Hi
Thanks for this. However, I'm more interested in the software's ability
to screen for dyslexia - not carry out an assessment. In other words,
it should act as a replacement for a dyslexia checklist or even the
Bangor or DAST tests. Studyscan was marketed, not as a screening test,
but as a full dyslexia assessment and has never had any credibility in
that regard as far as I'm aware. The same applied to original version of
Instines.
Regards
Peter
David Grant wrote:
> An interesting question - but I would suggest it's too early to draw any
> significant conclusions although some key points for comparison can be
> identified.
>
>
> There is no doubt that computerised assessment/diagnosis will make a
> meaningful contribution in time, but, in my opinion, we are not there yet.
> It is the responsibility of test constructors to demonstrate that their
> products are both reliable and valid, otherwise there is a high risk of
> inconsistency and misleading diagnoses.
>
>
> Andi Sanderson's evaluation of StudyScan [Dyslexia, 2000, vol. 6, pps
> 284-290] should be read by anyone who is thinking of purchasing this
> software. Anderson concludes that "...more work needs to be undertaken if
> StudyScan and QuickScan are to be used with confidence." [This was two
> years ago.]
>
>
> One of the issues addressed by Anderson, and picked up by Philip Teares
> [[author of Instines] in the following issue of Dyslexia, is that of the
> time it takes to work through StudyScan [can be hours], plus the volume of
> paperwork [i.e. the printout]. Students I've seen have who have used
> StudyScan have made exactly the same point and I heard recently about one
> Irish university which has stopped using StudyScan.
>
>
> An important point made by Philip Teares is the need to have age-related
> norms. If these are not provided I would not go anywhere near the test.
> For example, a score of 37 on the WAIS Symbol Search subtest would result in
> an average score for an 18-year-old student but a score more than one
> standard deviation higher for a 58-year-old student [I see quite a few
> mature students.]
>
>
> Until a publisher of a test can offer evidence on test-retest reliablity,
> clinical data, and age-related norms, I would advise that the use of any
> computerised form be treated for what it is: a product in development.
>
>
> It would also be helpful if developers could bear in mind the issue of
> students with English as a second language [a real issue for many
> universities. For example, I believe that about 30% of South Bank
> University studensts have ESL], plus the severely dyslexic.
>
> David
>
> David Grant, PhD., Chartered Psychologist
> dyslexia diagnosis - a specialist service for students
> 3 Rosebank Road
> Hanwell
> London W7 2EW
>
> Tel: 020 8579 1902
>
> e-mail: [log in to unmask]
>
> ----------
>
>>From: Peter Hill <[log in to unmask]>
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Computerised dyslexia screening
>>Date: Mon, Dec 9, 2002, 6:17 pm
>>
>>
>
>>Hi
>>
>>I asked the following on another forum recently - but the response was
>>alittle muted. So... (apologies to those who received it elsewhere)...
>>
>>I wonder if anyone has had the opportunity to compare up-to-date
>>versions of computerised adult dyslexia screening tests such as
>>Quickscan, Instines and LADS.
>>
>>Any info gratefully received.
>>
>>Regards
>>
>>Peter Hill
>>
>>--
>>01527 500324
>>[log in to unmask]
>>www.study-pro.com
>>
>>Dyslexia Consultancy and Resources
>>
>
>
>
--
01527 500324
[log in to unmask]
www.study-pro.com
Dyslexia Consultancy and Resources
|