Alouette‐R normative data for French‐speaking school‐aged children living in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Alouette-R (2005) by Lefavrais is one of the most widely used tools to assess reading skills in French. However, this instrument does not have normative data specific to the French-speaking population of Quebec, Canada. AIMS: The validity of an assessment being strongly compromised when using inappropriate norms, the first objective of this study was to establish local norms for the Alouette-R. The second objective was to provide sensitivity and specificity data for each Alouette-R measure in the French-speaking Quebec population. The third objective was to compare Quebec and French normative data and their sensitivity to better understand the applicability and effectiveness of the Alouette-R test at the regional level. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A total of 347 fluent readers and 48 children with dyslexia from 3rd to 6th grades were recruited from different regions in Quebec. Participants had to read aloud the 265-word text of the Alouette-R in a maximum of 3 min. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Norms (means, standard deviations and percentiles) by school grades were created for each test measure: reading time, number of words read, number of errors, number of words correctly read, reading accuracy index and reading fluency index. The sensitivity (i.e., the ability to correctly identify children with dyslexia) and specificity (i.e., the ability to correctly identify children without dyslexia) of these measurements were also documented. The norms and their sensitivity were then compared with those of the original French study by Lefavrais in 2005. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: The presence of differences between European and Quebec norms supports the importance of using local norms when assessing language skills. The reading accuracy and fluency indexes are the measurements that best discriminated children with dyslexia from those without a reading disorder in our study. This study will allow clinicians working in Quebec to have a better interpretation of the Alouette-R measurements and ultimately avoid erroneous conclusions resulting from the use of foreign normative data. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject The Alouette-R is a reading test validated and standardized in France to screen for dyslexia in children. The validity of existing norms with the Quebec population in Canada is questionable due to socio-linguistic differences with the population of France. What this study adds to existing knowledge This study provides for the first time normative and sensitivity/specificity data of the Alouette-R for French-speaking school-aged children living in Quebec. Differences were noted with the normative data from France, which supports the importance of using local normative data when administering reading tests in Quebec. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? When administering the Alouette-R, clinicians in Quebec will now be able to use normative data adapted to the local population, which will limit erroneous conclusions resulting from the use of foreign normative data. In addition, the sensitivity and specificity values reported in the article will allow these clinicians to better interpret their results when screening for a developmental reading disorder.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".