Name of the Test: Woodcock-Johnson is an intelligence test consists of cognitive abilities and academic achievement. Richard Woodcock and Mary Bonner Johnson originally developed the Woodcock-Johnson test in 1977. The latest version is the Woodcock-Johnson III, which was published in 2001. Purpose of the Test: The Woodcock-Johnson III test is generally used to examine and explore the “strengths and weaknesses through cognitive abilities and academic achievements”, state Benson & Taub (2013). The WJ III is intended for all ages from 2-90+ years of age. WJ III is useful to determine the inconsistencies between a person’s ability and their achievement level. Results of the WJ III help examiners and clinical physicians diagnose learning disabilities and assess programs that fit one’s needs. The Manual: Schrank, Mather, and Woodcock (2004), state that the comprehensive manual is well structured and distinctly written. It provides examiners with direct guidance and makes supervision moderately easy. The Development of the Test: The Woodcock-Johnson III covers 22 battery tests. The WJ COG tests include comprehensive-knowledge, long-term retrieval, visual-spatial thinking, auditory processing, fluid reasoning, processing speed, and short-term memory. WJ ACH series of test include reading-writing, mathematics, comprehension-knowledge, auditory processing, and long-term retrieval. The subtests for those tests include pair cancellation, general information, visual matching, decision speed, and many others. The WJ-III meets or surpasses the elementary standards. It qualifies as a gold standard IQ test along with the Stanford Binet and Wechsler Intelligence Tests. Test Administration: Woodcock-Johnson III test is an individ... ... middle of paper ... ...om/the-woodcock-johnson-iii-tests-achievement-5133225.html. Dombrowski, Stefan C. (2012, October 19). Investigating the Structure of the WJ-III Cognitive at School Age. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ruby2.uhv.edu/ehost/detail?vid=3&sid=34c9dff1-68b8-4804-acbc-3bacae40dd5a%40sessionmgr113&hid=117&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=psyh&AN=2013-04616-001. Schrank, Fredrick A., Mather, Nancy, Woodcock, Richard W. (2004, January 1). Woodcock-Johnson III (r) Diagnostic Reading Battery. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ruby2.uhv.edu/ehost/detail?vid=3&sid=bc1a689f-9e29-40ea-9062-2515516deeef%40sessionmgr113&hid=117&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=mmt&AN=TIP17133218. Shrank, McGrew, Woodcock. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III Assessment Service Bulletin Number 2. Retrieved from http://www.riverpub.com/products/wjIIIComplete/pdf/WJIII_ASB2.pdf.
The Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, Second Edition, also referred to as KBIT-2, is a test designed to measure verbal and nonverbal intelligence in people ages 4 to 90 years of age (Harris, 2013). The KBIT-2 has three subtests: two Verbal subtests and one Nonverbal subtests. The KBIT-2 Manuel typically takes between 15 to 30 depending on the age of the participant (Kaufman & Kaufman, 1990). This is shown in Table 1, with the distribution of times and how they change depending on age.
Developed by Linda Brown, Rita Sherbenou, and Susan Johnsen and published by pro.ed The Test of Nonverbal Intelligence-Fourth Edition (TONI-4) is an assessment that uses abstract reasoning and figural problem solving to estimate general intellectual ability. The Test of Nonverbal Intelligence, Fourth Edition (TONI-4) is a measure of general intelligence relying heavily on a nonverbal format and limited motor responses. The TONI-4 is designed to assess abstract/figural problem-solving skills of children and adults varying from ages 6 to 89 who have language, hearing, and motor difficulties. The TONI-4 has two equivalent versions, Form A and Form B, each of which consists of 60 items listed in
In order for a test to have appeal is must have validity (Cohen, 2012). The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales has been praised for its validity, and it utilizes the CHC model with is a composite model of intelligence (Cohen, 2012). The Wechsler model also shows strong validity and it also uses the CHC model (Cohen,
Seefeldt, C., & Wasik, A. (n.d.b). Education.com - print. Education.com - print. Retrieved May 6, 2014, from http://www.education.com/print/cognitive-development-preschoolers/
Age-equivalent scored also do not represent children who scored extremely high and extremely low on the given test. Age-equivalent scores are not estimated for the extreme scores at either end of the spectrum. Children that fall within these ranges are given a generalized age-equivalent score of below the lowest age derived or above the highest age. This results in inadequate information for all individuals that scores are reflected on these parts of the
Davis, S. F., & Palladino, J. J. (2003). Psychology. (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Similar to Sternberg, Binet came to the conclusion that intelligence is the sum of mental processes (Flangan, Harrison, 2005). He developed the first intelligence test in order to categorize how much children benefitted from school education. The Binet-Simon scale, keeping in mind that Binet believed in intelligence consisting of different components, thus included language component, auditory processing, learning and memory, as well as judgement and problem solving (Kamin, 1974). The results were supposed to identify the student’s mental age. Lewis Terman introduced the Binet-Simon test to America and adapted it to sort army recruits in World War I (Comer et al., 2013). The Stanford-Binet test, developed by Terman in 1916, aimed to be an improved version that was able to measure mental age more appropriately (Kamin, 1974). He was convinced that intelligence is the ability to form concepts and to think abstract (Comer et al., 2013). The Stanford-Binet test has been described by Maud Minton to be superior to other intelligence tests of that time because it was very precise, it had detailed guidelines, it measured the IQ which became the standard marking system (Flangan, Harrison,
Wessinger, C.M., Clapham, E. (2009) Cognitive Neuroscience: An Overview , Encylopedia of Neuroscience. 12(4) 1117-1122.
Wilson, K. & Gilmore, L. (2012). Assessing Intellectual Functioning in Young Adolescents: How do the WISC-IV and the SB5 Compare? Australian Journal of Guidance and Counseling, 22(1), 1-41.
Spinks, S. (2000). Adolescent brains are a work in progress. Retrieved November 18, 2011 from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/teenbrain/work/adolescent.html
Sternberg, R. J. (1999). Cognitive psychology (2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers
While the IQ test is generally used and widely accepted they have been criticized for several different reasons. One is that the test by its nature measures how well a person does answering questions on paper. However it is well-known that not all forms of intelligence involve memorizing words or solving equations. Recently there has been a movement in psychology regarding something called EQ or emotional quotient. What this is saying that there should also be a rating for people that are particularly able to deal with other people and social situations. While someone that is very good at dealing with people and real world situations is generally not regarded as being intelligent in a stereotypical manner there hasn’t been any definition of intelligence proposed which have ruled out this particular form of intelligence.
Smith, E. E. and Kosslyn, S. M. (2009). Cognitive psychology: Mind and brain. New Jersey: Pearson Education
Casey, B. J., Jones, R. M., & Hare, T. (2008). The adolescent brain. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1124, 111–126. Eaton Reyna, V.F. and Rivers, S.E. (2008).
Keil, F. C. and Wilson, R. A. (1999) The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences. Cambridge, Massachusetts & London, England: The MIT Press