International Open Access Journal Platform

汉语学习障碍筛查表（CLDC）的编制和状况初探

Compilation of the Chinese Learning Disability Checklist (CLDC) and a Preliminary Study of the Situation

Psychology of China / 2025,7(2)：206-212 / 2025-03-04 80 54

View Download PDF

• Authors: 李雨秋      杨双      宁宁     
• Information:

  苏州大学教育学院心理系，苏州

• Keywords: 阅读障碍；书写障碍；数学障碍；汉语学习障碍筛查表
• Dyslexia; Dysgraphia; Dyscalphy; Learning disability checklist; Comorbidity
• Abstract: 目的：编制汉语儿童学习障碍筛查表（CLDC），初探汉语儿童特定学习障碍情况。方法：本文根据特定学习障碍在DSM-Ⅴ的三维定义，参考NCLD量表与当下中国阅读书写测试和研究，编制CLDC测验，对苏州某代表性小学的200名学生进行施测，并对每一位学生的智力、阅读、书写和数学能力情况进行详细评估，以探究CLDC准确性。结果：探索性因素分析结果表明，CLDC量表包含阅读、书写和数学三维度的特殊学习障碍，提取的3个因素结构模型拟合较好。该量表的内部一致性a系数为0.938，阅读障碍分数与3分钟快速阅读测验成绩、书写障碍分数与听写测验得分、数学障碍分数与数学成绩等级都有较高的相关系数，校标效度较高。初步探究发现三种特定学习障碍的共病性，其中阅读书写共病率为10.9%，阅读数学共病率为5%，数学书写共病率为4%。结论：CLDC具有较好的信效度，可以为探究小学儿童学习障碍的全貌提供工具，有利于高效筛查特定学习障碍儿童并尽早进行干预。
• Objective: To compile the Chinese Learning Disability Checklist (CLDC) and to initially explore specific learning disabilities in Chinese-speaking children. Methods: Based on the three-dimensional definition of specific learning disabilities in DSM-V and with reference to the NCLD scale and contemporary Chinese reading and writing tests and research, this paper compiled the CLDC test, administered it to 200 students in representative primary schools in Suzhou, and assessed each student’s intelligence, reading, writing and maths proficiency in detail in order to explore the accuracy of the CLDC. Results: The results of exploratory factor analyses showed that the CLDC scale contains three dimensions of specific learning disabilities in reading, writing, and mathematics, and that the extracted three-factor structural model fit well. The internal consistency a coefficient of the scale was 0.938, and there were high correlation coefficients between dyslexia scores and 3-minute rapid reading test scores, dysgraphia scores and dictation test scores, and dyscalculia scores and maths achievement levels, and the validity of the calibration was high. Preliminary probes revealed co-morbidity for the three specific learning disabilities, with 10.9% co-morbidity for reading and writing, 5% co-morbidity for reading mathematics, and 4% co-morbidity for mathematics writing. Conclusion: The CLDC has good reliability and validity and can provide a tool for exploring the full picture of learning disabilities in primary school children, facilitating efficient screening and early intervention for children with specific learning disabilities.
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.35534/pc.0702033
• Cite: 李雨秋，杨双，宁宁．汉语学习障碍筛查表（CLDC）的编制和状况初探［J］．中国心理学前沿，2025，7（2）：206-212．