FirstLine Screener for Dyscalculia

1
First-Line Screener for Dyscalculia

• Update on trials
• Autumn 2006

2
Background
3
Cognitive Model

• Conceptual
• understanding of number, place value
• Comparative
• relative size
• Verbal
• Symbolic
• Visual-Spatial

4
Operational

• Conceptual
• conception of correct operation to
• achieve required outcome
• reverse a process
• Inferential
• given an operational definition
• make comparative inferences about an outcome,
  without realising the outcome
• Infer an operational relationship

5

• Abstract Symbolic
• Spatial-Temporal
• Understanding
• Visual-Spatial diagrams
• Time
• Graphical
• Reading and Interpreting
• Graphs
• Tables

6
Cognitive Model for Dyscalculia
inferential
operational
abstract
conceptual
symbolic
number
conceptual
symbolic
tables
number
graphical
comparative
verbal
graphs
visual-spatial
Direction
Spatial-
Temporal
Time
7
Phase 1 Developing the Screening Tool

• Development of items
• Development of the model
• Available in both paper and electronic versions

8
Phase 2 Initial Trials

• Involved 19 participants
• Organised into three groups
• Dyscalculic Dyslexic Control
• Showed no difference between paper and electronic
  versions
• Showed good discrimination

9
Phase 3 Further Trials

• Involved 30 participants
• Organised into three equal groups
  Dyscalculic Dyslexic Control
• Showed good discrimination

10
Graph percentage scores on the subtest
O dyscalculic O dyslexic O control
percent
11
Phase 4 Further Trials

• 137 students
• Large groups/small groups/individuals
• 16 out of 137 identified at risk
• 8 prevalence
• Geary (2004) 5 - 8
• Desoete et al (2004) 3 - 8
• Butterworth (1999) 4 - 6
• Not post-16

12
Phase 5 Autumn 2006
13
Aims of the Trials

• Two distinct aims
• to collect data on the general population
• to collect data about individuals already
  identified as dyscalculic by EP/Assessor.

14
Large-Scale Trials

• Paper-based trials
• Whole classes of students (FE and HE)
• Paper-based and electronic-based versions shown
  to be identical in nature
• This data establishes the required percentiles
  for the population

15
Small-Scale Trials

• Dyscalculic students
• Extended to mathematical difficulties
• However other students involved (neurodiverse)
• Learning support tutors completed a sheet
  detailing the SpLD identified
• Small-Scale conducted one-to-one
• Electronic-based

16
Results
17
Large-Scale Trials

• 356 students in H.E. (80 in FE)
• Percentiles calculated
• 8th percentile corresponded to a score of 84
• 2nd percentile to a score of 70 on the screener
• low and very low thresholds, at risk of
  dyscalculia
• very low still gives a score unlikely to
  further reduce confidence
• history of very low mathematical self-esteem

18
Small-Scale Trials

• Involved 89 students
• 46 in H.E.
• 43 in F.E.
• H.E. and F.E. data treated separately

19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
HE
22
FE
23
Dyspraxia
24
Profiles
25
Profiler
26
A typical dyscalculia profile?
27
2 Dyscalculic Profiles

• Symbolic number comparison
• Inferential operations

• Graph
• Time

28
Thank you to the 23 institutions of HE and FE