Search

The use of brief dyslexia rating scales is increasing given current dyslexia legislation efforts across the United States. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the historical context of the use of brief dyslexia rating scales, strengths, and limitations of using these measures, criteria for selecting these measures, and a review of three commonly used brief dyslexia rating scales in the United States. A discussion of how brief dyslexia rating scales can be used in conjunction with other forms of assessment is also provided. Implications for practice on using brief dyslexia rating scales are addressed in the context of both assessment and intervention. Practitioner points: Dyslexia screeners are intended to identify students who are at risk of not meeting reading performance standards and consist of both performance‐based measures and brief dyslexia rating scales.Caution should be taken when using brief dyslexia rating scale screeners due to low sample sizes for certain populations, limited numbers of students with dyslexia in the standardization sample of some measures, and variable specificity and sensitivity levels.Practitioners are encouraged to utilize performance‐based screeners if scores on a brief dyslexia rating scale screener fall below a cut score. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Validity of performance standards is a key element for the defensibility of standard setting results, and validating performance standards requires collecting multiple pieces of evidence at every step during the standard setting process. This study employs a statistical procedure, latent class analysis, to set performance standards and compares latent class analysis results with previously established performance standards via the modified‐Angoff method for cross‐validation. The context of the study is an operational large‐scale science assessment administered in one of the southern states in the United States. Results show that the number of classes that emerged in the latent class analysis concurs with the number of existing performance levels. In addition, there is a substantial level of agreement between latent class analysis results and modified‐Angoff method in terms of classifying students into the same performance levels. Overall, the findings establish evidence for the validity of the performance standards identified via the modified‐Angoff method. Practical implications of the study findings are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]