| MOT 4-6 |
Test theoretical based test construction. Discriminates between typically developing and children with disabilities. No differences of total score for boys and girls. Enhancement correlates with age |
Item analysis (n=2000) |
Concurrent validity with KTK for 5-6 y olds: 0.78 (n = 181) after correction for age r = 0.68 |
Refers to a norm |
| Movement-ABC |
|
NR |
Concurrent validity with BOTMP r =
-0.53 and with KTK r = 0.62 |
Refers to a normChecklist refers to a criterion |
| PDMS 2 |
Scores correlate with age (ranging from 0.80 - 0.93). Group differentiation: Comparison of standard mean scores shows differences as one would expect. Confirmatory factor analysis ranging from low correlation 0.29 (grasping- sub items) to high correlation 0.89 (Gross Motor - Locomotion). Item validity supported by discriminating powers of TGDM-2 |
PDMS-2 1) Description of the rational that underlies test item selection2) Conventional item analysis of items by Item Response Theory
3) Differential functioning analysis4) Item discrimination coefficients reported |
Criterion predictionPDMS2 - PDMS: GMQ: r = 0.84, FMQ: r = 0.91PDMS-2 and MSEL: > 0.80 for GMQ and FMQ, 0.73 - 0.83 for TMQWith the Mullen r = 0.86 (GM), r = 0.80 (FM) |
Refers to a criterion and a norm |
| KTK |
Construct validity proven by examining following assumptions: - absence of socio-cultural difference (urban and rural children) - gender differentiation in item normative data incorporated - differentiation for disadvantaged children (brain disorder, behavioral problems, mute)enhancement correlates with age |
Factor analyses showed that the test evaluated dynamic body coordination and body control (dynamic balance) |
|
Refers to a norm |
| TGMD-2 |
Ulrich addressed construct validity of TGDM-2 by examining five key assumptions- correlation with chronological age- differentiation between groups of individuals of average, below and above- items correlate highly with Total score of subtests- subtest composites correlate with each other- factor analysis: goodness of fit indexes ranging from 0.90 to 0.96 |
Three content experts judged whether skills selected are frequently taught in preschool and early elementary |
Partial correlations:TGDM-2 and CSSA subtests: subtest Basic motor Generalization: 0.63 for Locomotion and 0.41 for Object ControlCorrelation between Composite and the CSSA subtest was 0.63 |
Refers to a criterion and a norm |
| MMT |
|
Expert validity by a school doctor’s judgment |
AUC: range 0.80 - 0.87, ROC curves, cut-off points for sensitivity and specificity |
Refers to a criterion and a norm |
| BOT-2 |
r = 0.78 (0.56 - 0.86) (test scores / chronological age)Discriminative validity with scores varying by whether children were developing typically or had varying grades of developmental difficulty |
Theoretical and empirical sources of evidence include: test content, item fit and clinical groups. |
BOTMP - BOT-2: Moderate to strong correlations for subtest and composite scores (0.45 - 0.73) ; high correlation for TMC and BC 0.80. PDMS-2 - BOT-2:TMC and TMQ strongly correlate (0.73); subtest and composite correlations are moderate to high (0.35 - 0.75). TVMS-R - BOT-2: correlation of Fine Motor Integration subtest is strong 0.74 |
Refers to a normGoal directed activities |
