Software for assessment and monitoring the decoding skills development of children from the elementary school: validity based on response process.
Aparecido José Couto Soares, Débora Maria Befi-Lopes
PMID 39292019WHAT IT FOUND
PRADE decoding profiles from 250 elementary school children showed private-school children scored higher on words and non-words, and performance stabilized from third school year.
Key findings
01In the first school year, a greater number of private-school children were able to effectively decode words and non-words than public-school participants.
02Private-school children showed higher correct answer percentages and decoding accuracy than public-school children across school years and word lengths.
03Decoding time and correct answer percentage became more similar from the third school year onward, while longer stimuli strongly affected performance, especially non-words.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The current paper reports only the response-process stage of validation. Earlier validation steps are referenced as published elsewhere and are not shown here. The children were screened to exclude hearing, visual, neurological, cognitive, retention, phonological and oral language problems, so the results do not show how the software performs in children already suspected of disorders. The sample came only from first to fifth grade children in public and private schools in one Brazilian context, and the authors say further research in different regions is needed. For decoding time, children who did not correctly decode any stimulus were excluded, so the time findings may not represent the weakest performers. The paper reports assessment performance, not the effect of an intervention.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the private-school advantage as proof that PRADE diagnoses reading disorders. The children were screened to exclude hearing, vision, neurological, cognitive, retention and phonological or oral language problems, and the study only examined response-process validity.