Simulation evidence cited in the article indicates PSW methods have consistently low positive predictive values despite high negative predictive values¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The article reports, citing Stuebing et al. (2012), that across three PSW operationalizations, identification rates were very low and PPVs were consistently low. → Miciak Jeremy 2016

Evidence¶

Miciak Jeremy 2016¶

Miciak Jeremy, Williams Jacob L., Taylor W. Pat, Cirino Paul T., Fletcher Jack M., Vaughn Sharon. (2016). Do Processing Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses Predict Differential Treatment Response? Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(6), 898-909. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000096

q2 · i? · associational · r2

The article narrates a prior simulation study by Stuebing et al. (2012) that generated case-level values from latent variables; the review attributes to it that "identification rates were very low" and "PPVs were consistently low". No effect size is printed.

"identification rates were very low, resulting in high overall agreement and high NPV. However, PPVs were consistently low, suggesting that even if a PSW profile was educationally meaningful, it could not be reliably identified at the level of observation."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Simulations indicate PSW cognitive assessment would improve classification of response by only about 5-10 students per 1,000 in the best case — related
• The XBA and C/DM PSW methods show chance-level agreement (kappa = -.10) in identifying LD among fourth graders with reading comprehension deficits — related
• A few XBA inclusionary criteria modestly predict word reading only, with very small eta squared values (η2 range .008 to .018) — related