Journal of Paramedical Sciences & Rehabilitation

Journal of Paramedical Sciences & Rehabilitation

Designing the Comprehensive Diagnostic Test of Dyslexia (CDTD) and Investigating its Validity and Reliability for Primary School Students of Isfahan in 2015-2016

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
kh Heidari
S Faramarzi
A Abedi
A Ghamarani
Department of Psychology and Education of Children With Special Needs, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
10.22038/jpsr.2019.30060.1771
Abstract
Purpose:
there is no standard reading test for elementary school grades (first to six) in Iran to early identify students with special problems in reading. Considering the large population of individuals with reading problems and the urgent need for rapid and accurate diagnosis, the present study aimed to designing the Comprehensive Diagnostic Test of Dyslexia (CDTD) and investigating its validity and reliability for primary school students.
Methods:
This was a cross-sectional instrument development study. The statistical population of the study included all primary school students with in all the six educational regions of Isfahan in the academic year of 2015-2016. The sample was selected by stratified random sampling in proportion to the population size. Accordingly, 600 students (300 girls and 300 boys) were selected from the six grades. To develop the Comprehensive Diagnostic Test of Dyslexia (CDTD), after reviewing the previous studies and the theoretical literature, books and existing tests, the most important components of dyslexia were extracted through thematic analysis and the early version of CDTD was developed. Content validity was investigated by Lawshe method and for convergent validity, the correlation between CDTD and reading and dyslexia test was estimated. The internal consistency was estimated by Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and the validity of the test was estimated by the test-retest method.
Results:
the minimum and maximum Content Validity Ratio (CVR) for CDTD were 0.33 and 1, respectively and the Content Validity Index (CVI) was 0.81. The correlation between CDTD and the reading and dyslexia test was .56 (p=0.004). There was a statistically significant difference between students with and without reading difficulties in CDTD (p=0.001). The internal consistency of CDTD was 0.75 and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) was .88.
Conclusion:
the results of the analysis revealed that the CDTD is properly valid and reliable. Therefore, this test can be used to develop the profiles, and finding the strengths, and weaknesses of students with dyslexia and it can also be used for educational and rehabilitation purposes.
Keywords
Psychometric properties
Dyslexia
Elementary school students
Subjects
  1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders .5th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2013.
  2. Sadock BJ, Sadock VA, Kaplan HI. Kaplan and Sadock's concise textbook of child and adolescent psychiatry. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2016.
  3. Sedaghati L, Foroughi R, Shafiei B, Maracy MR. Prevalence of dyslexia in first to fifth grade elementary students Isfahan, Iran. Bimonthly Audiology-Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2010; 19(1): 94-101.
  4. Lerner, J.W.‎ Johns, B. Learning Disabilities and Related Disabilities: Strategies for Success. New York: Wadsworth Publishing: 2014.
  5. Deaton MJ. Academic success of Appalachian adolescents: The impact of parental authority and familism [Thesis]. Untied State: Miami University; 2008.
  6. Glazzard J. The impact of dyslexia on pupils' self-esteem. Support for Learning 2010; 25(2): 63-9.
  7. Mirzakhani N, Kangarani-Farahani M, Rezaee M, Akbarzadeh A, Sadeghi E. Comparison of assertiveness skills and anxiety between students with learning disability and typical peers in elementary schools of Tehran. J Rehab Med 2016; 5(2): 209-217. [Persian]
  8. Pourabdol S, Sobhi-Gharamaleki N & Abbasi M. A comparison of academic procrastination and academic vitality in students with and without specific learning disorder. Journal of Learning Disabilities 2015; 4(3): 121-127.
  9. Carroll JM, Iles JE. An assessment of anxiety levels in dyslexic students in higher education. British journal of educational psychology 2006; 76(3):651-62. 
  10. Kaveh, M. Keramati, H. The impact of resilience fostering program on parenting stress, marital satisfaction and resiliency of children with learning disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities 2017;6(3): 143-149. [Persian]
  11. Nergård‐Nilssen T, Eklund K. Evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Norwegian screening test for dyslexia. Dyslexia. 2018; 24(3): 250-62.
  12. Meikaeilei, N. Ganji, M. Talebi-Joybari. A comparison of resiliency, marital satisfaction and mental health in parents of children with learning disabilities and normal children. Journal of Learning Disabilities 2012; 2(1): 120-137.
  13. Tabrizchi, N. Vahidi, Z. Comparing emotional regulation, mindfulness and psychological well- being in mothers of students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of  Learning Disabilities 2015; 4(4): 118-124. 
  14. Narimani, M, Ghaffari, M. The role of moral and social intelligence in predicting resiliency and quality of life in parents of children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities 2016; 5(2): 127-135.
  15. Jabari, S. Khademi, M. Preparation of diagnostic test for reading and reading comprehension for elementary students. Journal of Curriculum Research 2013; 3(2): 33-51.
  16. Shafiei B, Tavakol S, Alinia L, Maracy MR, et al. [Developing a screening inventory reading test (IRT) for the Isfahanian students of the first to fifth grade]. Audiology 2009; 17(2): 53-60. [Persian] 
  17. Hosaini M. Moradi A. Kormi-Nouri R. Hassani J. Parhoon H. Reliability and Validity of Reading and Dyslexia Test (NEMA). Cognitive in Advances 2016; 18(0): 22-34. [Persian]
  18. Azizian M, Abedi M. Construction and Standardization of Reading Level Diagnostic Test for Third Grade Primary School Children. IJPCP 2006; 11 (4): 379-387.
  19. Shirazi ST, Nili-Pour R. Developing and Standardization of a Diagnostic Reading Test. jrehab 2004; 5 (1 and 2): 7-11.
  20. Woodcock R, Mather N, Schrank FA. Woodcock-Johnson® III Diagnostic Reading Battery (WJ III® DRB). Academic Pres:  San-diego, 2010.
  21. Neale MD. The Neale analysis of reading ability. Windsor, England: NFER- Nelson; 1989.
  22. Kaufman AS. Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (KTEA-3). Bloomington, MN: NCS Pearson; 2014.
  23. Wechsler D. Wechsler Individual Achievement Test–III- Abbreviated. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation, Harcourt Brace & Co; 2001.
  24. Heidari KH. Constructing and Investigating the Reliability ad Validity of the Comprehensive Diagnostic Test of Dyslexia (CDTD) and further Comparing the Effect of Training based on CDTD and Davis method on the Reading Performance, Academic Resilience and Academic Achievement of the Third Grade Students with Dyslexia [Thesis]. Isfahan: Univ. of Isfahan; 2018. [Persian]
  25. Ramezani M, Akbari S. Initial Measurement Scale of Pre-School Children's Specific Dyslexia: A Preliminary Study. Tabriz, Iran: 6th International Congress on Child and Adolescent Psychiatry; 2013. [Persian]
  26. Cochran WG. Sampling techniques. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2007.
  27. Rief SF, Stern J. The dyslexia checklist: A practical reference for parents and teachers. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2010.
  28. Fawcett, AJ, Nicolson R, & Lee R. Ready to learn. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation; 2004.
  29. Hannell G. Dyslexia: Action plans for successful learning. Abingdon, United Kingdom: Routledge; 2004.
  30. Selikowitz M. Dyslexia and other learning difficulties. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012.
  31. Moll K, Göbel SM, Gooch D, Landerl K, Snowling MJ. Cognitive risk factors for specific learning disorder: processing speed, temporal processing, and working memory. Journal of learning Disabilities 2016; 49(3): 272-81.
  32. Maehler C, Schuchardt K. Working memory in children with specific learning disorders and/or attention deficits. Learning and Individual Differences 2016; 49(5): 341-7.
  33. Fawcett AJ, Nicolson RI, Dean P. Impaired performance of children with dyslexia on a range of cerebellar tasks. Annals of Dyslexia 1996; 46(1): 259-83.
  34. Lotfabadi H. Reducing reading impairment by early diagnosis of children at risk of reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology Studies 2003; 8(2): 3-17. [Persian]
  35. Karlsen B, & Gardner E. Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test (4th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Pearson; 1996.
  36. Ávila CRB, Capellini SA. Relation between oral and written language. In: Capellini SA, editor. Neuro-psycho-linguistic perspectives on dyslexia and other learning disabilities. New York: Nova Science Publisher; 2007.
  37. Mardani N, Elahi E, Khorshidi E, Ghaemi H, Jamali J. Comparison of Rhyme Detection Skills between 7-9 Years Age Children with Dyslexia and Normal Children. Journal of Paramedical Sciences & Rehabilitation 2014; 3(1): 27-32. [Persian]
  38. National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 2000.
  39. Khosrojavid M, Vafaie M A, Nilipoor R, Rasoolzadeye Tabatabaie K, et al. Early Reading Intervention: Adaptation of a Prevention and Remedial Tutoring Model and Preparation of a Ready-to-Use Classroom Teaching Package for Preschool to Third Grades JOEC 2008; 8(2) :157-167.
  40. Dastjerdi M, Soleymani Z. [Phonological awareness test]. Tehran: Research center in exceptional children publisher; 2002. [Persian]
  41. Mather N, Wendling BJ. Essentials of dyslexia assessment and intervention. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2012.
  42. Snowling, M., and Stackhouse, J., Dyslexia Speech and Language: A practitioner's Handbook, London: Whurr Publishers; 2006.
  43. Christo C, Davis JM, Brock SE. Identifying, assessing, and treating dyslexia at school (1th ed.). New York: Springer science & Business Media; 2009.
  44. Kormi-Nouri R, Moradi A. [Design study of reading and dyslexia in bilingual and monolingual children]. Tehran: Organization for Educational research and planning; 2006. [Persian]
  45. Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Perso Psychol 1975; 28(4): 563-75.
  46. Erdfelder E, Faul F, Buchner A. GPOWER: A general power analysis program. Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers 1996; 28(1): 1-11. 
  47. Price L. Psychometric methods: Theory into practice (Methodology in the social sciences). New York, NY: The Guilford Press; 2017.
  48. Polit DF, Beck CT, Owen SV. Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? appraisal and recommendations. Res Nurs Health 2007; 30(4): 459-67.
  49. Furr RM, & Bacharach VR Psychometrics: An Introduction, Los Angeles: Sage; 2007. 
  50. Mayhew MJ, Powell JH. The development of a brief self-report questionnaire to measure ‘recent’ rash impulsivity: a preliminary investigation of its validity and association with recent alcohol consumption. Addictive behaviors 2014; 39(11): 1597-605.
  51. Trippolini MA, Dijkstra PU, Geertzen JHB, Reneman MF. Measurement properties of the spinal function sort in patients with sub-acute whiplash-associated disorders. Journal of occupational rehabilitation 2015; 25(3): 527-36.
Journal of Paramedical Sciences & Rehabilitation
Volume 8, Issue 2
Summer 2019
Pages 17-28