Getting More From Your Maze: Examining Differences in Distractors

The present study examined the technical adequacy of maze-selection tasks constructed in 2 different ways: typical versus novel. We selected distractors for each measure systematically based on rules related to the content of the passage and the part of speech of the correct choice. Participants included 262 middle school students who were randomly assigned to 1 of the 2 maze formats. Scoring of the maze included both correct and correct-minus-incorrect scores. Students completed 3 criterion-reading tests: the Scholastic Reading Inventory, the AIMSweb R-Maze, and a high-stakes state assessment (the Missouri Assessment Program). Alternate-forms reliability was similar across maze formats; however, with regard to scoring procedure, reliability coefficients were consistently higher for correct than for correct-minus-incorrect scores. Validity coefficients were also similar across format with 1 exception: The coefficients for typical maze scores were stronger when compared with the Missouri Assessment Program scores than the coefficients for novel maze scores

Comparing Two CBM Maze Selection Tools: Considering Scoring and Interpretive Metrics for Universal Screening

Advances in maze selection curriculum-based measurement (CBM) have led to several published tools with technical information for interpretation (e.g., norms, benchmarks, cut-scores, classification accuracy) that have increased their usefulness for universal screening. A range of scoring practices have emerged for evaluating student performance on maze selection (e.g., correct restoration, incorrect restoration, correct restoration minus incorrect restoration, and correct restoration minus one-half incorrect restoration). However, lack of clear understanding about the intersection between scoring and interpretation has resulted in limited evidence about using maze selection for making universal screening decisions. In this study, 925 students in Grades 3-6 completed two CBMs for maze selection. Student performance on the two was compared across different scoring metrics. Limitations and practical implications are discussed

Quantitative Interaction Proteomics of Neurodegenerative Disease Proteins

Several proteins have been linked to neurodegenerative disorders (NDDs), but their molecular function is not completely understood. Here, we used quantitative interaction proteomics to identify binding partners of Amyloid beta precursor protein (APP) and Presenilin-1 (PSEN1) for Alzheimer's disease (AD), Huntingtin (HTT) for Huntington's disease, Parkin (PARK2) for Parkinson's disease, and Ataxin-1 (ATXN1) for spinocerebellar ataxia type 1. Our network reveals common signatures of protein degradation and misfolding and recapitulates known biology. Toxicity modifier screens and comparison to genome-wide association studies show that interaction partners are significantly linked to disease phenotypes in vivo. Direct comparison of wild-type proteins and disease-associated variants identified binders involved in pathogenesis, highlighting the value of differential interactome mapping. Finally, we show that the mitochondrial protein LRPPRC interacts preferentially with an early-onset AD variant of APP. This interaction appears to induce mitochondrial dysfunction, which is an early phenotype of AD.Peer reviewe

Statement Verification for Science: Theory and Examining Technical Adequacy of Alternate Forms

While curriculum-based measurement (CBM) tools for screening decisions in reading, mathematics, and written language have been well examined, tools for use in content areas (e.g., science and social studies) remain in the beginning stages of research. In this study, two alternate forms of a new CBM tool (Statement Verification for Science; SV-S), for screening decisions regarding students’ science content knowledge, is examined for technical adequacy. A total of 1,545 students across Grades 7 (N = 799) and 8 (N = 746) completed two alternate forms of SV-S concurrently with a statewide high-stakes test of accountability. Promising results were found for reliability, in particular internal consistency, while results related to evidence of criterion- and construct-related validity were less than desired. Such results, along with additional exploratory analyses, provide support for future research of SV-S as a CBM tool to assist teachers and other educators with making screening decisions

Penelitian pendidikan merancang dan melaksanakan penelitian pada bidang pendidikan

544 hlm.; 25 cm

The Importance of Replication in Measurement Research: Using Curriculum-Based Measures with Postsecondary Students with Developmental Disabilities

Replication is a foundation of the development of a knowledge base in an evidence-based field such as education. This study includes two direct replications of Hosp, Hensley, Huddle, and Ford which found evidence of criterion-related validity of curriculum-based measurement (CBM) for reading and mathematics with postsecondary students with developmental disabilities (DD). Participants included two cohorts of postsecondary students with DD enrolled in a 2-year certificate program at a large Midwestern university (n = 24 and 21). Using the same standardized procedures as Hosp et al., participants were administered CBMs for Oral Passage Reading (OPR), Maze, Math Computation, and Math Concepts and Applications. Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations between CBMs and the content-appropriate Woodcock–Johnson Tests of Achievement–Third Edition were calculated. No significant differences in criterion-related validity coefficients between cohorts were found but differences between the correlations for Math Computation and Math Concepts and Applications identified in Hosp et al. were not found in either replication cohort