بررسی ویژگی‏‌های روان‌سنجی و ساختار عاملی ابزار رشد اوایل زندگی با مدل راش (مورد مطالعه: کودکان پیش‌دبستانی (4-6 ساله) مشهد)

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار گروه سنجش و اندازه گیری، دانشکده روان‏شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران

2 کارشناسی ارشد سنجش و اندازه گیری، دانشکده روان‏شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران

3 کارشناسی ارشد روان‏شناسی بالینی، دانشکده روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه سمنان، ایران

4 دانشجوی دکتری سنجش و اندازه‏گیری، دانشکده روان‏شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران

10.22034/emes.2020.241950

چکیده

هدف از اجرای پژوهش حاضر، تعیین ویژگی‏‌های روان‌سنجی و ساختار عاملی ابزار رشد اوایل زندگی در کودکان پیش ‏دبستانی مشهد بود. روش پژوهش توصیفی از نوع پیمایشی مقطعی بود. نمونه‌ای به حجم 456 کودک (226 دختر و 230 پسر) از کودکان پیش‌دبستانی (4 تا 6 ساله) در سال تحصیلی 97-98 به روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی چندمرحله‌ای انتخاب و مربیان این افراد به گویه ‏های ابزار رشد اوایل زندگی پاسخ دادند. ابتدا با استفاده از نرم ‏افزار R تحلیل عاملی تأییدی اجرا شد. مدل پنج‌عاملی اولیه با داده ‏ها برازش کافی نداشت، بنابراین نمونه‏ به دو زیرنمونه‌ 228 نفری تقسیم شد. در زیرنمونه‏ اول، تحلیل عاملی اکتشافی اجرا شد و 2 گویه‏ از ابزار کنار گذاشته شد. در زیرنمونه‏ دوم، تحلیل عاملی تأییدی اجرا شد، مدل پنج‌عاملی حاصل از تحلیل عاملی اکتشافی با داده ‏ها برازش داشت. پارامترهای گویه‏ ها با استفاده از نظریه کلاسیک آزمون برآورد شد و تمامی خرده‌مقیاس‌ها از اعتبار مناسب برخوردار بودند. سپس برازش گویه‏ ها با مدل امتیاز پاره‏ای (PCM) بررسی شد. پس از حذف گویه ‏های نامناسب، اعتبار ابزار 97/0 و شاخص PSI 95/0 به دست آمد. بین میانگین دختران و پسران در تمامی خرده‌مقیاس‌ها تفاوت وجود داشت. کارکرد افتراقی گویه ‏ها نشان داد 26 گویه در بین گروه دختران و پسران از کارکرد افتراقی مناسب برخوردارند. درنهایت، ابزاری با 93 گویه با ویژگی ‏های روان‏سجی مطلوب برای کودکان پیش‌دبستانی تهیه شد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Examining the Psychometric Properties and the Factor Structure of “Early Development Instrument” in Preschool Children Aged 4 to 6 Years in Mashhad with Rasch Model

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohammad Asgari 1
  • Sara Mohammadpoor-Fadiheh 2
  • Javad Mohammadian 3
  • Abolfazl Ghadamei 4
چکیده [English]

The aim of this study was to determine the psychometric properties and factor structure of Early Development Instrument (EDI) in preschool children in Mashhad. The research method was descriptive cross-sectional survey. A sample of 456 children (226 girls and 230 boys) of preschool children (4 to 6 years old) in the academic year 2018-19 was selected by multi-stage random sampling method and their educators responded to the items of EDI. First, confirmatory factor analysis was performed using R software. The initial 5-factor model did not fit well enough with the data, so the whole sample was divided into two subsets of 228 people. Exploratory factor analysis was performed on the first subset and two items were excluded from the instrument. Then, confirmatory factor analysis was performed on the second subset, and the 5-factor model from exploratory factor analysis fit the data. Then, the parameters of the items were estimated by the Classical Test Theory, and all subscales had good reliability. Then, the fit of the items was estimated using the Partial Credit Model (PCM). After removing the inappropriate items, the reliability of the instrument was 0.97 and the PSI index was 0.95. There was also a difference between the average of girls and boys on all subscales. Also, the Differential Item Functioning (DIF) showed that 26 items have a differential function among girls and boys. Finally, a 93-item instrument with desirable psychometric properties has been developed for preschool children.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Early Development Instrument (EDI)
  • Partial Credit Model
  • Psychometric properties
  • factor structure
  • Preschool Children
Andrich, D., & Styles, I. (2004). Final Report on the Psychometric Analysis of the Early Development Instrument EDI) Using the Rasch Model: A Technical Paper Commissioned for the Development of the Australian Early Development Instrument (AEDI). Murdoch University. i-62.
Augustyniak, K. M., Cook‐Cottone, C. P., & Calabrese, N. (2004). The predictive validity of the Phelps kindergarten readiness scale. Psychology in the Schools, 41(5), 509-516.
Bear, G. G., & Modlin, P. D. (1987). Gesell's developmental testing: What purpose does it serve?. Psychology in the Schools, 24(1), 40-44.
Brigance, A. (1992). Brigance Diagnostic Inventory of Early Development-Revised. North Billerica, MA: Curriculum Associates.
Buntaine, R. L., & Costenbader, V. K. (1997). The effectiveness of a transitional prekindergarten program on later academic achievement. Psychology in the Schools, 34(1), 41-50.
Chew, A. L., & Lang, W. S. (1990). Predicting academic achievement in kindergarten and first grade from prekindergarten scores on the Lollipop Test and DIAL. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 50(2), 431-437.
Chew, A. L., & Morris, J. D. (1989). Predicting later academic achievement from kindergarten scores on the Metropolitan Readiness Tests and the Lollipop Test. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 49(2), 461-465.
Davies, S., Janus, M., Duku, E., & Gaskin, A. (2016). Using the Early Development Instrument to examine cognitive and non-cognitive school readiness and elementary student achievement. Early Childhood Research Quarterly35, 63-75.
Doherty, G. (1997). Zero to six: The basis for school readiness. Human Resources Development Canada, Strategic Policy, Applied Research Branch.
Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1981). PPVT: Peabody picture vocabulary test-revised: manual for forms L and M. American Guidance Service.
Duncan, J., & Rafter, E. M. (2005). Concurrent and predictive validity of the Phelps Kindergarten Readiness Scale‐II. Psychology in the Schools, 42(4), 355-359.
Graue, M. E., & Shepard, L. A. (1989). Predictive validity of the Gesell School Readiness Tests. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 4(3), 303-315.
Hagquist, C., & Andrich, D. (2004). Is the sense of coherence-instrument applicable on adolescents? A latent trait analysis using Rasch-modelling. Personality & Individual Differences, 36(4), 955-968.
Hagquist, C., & Hellström, L. (2014). The psychometric properties of the Early Development Instrument: a Rasch analysis based on Swedish pilot data. Social Indicators Research, 117(1), 301-317.
Janus, M., Brinkman, S. A., & Duku, E. K. (2011). Validity and psychometric properties of the early development instrument in Canada, Australia, United States, and Jamaica. Social Indicators Research, 103(2), 283.
Janus, M., & Offord, D. R. (2007). Development and psychometric properties of the Early Development Instrument (EDI): A measure of children's school readiness. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 39(1), 1-68.
Janus, M. (2007). The Early Development Instrument: A tool for monitoring children’s development and readiness for school. In M.E.Young (Ed.), Early Child Development - From Measurement to Action.  A Priority for Growth and Equity (pp. 141-155). Washington, DC: World Bank.
Janus, M., & Reid-Westoby, C. (2016). Monitoring the development of all children: the Early Development Instrument. Early Childhood Matters, 125(1), 40-45.
Kagan, S. L. (1992). Readiness past, present, and future: Shaping the agenda. Young Children, 48(1), 48-53.
Lichtenstein, R. (1990). Psychometric characteristics and appropriate use of the Gesell School Readiness Screening Test. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 5(3), 359-378.
Linacre, J. M. (2009). A User’s guide to Winsteps-ministep: Rasch-model computer programs. Program Manual 3.68. 0. Chicago, IL.
Love, J., Aber, J. L., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (1994). Strategies for assessing community progress toward achieving the first national education goal. Mathematica Policy Research.
Mardell-Czudnowski, C., & Goldenberg, D. (1998). DIAL-3: Developmental Indicators for the assessment of Learning. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Pianta, R. C., & Cox, M. J. (2000). Teachers’ judgments of problems in the transition to kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15(2), 147-166.
Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. National Academy Press.
Woolfson, L. M., McNicol, S., & Booth, J. (2012). Scottish Early Development Instrument Phase 2 Technical Report September 2012. School of Psychological Sciences and Health. University of Strathclyde. http://www.scphrp.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/EDI-study-final-technical-report-1.pdf
Zill, N., Resnick, G., Kim, K., McKey, R. H., Clark, C., Pai-Samant, S., ... & D'Elio, M. A. (2001). Head Start FACES: Longitudinal Findings on Program Performance. Third Progress Report. Washington, DC: Administration on Children, Youth and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human.