Screening domain is a significant moderator of validity: literacy-literacy correlations (r = .55) exceed language-literacy (r = .38) and mathematics/literacy-achievement (r = .27)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr?·q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? The domain of screening tools was the only statistically significant moderator in single moderator analyses (Wald F(1, 3.76) = 19.60, p = .013); literacy-literacy pairs pooled r = .55, language-literacy r = .38, mathematics/literacy-achievement r = .27. → Keles 2025
Evidence¶
Keles 2025¶
Keles, S., ten Braak, D., Hagen, Å. M., & Melby-Lervåg, M. (2025). Validity of Early-Grade Screening Tools in the Three Tier (RTI/MTSS) Model: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Literacy, Language, and Mathematics. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10077-5
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r?
Single moderator analyses (not meta-regression, due to insufficient eligible studies) with Wald tests. Table 2 reports literacy-literacy r = .55*** [.39,.67], language-literacy r = .38* [.14,.59], mathematics/literacy-achievement r = .27* [.21,.32]; assessment type, validity data type, publication type, and screening grade were non-significant.
"Most of the moderators (i.e., assessment type, publication type. validity data type, and grade at screening) did not show a statistically significant moderating effect. However, the domain of screening tools was identified as a statistically significant moderator."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- DIBELS is the most frequently used screening tool for tier assignment, and literacy is the most assessed domain — related
- Screening tools in the Three Tier model show a moderate pooled correlation with academic achievement outcomes (r = .51), with very high heterogeneity — related
- Very few studies (18 of 127) provide validity data for screening tools used in tier assignment, and none test whether screening itself improves achievement — related
- Sensitivity and specificity of Three Tier screening tools vary widely, and no studies report language-domain-only accuracy — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
domain-moderates-screening-validity |
title |
Screening domain is a significant moderator of validity: literacy-literacy correlations (r = .55) exceed language-literacy (r = .38) and mathematics/literacy-achievement (r = .27) |
description |
Screening domain is a significant moderator of validity: literacy-literacy correlations (r = .55) exceed language-literacy (r = .38) and mathematics/literacy-achievement (r = .27) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2025 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-21 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — keles-2025 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.