Re-examining educational risk prediction: The development of a parent screening inventory for children with learning difficulties at school entry

A parent screening instrument for learning difficulties (PSILD) was investigated clinically over three years with children referred for learning and behaviour problems. This established face validity for an instrument with eight sub-areas (i) SocioDemographic, (ii) Genetic, (iii) Pregnancy, (iv) Birth, (v) Early Illness, (vi) SpeechLanguage, (vii) Movement, (viii) Behaviour (Withdrawal - Social Competence, Anxiety-Depression, Conduct-Oppositional Disorder, Hyperactivity, Attention). To these were added the sub-areas of Early Education and Social Strength (resilience). PSILD was then trialled at school entry for usability, acceptability, cost effectiveness, and ease of administration by school personnel, in one private primary school, two state schools from low socio-economic areas, and a child health clinic. The clinic results showed a higher incidence of problems, providing further face validity. Usability, acceptability, cost effectiveness and ease of administration were seen to be satisfactory. Parent feedback led to deletions and modifications of the items and an A3 form was found to be quicker and easier to complete than an A4 form. A brief introductory letter to parents was also seen to help completion of the instrument. A computer-scored Feedback Sheet was constructed providing teachers with an overall risk level (1 - 9 scale; 1 =high risk; 9 =no risk) and sub-area risk levels (1 - 3 scale; risk, borderline, no risk). This laid the basis for the early identification of academic problems, besides remedial procedures and professional referrals.

PSILD, based on 305 items, was then completed by 422 parents and factor analysed by sub-area. The factors obtained were found to logically define the previously trialled PSILD sub-areas, providing construct validity. Items with a loading ofless than .3, were eliminated, reducing the total from 305 to 202 which enhanced content validity. Items were also eliminated which did not contribute to the Cronbach Alpha coefficient per sub-area. The resultant 170 items gave an average time of completion of 12.7 minutes. The overall Alpha coefficient (internal consistency) was .83 (.8295) (N = 215). Test-retest stability after a median period of 127 days was also .83 (.8329) (N = 81 ). Both these measures showed PSILD to have a high level of reliability.

Employing 215 children from six schools, a teacher instrument, the Pupil Rating Scale Revised (PRSR) and the Letter Identification Test (CLAY), given after nine months of schooling, were used as predictive instruments with PSILD and chronological age, against the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (Reading Sub-Test) (WIAT), given 21 months after school entry. PSILD was found to have a modest but significant correlation with WIAT (r = .34). When PSILD was reduced to five components (SUBPSILD) (Genetic, Pregnancy, Withdrawal, Early Education and parents' educational level), the level rose tor= .44. The PRSR and CLAY levels were .45 and .51 respectively. When SUBPSILD was combined with Auditory Comprehension and Memory (PRSRAUD), CLAY and age, multiple R reached .76 (variance 57 percent). Entering these components into a discriminant function analysis produced a hit rate of 91.2 percent and an odds ratio of 12.6 (12 < .0001). This result was superior to those of seven recent studies which also used multiple measures (Scarborough, 1998). SUBPSILD's level of prediction was shown to be equivalent to that of the teacher measure (PRSRAUD). A .25 correlation between the PSILD and PRSR behaviour subscales was similar to that of Achenbach et al. (1987) of .27 for 41 parent-teacher samples. This provided a potential basis for pervasive behavioural evaluation at nine months of schooling. Thus PSILD was shown to combine the roles of educational prediction with that of the early identification of academic and behavioural problems.