Introduction
The Das-Naglieri Cognitive Assessment System (CAS) developed in 1997 by Naglieri and Das conceptualizing on the works of A. R. Luria PASS model theory, represents an analytic measurement of cognitive abilities based on neuropsychological construct. The PASS theory, acronym for planning, attention, simultaneous, and successive, focuses on the neuropsychological foundation in which cognitive processing and human intelligences based on the functional brain and mental activities of input, processing, and output (Das, 1999). Endorsement of the PASS theory endures understanding of human intelligence as it relates to cognitive abilities.
Psychometrical Component
The CAS is a standardized test geared to capturing the essence of cognitive abilities by placing emphasis on brain functioning and the cognitive processes. The psychometrical properties for the CAS include standardization based on the sampling 2,200 children ranging in ages five through 17. Standardization was based on random sampling using the United States 1990 Census in which the norms of the diverse population is branched by race, gender, region, educational background, environmental setting, and parent educational attainment (Reynolds & Fletcher-Janzen, 2003) In addition, normalization of instruments are reported in four-month intervals (Naglieri & Das, 2010). The instrument is available in two versions, the standard battery that requires 60 minutes to complete and basic battery, which is a shorter version of the standard battery and only requires 40 minutes to complete. For the validity of psychometric measurement, the PASS scales and Full Scale (FS) are used.
The psychometrical measurement for the CAS involves taking raw scores from each subtests and c...
... middle of paper ...
...the development of instructional training are questionable. The ethical concerns of using the CAS for instructional and remedial purposes is the reliability of score interpretation and the effectiveness of categorization of cognitive deficiencies. For example, the simultaneous process emphasis on grouping related stimuli by using the cognitive task of integration of information. Naglieri and Goldstein (2009) argued the simultaneous process engages in the visual-spatial perspective by relying on visual memory that might display cognitive weakness in reading comprehension or verbal concepts. The complication of interpreting and profiling an individual with weaknesses in reading comprehension or cognitive deficiencies in word grouping based on the CAS subscale simultaneous involves disregarding phonological skills as a means of declined reading skills (Aaron, 2002).
The Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Third Edition (KTEA-3) is a revised and updated comprehensive test of academic achievement (Kaufman & Kaufman, 2014). Authored by Drs. Alan and Nadeen Kaufman and published by Pearson, the KTEA-3 remains an individually administered test of achievement intended for use with examinees ages 4 through 25 years, or those in grades Pre-Kindergarten (PK) through 12 and above. The KTEA-3 is based on a clinical model of academic skills assessment in the broad areas of reading, mathematics, and written and oral language. It was designed to support clinicians utilizing a Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) or Information Processing theoretical approach to assessment and detailed information regarding the structure
Not only does the KBIT-2 lack in accommodating for cultural and language barriers, but it is also deficient towards those with mild to moderate motor difficulties due to the fact that the test requires minimal motor skills (Bain & Jaspers, 2010). However, since the test does not require time limits individuals with mild motor difficulties could be assessed. Overall, the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, Second Edition appears to be psychometrically strong and feasible assessment to administer (Bain & Jaspers, 2010).
Butcher, James N. "Assessment in Clinical Psychology: A Perspective on the Past, Present Challenges, and Future Prospects." Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 13(3)(2006): 205-209.
General intelligence tends to relate to various degrees with each other (Cohen 2012). An example of this is that if an individual is good in math, they may also be good in spelling. In this weeks reading we reviewed several different models of measurement of intelligence. In regard to these theories and general intelligence (g), the theories are various but have commonality and overlap. The Spearman's two-factor theory is if a test has high correlation with other test than the measurement of g is highly saturated (Cohen, 2012). The greater the importance of g on a test, the better the test is believed to predict intelligence
Reading Methods and Learning Disabilities. (1998, April). Learning Disabilities Association Newsbrief, 38(4). Retrieved December 18, 2013
The bioecological model of intelligence, introduced by Stephen Ceci, concentrates on the potential abilities, environmental influence and internal motivation. To perform well in an intelligent test a person must have the necessary abilities, be in a positive environment and be motivated (Comer et al.,
Cognitive psychology is concerned with the internal processes involved in making sense of the environment and deciding what action may be appropriate. These processes include attention, perception, learning and reasoning, (Eysenck and Keane, 2010).There are a number of approaches which can be used within this field, however for the purposes of the essay only two will be compared; cognitive neuroscience and neuropsychology. The aims of cognitive neuroscientists are often similar to those of cognitive psychologists; they are both interested in the brain and cognition, (Medin and Ross, 1996). Nevertheless, it could be argued that there are also some fundamental differences between the two approaches, especially in the research methods employed. This assignment will explain and evaluate the models in comparison to one another.
Charles Spearman's model of intelligence and Howard Gardner's multiple intelligence theory are two of the most widely used theories of intelligence. In order to understand how similar the two theories are we must first understand their differences. These two men differed in opinion on how IQ and intelligence should be measured, and they differed in opinion on what made a person "smart". In order to examine these things they first had to understand the human brain and how it works. They had to examine the human study habits and rituals, along with the human test taking habits.
Construct validity is the degree to which scores measure an intended construct. Construct validity is demonstrated by the correlation with other established intelligence and school achievement tests, and item performance. Developers computed correlation coefficients between scores on the TONI-4 and scores on two nonverbal intelligence tests, the Comprehensive Test of Nonverbal Intelligence–Second Edition (CTONI-2; Hammill, Pearson, & Wiederholt, 2009) and the TONI-3 (Brown, Sherbenou, & Johnsen, 1997). For the CTONI-2 study, there were 72 participants 6 to 17 years old. Form A scores were correlated with scores on the CTONI-2 Pictorial Scale, CTONI-2 Geometric Scale, and CTONI-2 Full Scale. The corresponding corrected coefficients between the TONI-4 and these scales were .74, .73, and .79, respectively. In the TONI-3 study, 56 participants were randomly sampled from the standardization sample. Participants’ item-level data were rescored to obtain TONI-3 scores. The corrected correlation coefficient between the TONI-4 and TONI-3 was .74. Developers also calculated average correlation coefficients between TONI-4 scores and scores on three school achievement tests ranging from .55 to .78. The resulting correlations confirm construct validity. These results show the TONI-4 scores are generally more correlated with other intelligence test scores than with achievement test scores. Item
Jansari, A. (2010). Cognitive neuropsychology In H. Kaye (Ed.), Cognitive Psychology Methods Companion (2nd ed., pp.59-101), Milton Keynes: The Open University.
In this world, there are many different individuals who are not only different in demographics but also different neurologically. Due to an immense amount of people it is important to first understand each individual, in order, to better understand them and to help them when it comes to certain areas such as education, the work force, and etc…. For this reason psychologists have aimed to further understand individuals through the use of psychological assessments. This paper aims to examine a particular assessment tool, the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (Fifth Edition), which measures both intelligence and cognitive abilities (Roid, 2003). This assessment is usually administered by psychologists and the scores are most often used to determine placement in academics and services allotted to children and adolescents (despite their compatibility for adults) (Wilson & Gilmore, 2012). Furthermore before the investigation dives into the particulars of the test, such as its strengths and weakness’, it is best to first learn more about the intelligence scales general characteristics.
The true nature of intelligence has been debated more intensely then ever over the last century. As the science of psychology has developed one of the biggest questions it had to answer concerned the nature of Intelligence. Some of the definitions that have been given for intelligence have been the ability to adjust to one’s environment. Of course by such a definition even a person who is generally considered to be dull can be regarded as being intelligent if he can take care of himself. Other definition is such as having the tendency to analyze things around yourself. However it can be argued that such behavior can lead to over-analyzing things and not reacting to one’s environment and dealing with it in an intelligent manner.
The classroom is a diverse place where learners from all different genres of life meet. Included in these learners are those that display learning disabilities. According to the British Columbia School Superintendent’s Association, ‘learning disabilities refer to a number of conditions that might affect the acquisition, organization, retention, understanding or use of verbal or nonverbal information. These disorders affect learning in individuals who otherwise demonstrate at least average abilities essential for thinking and/or reasoning’. They also posit that ‘learning disabilities result from impairments in one or more processes related to perceiving, thinking, remembering or learning. These include, but are not limited to language processing,
Much current work involves identifying the cognitive components (such as memory and attention span) used in problem-solving activities. Researchers also are trying to identify the processes that occur in the transition from one level of thought to the next. Another area of investigation is the cognitive components in reading and arithmetic. It is hoped that this research will lead to improved methods of teaching academic skills and more effective remedial teaching.
The ability to test a student’s language skills is essential to have as a teacher. Over the years, classrooms have become much more diverse with a wide variety of impairments being presented on a daily basis. Often, these disabilities contain a language impairment that appears as a side effect of the main disability. Unfortunately, assessing language is not as easy as one may think because it is not clearly defined and understood. Kuder (2008) writes that “…language is not a unitary phenomenon- it is ‘multidimensional, complex, and dynamic; it involves many interrelated processes and abilities; and it changes from situation to situation” (pg. 274). Language also develops at different times for different individuals, thus making language assessment an even harder task for test administrators to grade and evaluate. In order to further understand the language impairment that students present, teachers need to be aware of appropriate language tests that could be administered. In order to assure that the best language test is being issued to a student, several various tests exist to choose from. To test a student’s overall language capability, a comprehensive language test, such as the Comprehensive Assessment of Spoken Language (CASL) or the Oral and Written Language Scales (OWLS), could be administered. If a teacher wanted to test a specific language skill such as pragmatics, phonology, syntax, or semantics, the teacher would need to find the best test for the student’s unique situation.