Test identification

Name of test Dynamo maths
Version n/a
Previous version(s) n/a
Subjects Maths
Summary Provides a standardised assessment using the researched NumberSenseMMR® framework, to identify symptoms of dyscalculia and maths developmental delays.

Assessment screening

Subscales number meaning, number magnitude and number relationships
Additional References Dowker, A., & Esmail, K. (2017). Development of components of mathematics in 7 to 11 year old children: A study using Dynamo Assessment. Paper presented at the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics.
Authors Dynamo Maths
Publisher Jelly James Publisher
Test source https://dynamomath.com/dynamo-maths/
Guidelines available? Yes
Norm-referenced scores. Yes
Age range 6-15 Years (although note that the standardisation is for age 7-9)
Key Stage(s) applicable to KS1, KS2, KS3, KS4
UK standardisation sample Yes
Publication date 2015
Re-norming date n/a

Eligibility

Validity measures available? Yes
Reliability measures available? Yes
Reason for exclusion from shortlist shortlisted

Evaluation and Appraisal

Additional information about what the test measures Maths (number meaning, number magnitude and number relationships)
Are additional versions available? no
Can subtests be administered in isolation? no
Administration group size individual
Administration duration 30 minutes
Description of materials needed to administer test computer with microphone and speakers or headphones, mouse, fast and reliable internet access
Any special testing conditions? n/a

Response format

Response mode Electronic
What device is required computer, microphone and mouse
Queston format. mixed
Progress through questions not stated

Assessor requirements

Is any prior knowledge/training/profession accreditation required for administration? no
Is administration scripted? Yes

Scoring

Description of materials needed to score test automated scoring
Types and range of available scores overall standardised score, percentile, confidence intervals. Subtest scaled scores where 5 is age-appropriate. No information is given as to the distribution of these subtest scaled scores
Score transformation for standard score age standardised
Age bands used for norming 2 months
Scoring procedures computer scoring with direct entry by test taker
Automatised norming online

Construct Validity

Does it adequately measure literacy, mathematics or science?
Does it reflect the multidimensionality of the subject? specific maths (number sense. Targeted on the areas of maths most at risk in dyscalculia: number meaning, number magnitude and number relationships)
Construct validity comments (and reference for source) The standardisation and validation document (Esmail, 2020) reports a analysis (multiple regression) of the proposed structure (that number magnitude and number meaning are key components of number relationships). This shows that both factors are significant independent predictors of number relationships. This document also provides a clear explanation of the theoretical constructs. There is no data presented on correlations with other tests etc. However, the authors state that "there are no similar online developmental dyscalculia tests".Scores for each age group for each subtest are presented. There are effects of age on all subscales. However, scores on number meaning seem to drop from age 9 to age 10 and 11. This is not addressed.

Criterion Validity

Does test performance adequately correlate with later, current or past performance?
Summarise available comparisons n/a

Reliability

Is test performance reliable?
Summarise available comparisons Multiple measures support good reliability of this measure. The standardisation and validation document (Esmail, 2020) reports good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: total sample: .85; 6 years .79; 7 years .83; 8 years .86; 9 years .86; 9-14 years .89). Temporal stability (on average there was a 10 day test-retest interval) is also reported as good (age 6 r = .85; age 7 r =.87; age 8 r =.94; age 9 .82; 9-14 years .97; Total sample r = .87). The manual also highlights that the computerised format means that inter-rater reliability would be very high - above .99.

Is the norm-derived population appropriate and free from bias?

Is population appropriate and free from bias? Yes
If any biases are noted in sampling, these will be indicated here. Norming sample size is excellent, however no information is given about sample selection or representativeness.

Sources

Sources Esmail, K. K. (2020). Dynamo maths Developmental Dyscalculia Assessment: Standardisation and Validation. Stanmore, UK: JellyJames Publishing Ltd.Dowker, A., & Esmail, K. (2017). Development of components of mathematics in 7 to 11 year old children: A study using Dynamo Assessment. Paper presented at the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics.