MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6907746019 · doi:10.25384/sage.c.6333959

Psychometric Properties of a Preschool Language, Literacy, and Behavior Screener

2022· other· en· W6907746019 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueSage Journals Data · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfirmatory factor analysisExploratory factor analysisPsychometricsConcurrent validityPredictive validityReliability (semiconductor)Item analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the psychometric properties of the Preschool Language, Literacy, and Behavior Screener (PLLB-S). We examined and tested the factor structure of the PLLB-S using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. We further conducted internal consistency, concurrent validity, and predictive validity analyses and evaluated teacher satisfaction using PLLB-S. Our factor analyses resulted in 22 items distributed among three subscales with high internal consistency: Oral language, emergent literacy, and behavior skills. The PLLB-S and its subscales correlated moderately to strongly with standardized measures. The emergent literacy of the PLLB-S was the only subscale that significantly predicted children’s later vocabulary knowledge. Preschool teachers reported high satisfaction with the content and purpose of the questionnaire. We concluded that this tool with sound psychometric properties can potentially help increase the feasibility and efficiency of implementing standardized assessments in MTSS frameworks in preschool classrooms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSage Journals DataFrench-language works237,207