1996). Desarrollo metafonológico y adquisición de la lectura: Un programa de entrenamiento [Metaphonological development and reading acquisition: A training program]. Madrid, Spain: CIDE.
  • Carroll J. M., Snowling M. J., Stevenson J., & Hulme C. (2003). The development of phonological awareness in preschool children. Developmental Psychology, 39, 913–923. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.39.5.913
  • Cuetos F. (2008). Psicología de la lectura [Psychology of reading] (7th Ed.). Madrid, Spain: Kluwer.
  • Cuetos F., Rodríguez B., Ruano E., & Arribas D. (2007). PROLEC-R: Batería de evaluación de los procesos lectores -revisada [Test battery for reading processes assessment -revised]. Madrid, Spain: TEA.
  • Defior S. (1996). Una clasificación de las tareas utilizadas en la evaluación de las habilidades fonológicas y algunas ideas para su mejora [A classification of tasks utilized in phonological skills assessment, and some ideas on how to improve them]. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 19, 49–63. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1174/02103709660560546
  • Defior S. (2008). ¿Cómo facilitar el aprendizaje inicial de la lectoescritura? Papel de las habilidades fonológicas [How to facilitate initial literacy acquisition? The role of phonological skills]. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 31, 333–345. http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1174/021037008785702983
  • Gillam R., & van Kleeck A. (1996). Phonological awareness training and short-term working memory: Clinical implications. Topics in Language Disorders, 17, 72–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00011363-199611000-00008
  • Howell D. C. (2013). Statistical methods for psychology (8th Ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
  • Jiménez J. E., & Ortiz M. R. (1995). Conciencia fonológica y aprendizaje de la lectura: Teoría, evaluación e intervención [Phonological awareness and reading acquisition: Theory, assessment and intervention]. Madrid, Spain: Síntesis.
  • Jiménez J. E., Antón L., Díaz A., Guzmán M. R., HernándezValle M. I., Ortiz M. R., … Muñetón M. A. (2007). SICOLE-R-Primaria: Manual de uso e instrucciones para el examinador [SICOLE-R-Basic: Manual and examiner instructions]. Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain: Ocide.
  • Kaiser H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ BF02291575
  • Kirk R. E. (2013). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences (4th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Leong C. K. (1991). From phonemic awareness to phonological processing to language access in children developing reading proficiency. In D. J. Sawyer & B. J. Fox (Eds.), Phonological awareness in reading: The evolution of current perspectives (pp. 217–254). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
  • Márquez J., & de la Osa P. (2003). Evaluación de la conciencia fonológica en el inicio lector [Assessing phonological awareness in initial reading]. Anuario de Psicología, 34, 357–370.
  • Mayor M. A., Fernández M. L., Tuñas A., Zubiauz B., & Durán M. (2012). La relación entre funciones ejecutivas y conciencia fonológica en Educación Primaria [The relationship between executive functions and phonological awareness in Primary School]. In L. Mata, F. Peixoto, J. Morgado, J. Castro, & V. Monteiro (Eds.), Educaçao, aprendizajem e desenvolvimento [Education, learning and development] (pp. 1792–1806). Lisbon, Portugal: ISPA.
  • Morais J. (1991). Phonological awareness: A bridge between language and literacy. In D. J. Sawyer & B. J. Fox (Eds.), Phonological awareness in reading. The evolution of current perspectives. Springer Series in Language and Communication (Vol. 28, pp. 31–71). New York, NY: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3010-6_2
  • Muñiz J. (1999). Psicometría [Psychometrics]. Madrid, Spain: Pirámide.
  • Peralbo M., Brenlla J. C., García M., Barca A., & Mayor M. A. (2012). Las funciones ejecutivas y su valor predictivo sobre el aprendizaje inicial de la lectura en educación primaria [The executive functions and their predictive value in initial reading acquisition during Primary School]. In L. Mata, F. Peixoto, J. Morgado, J. Castro, & V. Monteiro (Eds.), Educaçao, aprendizajem e desenvolvimento [Education, learning and development] (pp.76–90). Lisbon, Portugal: ISPA.
  • Pérez-Gil J. A., Chacón S., & Moreno R. (2000). Validez de constructo: El uso de análisis factorial exploratorio confirmatorio para obtener evidencias de validez [Construct validity: The use of exploratory-confirmatory factor analysis to collect evidence of validity]. Psicothema, 12, 442–440.
  • Stanovich K. E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Torgesen J. K., & Davis C. (1996). Individual difference variables that predict response to training in phonological awareness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 63, 1–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1996.0040
  • Toro J., Cervera M., & Urio C. (2000). EMLE-TALE 2000. Escalas Magallanes de Lectura y Escritura [Magallanes Reading and Writing Scales]. Baracaldo, Spain: Albor-COHS.
  • Treiman R. (1991). Phonological awareness and its roles in learning to read and spell. In D. J. Sawyer & B. J. Fox (Eds.), Phonological awareness in reading. The evolution of current perspective (pp. 159–189). New York, NY: Spinger-Verlag.
  • Wilson M. (2005). Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Zimmerman D. W. (2004). A note on preliminary tests of equality of variances. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 57, 173–181. http://dx.doi. org/10.1348/000711004849222
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet