Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Feb 11;51(1):40.
doi: 10.1186/s13052-025-01881-4.

Teleassessment can overestimate the risk of learning disability in first and second grade of primary school

Stefania Fontolan #  1 , Sandro Franceschini #  2   3 , Marisa Bortolozzo  2   3 , Linda Greta Dui  4 , Simona Ferrante  4   5 , Cristiano Termine  2
Affiliations

Teleassessment can overestimate the risk of learning disability in first and second grade of primary school

Stefania Fontolan et al. Ital J Pediatr. .

Abstract

Background: Early administration of reading, writing and math standardised tests allows us to assess the risk of developing a learning disorder and to plan a specific intervention. The ease of access to technological tools and past pandemic restrictions have led to the abandonment of face-to-face assessment in favour of teleassessment methods. Although these kinds of assessments sometimes seem comparable in the literature, their equivalence is not clearly defined. The first aim of our research was to test the comparability of the two modalities using a complete battery of neuropsychological tests. Second, we addressed whether the administration order could influence performance.

Methods: Using a within-subject sample design, we compared face-to-face and teleassessment performance in reading, writing and math tasks in 64 children attending first and second year of primary school.

Results: Teleassessment scores were lower than face-to-face; math tests weighted on difference. Differences were mitigated by previous experience with face-to-face modality.

Conclusions: Although there was considerable overlap between the two administration methods, teleassessment could lead to overestimation of the risk for learning disorders.

Keywords: Evaluation methodologies; Learning difficulties; Primary school; Remote assessment; Test modality comparison.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: The entire investigation process was conducted according to the principles expressed in the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was obtained from all families, and all procedures were approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Politecnico of Milan. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Delta score (z score difference) between face-to-face and teleassessment performance. Asterisks indicate a significant difference between the two modalities; bars represent the standard error of the mean
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Mean performance of the two groups tested in the two different modalities in different orders
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Seymour PHK, Aro M, Erskine JM. Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies. Br J Psychol [Internet]. 2003;94(2):143–74. - PubMed
    1. Share DL. On the anglocentricities of current reading research and practice: the perils of overreliance on an outlier orthography. Psychol Bull. 2008;134(4):584–615. - PubMed
    1. Catts HW, Nielsen DC, Bridges MS, Liu YS, Bontempo DE. Early identification of reading disabilities within an RTI framework. J Learn Disabil. 2015 May-Jun;48(3):281–97. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ruffini C, Marzocchi GM, Pecini C. Preschool Executive Functioning and Child Behavior: Association with Learning prerequisites? Children. 2021;8(11):964. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Codding RS, Hilt-Panahon A, Panahon CJ, Benson JL. Addressing mathematics computation problems: a review of simple and moderate intensity interventions. Educ Treat Child. 2009;32(2):279–312.

LinkOut - more resources