Dap Scoring Manual

Return to site

Dap Scoring Manual

See Full List On Aasm.org
Dap Scoring Manual Software

General Information on the Measure
Purpose of the measureThe DAP assesses young people's strengths, supports, and other noncognitive factors critical for success in life. The DAP can be used to plan positive youth development programs or to identify areas in need of strengthening.
Main constructs measuredIntrapersonal competencies; Interpersonal competencies
Applicable grade levelsAges 8-18
Publication year for the most recent versionNo information is available in the references reviewed.
Year originally developed2004
Related measures
Measure Administration
RespondentStudent
Method of administrationPaper/Pencil, Digital
Number of items58
Item formatFour-point Likert-type scale
Administration time10 minutes
Available languagesEnglish, Spanish, and other languages including Albanian, Arabic, Armenian, Chinese, French, Japanese, Nepali, Portuguese, and Tagalog
Fee for useFee charged by developer
Credentials required for administrationNone
Scoring
Overall score reportingA total DAP score is reported.
Subscore reportingEight subscores are reported:
Support
Empowerment
Boundaries and expectations
Constructive use of time
Commitment to learning
Positive values
Social competence
Positive identity
Scores are also provided by family, school, community, social, and personal contexts.
Scoring proceduresAn online scoring service is provided by the assessment developers.
Interpretive informationScore reports include narrative information on areas of strength and growth, and they identify asset levels as challenged, vulnerable, adequate, or thriving.
Evidence of Technical Quality
Populations for which technical quality evidence has been collectedEvidence was collected from two samples: 6th-12th grade students in Minnesota (N=13,00), and 6th-8th grade students in Oregon (N=1,110). Additional pilot-testing has occurred with international populations to validate contextualized and translated measures.
Reliability evidenceInternal consistency estimates averaged 0.81 for the eight asset category scales and 0.88 for the five context scales. Overall DAP score had an internal consistency of 0.97. 
Test-retest reliability was estimated over a two-week interval, and averaged 0.79 for the eight asset categories. Overall DAP score had a test-retest reliability of 0.87. (Search institute, 2016).
Validity evidence Evidence based on contentNo information available in the references reviewed. Evidence based on response processesNo information available in the references reviewed. Evidence based on internal structureNo information available in the references reviewed. Evidence based on relations with other variablesDAP scores showed significant correlations in the expected direction with scores from the Attitudes and Behaviors survey (Search Institute, 2016b), which measures similar constructs. (Search Institute, 2016a).
Locating the Measure
Obtaining a copy of the measuresearch-institute.org
References
Search Institute, 'Developmental assets profile: User manual,' Minneapolis, MN, 2016a.
Search Institute, 'User Guide for the Attitudes and Behaviors Survey,' Minneapolis, MN, 2016b.
Notes
This measure is also reviewed in the AWG Guide.
Windows 10 gigaware usb to serial driver. Measure summary updated October 3, 2018.
See Full List On Aasm.org

General Information on the Measure
Purpose of the measure	The DAP assesses young people's strengths, supports, and other noncognitive factors critical for success in life. The DAP can be used to plan positive youth development programs or to identify areas in need of strengthening.
Main constructs measured	Intrapersonal competencies; Interpersonal competencies
Applicable grade levels	Ages 8-18
Publication year for the most recent version	No information is available in the references reviewed.
Year originally developed	2004
Related measures
Measure Administration
Respondent	Student
Method of administration	Paper/Pencil, Digital
Number of items	58
Item format	Four-point Likert-type scale
Administration time	10 minutes
Available languages	English, Spanish, and other languages including Albanian, Arabic, Armenian, Chinese, French, Japanese, Nepali, Portuguese, and Tagalog
Fee for use	Fee charged by developer
Credentials required for administration	None
Scoring
Overall score reporting	A total DAP score is reported.
Subscore reporting	Eight subscores are reported: Support Empowerment Boundaries and expectations Constructive use of time Commitment to learning Positive values Social competence Positive identity Scores are also provided by family, school, community, social, and personal contexts.
Scoring procedures	An online scoring service is provided by the assessment developers.
Interpretive information	Score reports include narrative information on areas of strength and growth, and they identify asset levels as challenged, vulnerable, adequate, or thriving.
Evidence of Technical Quality
Populations for which technical quality evidence has been collected	Evidence was collected from two samples: 6th-12th grade students in Minnesota (N=13,00), and 6th-8th grade students in Oregon (N=1,110). Additional pilot-testing has occurred with international populations to validate contextualized and translated measures.
Reliability evidence	Internal consistency estimates averaged 0.81 for the eight asset category scales and 0.88 for the five context scales. Overall DAP score had an internal consistency of 0.97. Test-retest reliability was estimated over a two-week interval, and averaged 0.79 for the eight asset categories. Overall DAP score had a test-retest reliability of 0.87. (Search institute, 2016).
Validity evidence	Evidence based on content No information available in the references reviewed. Evidence based on response processes No information available in the references reviewed. Evidence based on internal structure No information available in the references reviewed. Evidence based on relations with other variables DAP scores showed significant correlations in the expected direction with scores from the Attitudes and Behaviors survey (Search Institute, 2016b), which measures similar constructs. (Search Institute, 2016a).
Locating the Measure
Obtaining a copy of the measure	search-institute.org
References
Search Institute, 'Developmental assets profile: User manual,' Minneapolis, MN, 2016a. Search Institute, 'User Guide for the Attitudes and Behaviors Survey,' Minneapolis, MN, 2016b.
Notes
This measure is also reviewed in the AWG Guide.

General Information on the Measure
Purpose of the measureThe DAP assesses young people's strengths, supports, and other noncognitive factors critical for success in life. The DAP can be used to plan positive youth development programs or to identify areas in need of strengthening.
Main constructs measuredIntrapersonal competencies; Interpersonal competencies
Applicable grade levelsAges 8-18
Publication year for the most recent versionNo information is available in the references reviewed.
Year originally developed2004
Related measures
Measure Administration
RespondentStudent
Method of administrationPaper/Pencil, Digital
Number of items58
Item formatFour-point Likert-type scale
Administration time10 minutes
Available languagesEnglish, Spanish, and other languages including Albanian, Arabic, Armenian, Chinese, French, Japanese, Nepali, Portuguese, and Tagalog
Fee for useFee charged by developer
Credentials required for administrationNone
Scoring
Overall score reportingA total DAP score is reported.
Subscore reportingEight subscores are reported:
Support
Empowerment
Boundaries and expectations
Constructive use of time
Commitment to learning
Positive values
Social competence
Positive identity
Scores are also provided by family, school, community, social, and personal contexts.
Scoring proceduresAn online scoring service is provided by the assessment developers.
Interpretive informationScore reports include narrative information on areas of strength and growth, and they identify asset levels as challenged, vulnerable, adequate, or thriving.
Evidence of Technical Quality
Populations for which technical quality evidence has been collectedEvidence was collected from two samples: 6th-12th grade students in Minnesota (N=13,00), and 6th-8th grade students in Oregon (N=1,110). Additional pilot-testing has occurred with international populations to validate contextualized and translated measures.
Reliability evidenceInternal consistency estimates averaged 0.81 for the eight asset category scales and 0.88 for the five context scales. Overall DAP score had an internal consistency of 0.97. 
Test-retest reliability was estimated over a two-week interval, and averaged 0.79 for the eight asset categories. Overall DAP score had a test-retest reliability of 0.87. (Search institute, 2016).
Validity evidence Evidence based on contentNo information available in the references reviewed. Evidence based on response processesNo information available in the references reviewed. Evidence based on internal structureNo information available in the references reviewed. Evidence based on relations with other variablesDAP scores showed significant correlations in the expected direction with scores from the Attitudes and Behaviors survey (Search Institute, 2016b), which measures similar constructs. (Search Institute, 2016a).
Locating the Measure
Obtaining a copy of the measuresearch-institute.org
References
Search Institute, 'Developmental assets profile: User manual,' Minneapolis, MN, 2016a.
Search Institute, 'User Guide for the Attitudes and Behaviors Survey,' Minneapolis, MN, 2016b.
Notes
This measure is also reviewed in the AWG Guide.
Windows 10 gigaware usb to serial driver. Measure summary updated October 3, 2018.
See Full List On Aasm.orgDap Scoring Manual SoftwareScoring criteria have less cultural specificity than most intelligence tests, verbal or nonverbal (culture-reduced) All you need to give and score of the DAP:IQ is the test manual, the Administration/Scoring Form, and a sharpened pencil. The first Draw-A-Person test was created by Florence Goodenough in 1926 to initially assess intelligence & maturity level in children through a non verbal task: drawing a person. The test was meant to be an alternative to traditional intelligence tests and was a non-verbal, ‘nonthreatening’ task (ie. No investigator pressures) to evaluate.