Cross-regional validation of the school version of the assessment of motor and process skills

American Journal of Occupational Therapy

Volumn 64, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 768-775

  Munkholm, Michaela ^a   Berg, Brett ^b   Löfgren, Britta ^a   Fisher, Anne G ^a  

^a UMEÅ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b AMPS Project International   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHILD; EDUCATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY; SCHOOL; STUDENT; TASK PERFORMANCE; VALIDATION STUDY;

CHILD; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MOTOR SKILLS; OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY; SCHOOLS; STUDENTS; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS;

EID: 78149290649     PISSN: 02729490     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5014/ajot.2010.09041     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Atchison, B. T., Fisher, A. G., & Bryze, K. (1998). Rater reliability and internal scale and person response validity of the School Assessment of Motor and Process Skills. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 52, 843-850.
2. Boomsma, A., van Duijn, M. A. J., & Snijders, T. A. B. (Eds.). (2001). Essays on item response theory. New York: SpringerVerlag.
3. Conrad, K. J., Dennis, M. L., Bezruczko, N., Funk, R. R., & Riley, B. B. (2007). Substance use disorder symptoms: Evidence of differential item functioning by age. Journal of Applied Measurement, 8, 373-387.
4. Downing, S. M. (2003). Validity: On the meaningful interpretation of assessment data. Medical Education, 37, 830-837. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2003. 01594.x
5. Draba, R. E. (1977). The identification and interpretation of item bias. MESA Memorandum No. 25. Retrieved April 8, 2010, from www.rasch.org/memo25.htm
6. Fisher, A. G. (1993). The assessment of IADL motor skills: An application of many-faceted Rasch analysis. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 47, 319-329.
7. Fisher, A. G. (2006). Performance skills: Definitions and evaluadon in the context of the Occupational Therapy Practice Framework. In H. Pendleton & W. Schultz-Krohn (Eds.), Pedretti's occupational therapy: Practice skills for physical dysfunction (6th ed., pp. 372-402). St. Louis, MO: Mosby.
8. Fisher, A. G., Bryze, K., & Atchison, B. T. (2000). Naturalistic assessment of functional performance in school-settings: Reliability and validity of the School AMPS scales. Journal of Outcome Measurement, 4, 491-512.
9. Fisher, A. G., Bryze, K., Hume, V., & Griswold, L. A. (2007). School AMPS: School Version of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (2nd ed.). Fort Collins, CO: Three Star Press.
10. Fisher, A. G., & Duran, G. A. (2004). Schoolwork task performance of students at risk of delays. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 11, 191-198. doi:10.1080/ 11038120410003664
11. Heward, W. L. (2000). Exceptional children: An introduction to special education (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
12. Linacre, J. M. (1993). Many-faceted Rasch measurement (2nd ed.). Chicago: MESA Press.
13. Linacre, J. M. (1994). Sample size and item calibration (or person measure) stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 7, 328.
14. Linacre, J. M. (2009). FACETS: Rasch measurement computer program (Version 3.65.0) [Computer software]. Chicago: Winsteps.com.
15. Munkholm, M., & Fisher, A. G. (2008). Differences in schoolwork performance between typically-developing students and students with mild disabilities. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 28, 121-132. doi:10.3928/ 15394492-20080601-06
16. Norman, G. R., Sloan, J. A., & Wyrwich, K. W. (2003). Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: The remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Medical Care, 41, 582-592. doi: 10.1097/00005650- 20030500000004
17. Pae, T., & Park, G. P. (2006). Examining the relationship between differential item functioning and differential test functioning. Language Testing, 23, 475-496. doi: 10.1191/02655322061t338oa (Pubitemid 44680208)
18. Perrone, M. (2006). Differential item functioning and item bias: Critical considerations in test fairness. Teachers College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL and Applied Linguistics, 6, 1-3.
19. Tennant, A., & Pallant, J. F. (2007). DIF matters: A practical approach to test if differential item functioning makes a difference. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 20, 1082-1084.
20. Three Star Press. (2005). School AMPS 2005 computer-scoring software. Fort Collins, CO: Author.
21. Tristan, A. (2006). An adjustment for sample size in DIF analysis. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 20, 1070-1071.
22. Wilson, M. (2005). Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23. Wright, B., & Stone, M. (1979). Best test design: Rasch measurement. Chicago: MESA Press.
24. Wright, B., & Stone, M. (1999). Measurement essentials (2nd ed.). Wilmington, DE: Wide Range.
25. Zumbo, B. D. (1999). A handbook on the theory and methods of differential item functioning (DIF): Logistic regression modeling as a unitary framework for binary and Likert-type (ordinal) item scores. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defense.