Along with the already clear and precise guidelines for the Woodcock-Johnson III NU Tests of Cognitive Abilities, seven new features have been added to the tests (Woodcock & Johnson, 1989). In the Woodcock-Johnson III NU: Tests of Cognitive Abilities, it includes eight new tests, which measure information-processing abilities (Keith, Kranzler, & Flanagan, 2001). These tests include ones which measure working memory, planning, naming speed, and attention (Woodcock, McGrew, & Mather, 2001b). Also included in this version are five new cognitive clusters (McGrew, Werder, & Woodcock, 1991). Of these five clusters, there are also two additional clusters that are available when cognitive and achievement batteries are used together (Ramos, Alfonso, …show more content…
Much thought and time have been put into researching whether or not the tests are valid. The research and literature reviews cited throughout, all consider whether the Woodcock-Johnson III NU Tests of Cognitive Abilities are reliable and valid by addressing the general information, a description of the test, the technical properties, the practical aspects, and the uses, value, strengths and weaknesses, and professional commentary in literature. These five main topics have been addressed thoroughly, in a manner that highlights the important key aspects, as well as addressing the few issues that need to be fixed. Above all, from the research conducted, the Woodcock-Johnson III NU Tests of Cognitive Abilities provides adequate information pertaining to the subject matter regarding whether or not the test is a reliable or valid set of tests to be given to individuals to measure their cognitive …show more content…
E., Dunham, M., Rothlisberg, B. A., & Finch, H. (2007). Joint confirmatory factor analysis of the differential ability scales and the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities–Third Edition. Psychology in the Schools, 44(2), Feb2007, 119-138. doi: 10.1002/pits.20211.
Sotelo-Dynega, M.,Ortiz, S. O., Flanagan, D. P., & Chaplin, W. F. (2013). English Language Proficiency and Test Performance: An Evaluation of Bilingual Students with the Wood cock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities. Psychology in the Schools, 50(8), 781-797. doi: 10.1002/pits.21706.
Woodcock, R. W., & Johnson, M. B. (1989). WJ-R Tests of Cognitive Ability. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing. Retrieved from: http://www.riverpub.com/clinical/pdf/WJIII_AS B2.pdf.
Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001a). Woodcock-Johnson III. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing. Retrieved from: http://www.riverpub.com/clinical/pdf/WJIII_AS B2.pdf.
Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001b). Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing. Retrieved from: http://www.riverpub.com
Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001c). Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing. Retrieved from:
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
The report will critique Woodcock Johnson III Diagnostic Reading Battery (WJ III DRB) and compare my report to the Mental Measurement Yearbook (MMY). The assessment will include the evaluation, in relation to Woodcock et al.’s (1989) WJ III DRB, on the description and purpose of such tests along with ease of use, administrating and interrupting results based on converting raw scores to standard scores including analyzing the results. Finally, assess the overall quality of the test.
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).
Two types of assessment procedures that are currently being used are the Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery (LNNB), and the Halstead Russell Neuropsychological Evaluation System (HRNES-R). The LNNB is used to diagnose cognitive deficits, while the HRNES-R indicates both the presence and degree of impairment. Both procedures involve tasks that require the patient to complete a series of functions that test abilities and/or perceptions. Such tasks would include, but are not limited to, problem solving, memory, sensorimotor functioning, and psychological/emotional status.
Piaget has played an important part in helping people understand more about children and the process of a child’s cognitive development. Throughout this lab report, there will be questions asked of two young children. The first child’s name is Makayla. She is 9 years old and has just started fourth grade. The first Piagetian task that was given to the children is referred to as the conservation of mass task. During this task, the children rolled two equal amounts of play dough into two separate balls. Afterward, Makayla was asked if these two separate balls had the same amount of play dough. She responded yes, because they came from the same container so they are the same amounts. The children were then asked to roll one ball of play dough into a snake. Afterward, Makayla was asked if the ball and the snake had the same amount of play dough. She replied yes, because its all still from the same size container so they are the same amounts. The second task that was asked of the
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
Maltby, J., Day, L., & Macaskill, A. (2010). Personality, individual differences and intelligence. Pearson Education.
Jackson’s cognitive abilities were assessed with regard to seven broad areas of cognitive processing, through the use of the WISC-V, in addition to supplemental subtests given from the WJ-IV Cognitive. The areas of cognitive processing ability measured include crystallized intelligence, short-term memory, long-term memory, visual-spatial processing, reasoning ability, processing speed and phonemic awareness, which is an aspect of auditory processing. On the WISC-V, subtests that measure different cognitive processing abilities combine to form five index scores: Verbal Comprehension, Visual-Spatial, Fluid Reasoning, Working Memory and Processing Speed which all together make up the Full Scale IQ score (FSIQ). Jackson obtained a FSIQ of 87
In the biography “A Childhood”, Crews explained his life story on how he grew up without a father. Crews often wondered if his life would have been different had his father played a role in his life. Although Crews did not know his father, many individuals often told him stories about his father. In Crews’ biography “A Childhood”, it shows how the absences of a father can affect one’s attitude and outcome in life.
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
Loehlin, John C., Lindzey Gardner, and J.N. Spuhler. Race Differences in Intelligence. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company, 1975.
The House-Tree-Person (H-T-P) was designed in 1947 by psychologist John N. Buck. The projective assessment was designed to provide information on personality characteristics and interpersonal relationships.
The test under analysis is the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition (SB5) which is thoroughly explained through the technical manual of the intelligence assessment (Roid, 2003). The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition, Technical Manual and the SB5 test in general was authored by Gale H. Roid (Roid, 2003). The manual was published by Riverside Publishing in the year 2003 after enduring many years of development (Roid, 2003). The SB5 is an assessment of both cognitive abilities and intelligence (Roid, 2003). The SB5 complete kit is provided via the publisher for the total price of $1...
Horn, J. L., & Cattell, R. B. (1967). ‘Age differences in fluid and crystallized intelligence’. Acta Psychological, 26, 107-129.
Furnham, A. (2009). The validity of a new, self-report measure of multiple intelligence. Current Psychology, 28(4), 225-239.