CHAPTER 1: Intelligence and Its Measurement Intelligence as a multifaceted capacity that manifests itself in different ways across the life span. In general, intelligence includes the abilities to: ■ acquire and apply knowledge ■ reason logically ■ plan effectively ■ infer perceptively ■ make sound judgments and solve problems ■ grasp and visualize concepts ■ pay attention ■ be intuitive ■ find the right words and thoughts with facility ■ cope with, adjust to, and make the most of new situations INTELLIGENCE FOR… FRANCIS GALTON- intelligent persons were those equipped with the best sensory abilities. He reasons; the only knowledge we have about external events appears to come through our senses, and the more aware our senses are of difference, the greater the field of action for our judgment and intelligence. Tests of visual acuity or hearing ability are, in a sense, tests of intelligence. ALFRED BINET- Binet argued that when one solves a particular problem, the abilities used cannot be separated because they interact to produce the solution. He discussed its components of intelligence in terms of reasoning, judgment, memory, and abstraction. DAVID WECHSLER- Intelligence, operationally defined, is the aggregate or global capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally and to deal effectively with his environment. It is aggregate or global because it is composed of elements or abilities which, though not entirely independent, are qualitatively differentiable. Nonintellective factors that must be taken into account when assessing intelligence. • • • capabilities more of the nature of conative affective personality traits [that] include such traits as drive, persistence, and goal awareness [as well as] an individual’s potential to perceive and respond to social, moral, and aesthetic values. JEAN PIAGET- intelligence may be conceived of as a kind of evolving biological adaptation to the outside world. He believed that, as a consequence of interaction with the environment, psychological structures become reorganized. Cognitive development as the result of the interaction of biological factors and learning. Interactionism refers to the complex concept by which heredity and environment are presumed to interact and influence the development of one’s intelligence. BINET, WECHSLER, PIAGET’s meaning of intelligence is based on Interactionism. Factor-analytic theories The focus is squarely on identifying the ability or groups of abilities deemed to constitute intelligence. Information-processing theories The focus is on identifying the specific mental processes that constitute intelligence. Factor-analytic theories of Intelligence- group of statistical techniques designed to determine the existence of underlying relationships between sets of variables, including test scores. Theorists have used factor analysis to study correlations between tests measuring varied abilities presumed to reflect the underlying attribute of intelligence. CHARLES SPEARMAN- pioneered new techniques to measure intercorrelations between tests. • • • • • • He found that measures of intelligence tended to correlate to various degrees with each other. Spearman (1927) formalized these observations into an influential theory of general intelligence that postulated the existence of a general intellectual ability factor (g) conceived of the basis of the g factor as some type of general electrochemical mental energy available to the brain for problem solving. associated with facility in thinking of one’s own experience and in making observations and extracting principles. Abstract-reasoning problems were thought to be the best measures of g in formal tests. Group factors- existence of an intermediate class of factors common to a group of activities but not to all. GENERAL INTELLECTUAL ABILITY FACTOR (g) • • • • • partially tapped by all other mental abilities. Referred to as a two-factor theory of intelligence g- portion of the variance that all intelligence tests have in common s- remaining portions of the variance being accounted for either by specific components e- error components GARDNER- Theory of Multiple Intelligences (Seven intelligence) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Logical-mathematical Body-kinesthetic Linguistic Musical Spatial Interpersonal- Interpersonal intelligence is the ability to understand other people: what motivates them, how they work, how to work cooperatively with them. 7. Intrapersonal- it is a capacity to form an accurate, veridical model of oneself and to be able to use that model to operate effectively in life. Interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence is so called emotional intelligence. RAYMOND B. CATELL- made a theory of intelligence. The theory postulated the existence of 2 major types of cognitive ability. TWO MAJOR TYPES OF COGNITIVE ABILITIES • • Crystallized intelligence (Gc)- include acquired skills and knowledge that are dependent on exposure to a particular culture as well as on formal and informal education. Retrieval of information and application of general knowledge for example. The ability to use knowledge that was previously acquired through education and experience. Fluid intelligence (Gf)- relatively culture-free, and independent of specific instruction. The ability to use logic and solve problems in new or novel situations without reference to pre-existing knowledge. CULTURE FAIR INTELLIGENCE TEST (CFIT) Purpose of CFIT • The Culture Fair Intelligence Tests measures individual intelligence in a manner designed to reduce, as much as possible, the influence of verbal fluency, cultural climate, and educational level. • The test can be administered individually or in a group, non-verbal measure of intelligence and requires only the examinees be able to perceive relationships in shapes and figures. • CFIT was by Raymond B. Cattell in an attempt to produce a measure of cognitive abilities that accurately estimated intelligence devoid of sociocultural and environmental influences. • Cattell developed a “culture-fair” test to measure fluid intelligence. • It aids in the identification of learning problems and helps in making more reliable and informed decisions in relation to the special education needs of children. • Other uses include selecting students for accelerated educational programs, advising students as to probable success in college, and increasing effectiveness of vocational guidance decisions, for both students and adults. History of the Test ● late 1920’s - began in the work undertaken by Cattell, sparked the precise scientific research of Charles Spearman into the nature and accurate measurement of intelligence. ● 1930 - resulted in the publication of the Cattell Group and Inventory (particularly intended for use with children) were revised and recast into non-verbal form to diminish the unwanted and unnecessary effects of verbal fluency in the pure measurement of intelligence. ● 1940 - another revision of the test appeared. Items had become completely perceptual and were organized into 6 subtests, 3 of which have been retained in the present format. Of the 159 item analyzes, 72 of satisfactory validity and reliability were retained for the published edition. ● 1949 - another revision and adopted the format consisting of 4 subtests (Series, Classification, Matrices, and Conditions). ● 1961 - primary outcome of this revision were slight adjustments in the difficulty level and sequencing of few items. At the same time the few samples were expanded to achieve better national representation in the final tables. Format of the Test There are three intelligence scales measured, with Scale I including eight subtests while Scales II and III contain four subtests each. ● Scale 1: For children 4-8 years and older, mentally handicapped individuals (individual administration) ● Scale 2: For children aged 8-14 as well as average adults (group administration) ● Scale 3: For children aged 14 and up as well as adults of superior intelligence (group administration) Scale 2 and 3 contain two equivalent forms A and B. Subtest 1 : Series ➢ Presented with an incomplete, progressive series. The task is to select the answer which best continues the series. Subtest 2 : Classifications ➢ Presented with 5 figures. ➢ Scale 2: he must select one which is different from the other four. ➢ Scale 3: he must correctly identify two figures which are different from the other three. Subtest 3 : Matrices ➢ The task is to correctly complete the design or matrix presented at the left of each row. Subtest 4 : Conditions / Topology ➢ Requires the individual to select, from the five choices provided, the one which duplicates the conditions given in the far left box. Requirements of Purchase ➢ LEVEL B – available only if the test administrator has completed an advanced level course in testing in a university, or its equivalent in training under the direction of a qualified superior or consultant. SCORING Scoring on CFIT test is done with a view towards justice answers given by participants or clients, and calculate the total correct answers owned by the client after carrying out the test. Total correct answer will be referred to as RS or Raw Score, which should be changed or converted into Scaled Score. Thereafter, the scores are then paired with norm is standard, to then look at the intelligence level of the participant or client. CHAPTER 2: STANFORD-BINET Intelligence Test The fifth edition of the Stanford-Binet (SB5; Roid, 2003a) was designed for administration to assessees as young as 2 and as old as 85 (or older). The test yields a number of composite scores, including a Full Scale IQ derived from the administration of ten subtests. Subtest scores all have a mean of 10 and a standard deviation of 3. Other composite scores are an Abbreviated Battery IQ score, a Verbal IQ score, and a Nonverbal IQ score. It is a cognitive ability and intelligence test that is used to diagnose developmental or intellectual deficiencies in young children. • • • • • Stanford-Binet was certainly not without major flaws (such as lack of representativeness of the standardization sample). All composite scores have a mean set at 100 and a standard deviation of 15. It was the first published intelligence test to provide organized and detailed administration and scoring instructions. It was also the first American test to employ the concept of IQ. it was the first test to introduce the concept of an alternate item, an item to be substituted for a regular item under specified conditions. SB5 was based on the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of intellectual abilities. ratio IQ = mental age divided by chronological age × 100 CHAPTER 3: WAIS IV The items were classified by subtests rather than by age. The test was organized into six verbal subtests and five performance subtests, and all the items in each test were arranged in order of increasing difficulty. W-B 2, was created in 1942 but was never thoroughly standardized Still, the test suffered from some problems: (1) The standardization sample was rather restricted; (2) some subtests lacked sufficient inter-item reliability; (3) some of the subtests were made up of items that were too easy; and (4) the scoring criteria for certain items were too ambiguous. the WAIS was organized into Verbal and Performance scales. Scoring yielded a Verbal IQ, a Performance IQ, and a Full Scale IQ. As a result of many over its W-B predecessor, the WAIS would quickly become the standard against which other adult tests were compared. An individually administered, norm-referenced test designed to measure cognitive ability in individuals from age 16 years to 90 years, 11 months. Subtest Description Information In what continent is Brazil? Questions such as these, which are wide-ranging and tap general knowledge, learning, and memory, are asked. Interests, education, cultural background, and reading skills are some infl uencing factors in the score achieved. In general, these questions tap social comprehension, the ability to organize and apply knowledge, and what is colloquially referred to as “common sense.” An illustrative question is Why should children be cautious in speaking to strangers? How are a pen and a pencil alike? This is the general type of question that appears in this subtest. Pairs of words are presented to the examinee, and the task is to determine how they are alike. The ability to analyze relationships and engage in logical, abstract thinking are two cognitive abilities tapped by this type of test. Arithmetic problems are presented and solved verbally. At lower levels, the task may involve simple counting. Learning of arithmetic, alertness and concentration, and short-term auditory memory are some of the intellectual abilities tapped by this test. The task is to defi ne words. This test is thought to be a good measure of general intelligence, although education and cultural opportunity clearly contribute to success on it. Comprehension Similarities Arithmetic Vocabulary Receptive Vocabulary Picture Naming Digit Span Letter-Number Sequencing Picture Completion Picture Arrangement Block Design The task is to select from four pictures what the examiner has said aloud. This tests taps auditory discrimination and processing, auditory memory, and the integration of visual perception and auditory input. The task is to name a picture displayed in a book of stimulus pictures. This test taps expressive language and word retrieval ability. The examiner verbally presents a series of numbers, and the examinee’s task is to repeat the numbers in the same sequence or backward. This subtest taps auditory short-term memory, encoding, and attention. Letters and numbers are orally presented in a mixed-up order. The task is to repeat the list with numbers in ascending order and letters in alphabetical order. Success on this subtest requires attention, sequencing ability, mental manipulation, and processing speed. The subject’s task here is to identify what important part is missing from a picture. For example, the testtaker might be shown a picture of a chair with one leg missing. This subtest draws on visual perception abilities, alertness, memory, concentration, attention to detail, and ability to differentiate essential from nonessential detail. Because respondents may point to the missing part, this test provides a good nonverbal estimate of intelligence. However, successful performance on a test such as this still tends to be highly infl uenced by cultural factors. In the genre of a comic-strip panel, this subtest requires the testtaker to re-sort a scrambled set of cards with pictures on them into a story that makes sense. Because the testtaker must understand the whole story before a successful re-sorting will occur, this subtest is thought to tap the ability to comprehend or “size up” a situation. Additionally, attention, concentration, and ability to see temporal and cause-and-effect relationships are tapped. A design with colored blocks is illustrated either with blocks themselves or with a picture of the fi nished design, and the examinee’s task is to reproduce the design. This test draws on perceptualmotor skills, psychomotor speed, and the ability to analyze and synthesize. Factors that may infl uence performance on this test include the examinee’s color vision, frustration tolerance, and fl exibility or rigidity in problem solving. Object Assembly The task here is to assemble, as quickly as possible, a cut-up picture of a familiar object. Some of the abilities called on here include pattern recognition, assembly skills, and psychomotor speed. Useful qualitative information pertinent to the examinee’s work habits may also be obtained here by careful observation of the approach to the task. For example, does the examinee give up easily or persist in the face of diffi culty? Coding If you were given the dot-and-dash equivalents of several letters in Morse code and then had to write out letters in Morse code as quickly as you could, you would be completing a coding task. The Wechsler coding task involves using a code from a printed key. The test is thought to draw on factors such as attention, learning ability, psychomotor speed, and concentration ability. Symbol Search The task is to visually scan two groups of symbols, one search group and one target group, and determine whether the target symbol appears in the search group. The test is presumed to tap cognitive processing speed. Matrix Reasoning A nonverbal analogy-like task involving an incomplete matrix designed to tap perceptual organizing abilities and reasoning. Word Reasoning The task is to identify the common concept being described with a series of clues. This test taps verbal abstraction ability and the ability to generate alternative concepts. Picture Concepts The task is to select one picture from two or three rows of pictures to form a group with a common characteristic. It is designed to tap the ability to abstract as well as categorical reasoning ability. Cancellation The task is to scan either a structured or an unstructured arrangement of visual stimuli and mark targeted images within a specifi ed time limit. This subtest taps visual selective attention and related abilities. CHAPTER 4: Differential Aptitude Test The DAT, first published in 1947 by the Psychological Corporation, is a battery of tests whose goal is to assess multiple separate aptitudes of students and adults. The latest edition (5th) version, published in 1990. The proponents of DAT are the following: • George K. Bennet • Harold Seashore • Alexander Wesman Aptitude- Capacity to learn given appropriate training and environmental input. In other words, aptitudes are not inherited; rather, they are developed abilities. Aptitude Test- An instrument used to determine and measure an individual’s ability to acquire, through future training, some specific set of skills. Differential Aptitude Test- Designed to measure's student's ability to learn or to succeed in a number of different areas such as mechanical reasoning, verbal reasoning, numerical reasoning, and space relations. WHY DO WE NEED DAT’s? ▪Help students to choose educational and career options on the basis of strengths and weaknesses. ▪Help students understand better why they do well/poorly in some subjects. ▪Broaden student’s horizons by suggesting new and expanded career options consistent with tested abilities ▪Raise the level of occupational aspirations or change the direction ▪Supplementing existing achievement data to facilitate admission educational courses of apprenticeships. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND Factor analysis is the mathematical tool used to sort out the abilities of man. It helps separate special aptitudes from the general intelligence and permits grouping of tests which overlap. Conclusions about what a test measures are drawn from its correlations with other tests. Thurstone, was one of the pioneers in the use of factor analysis. He found seven factors that recurred, leading him to believe that there were seven major types of ability. These factors were Spatial (S), Perceptual (P), Number (N), Verbal (V), Word Fluency (W), Memory (M), and Reasoning (R). ADMNISTER ▪ DAT tests can be administered online, or in a paper-and-pencil format. ▪ In a new testing session, the desks must be cleared and sure that each student has two No. 2 soft-lead pencils and an eraser. ▪ Say “I am going to give you your answer document again. I am also going to give you a test booklet, leave it on your desk. Do not open it or write anything on it. You will mark all your answers on your answer document. Do not make any marks on your booklet” ▪ Distribute the answer documents then the test booklets. Check to see that each student gets the right answer document ▪ Continue with the directions for the Verbal Reasoning test. WHAT IS MEASURED IN DAT? Verbal Reasoning- This test measures the ability to reason with words and to think logically. Important for work involving communicating ideas or understanding the material. Highly important in academic courses. Subjects included are English, History, and Language. Numerical Reasoning- Measures the ability to reason with numbers and to deal intelligently with quantitative measures. To ensure that the reasoning rather than the computational facility is stressed, the computational level of the problem is low. Abstract Reasoning- Non-verbal/non-numerical measure of reasoning power. It assesses how well one can reason with geometric figures or designs. It is important in such occupational fields as drafting, mathematics, and computer programming. Perceptual Speed and Accuracy- measures the ability to compare and mark written lists quickly and accurately. Test items do not call for reasoning skills, the emphasis is on speed. It is important for success in jobs requiring careful record keeping and in jobs requiring technical and scientific data. This test is usually for Laboratory technician, office administration, forensics, etc. Mechanical Reasoning- Measures the ability to understand basic mechanical principles of machinery, tools and motion, and the laws of everyday physics. It is important in such occupational fields as carpentry, engineering, and machine operation. Space Relations- Measures the ability to visualize a three-dimensional object from a two-dimensional pattern and to visualize how this object would look if rotated in space. It is important in such occupational fields as carpentry, engineering, automobile design, and art. Spelling- It measures the ability to spell common English words. This is a basic skill necessary in many academic and vocational pursuits, especially in courses requiring written reports. Language Usage- Measures the ability to detect errors in grammar, punctuation and capitalization. Language Usage and Spelling are included in this test because the skills they measure are important in so many areas of education and work. Subject Choice • Your choice of subjects should include those subjects: • Which required/necessary to get into your intended course / career. • Which suit your particular strengths and talents. Scoring and Analysis •When scoring is done by hand, it is necessary to inspect the answer sheet to determine whether the student marked 2 or more choices for any item. •A general rule applies to all DAT answer sheet. Each answer sheet should be inspected before it is scored by machine; light marks should be made darker and stray marks should be erased. CHAPTER 5: K-ABC Test KAUFMAN ASSESSMENT BATTERY FOR CHILDREN Alan S. Kaufman On the development of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, he collaborated closely with David Wechsler (WISC). He also worked on the development and standardization of the McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities alongside Dorothea McCarthy. Before joining Yale University, he worked at the University of Georgia (1974–1979) and the University of Alabama (1984–1995). Nadeen L. Kaufman She also was a direct participant in the development and standardization of the McCarthy Scales and WISC-R. Kaufman has worked as a school psychologist, learning disabilities specialist, university professor, and founderdirector of several psychoeducational clinics, as well as teaching learning-disabled children. While at the University of Georgia in 1978-79, they supervised a research team that developed the first K-ABC and several other psychological and educational assessments. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND The second edition (KABC-II) was published in 2004, is an individually administered measure of the processing and cognitive abilities of children and adolescents aged 3-18. KABC - II incorporates two distinct theoretical models: The Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) psychometric model of broad and narrow abilities Luria’s neuropsychological theory of processing. Cattell-Horn-Carroll model - useful for children from mainstream cultural and language background. Luria model - Excludes verbal ability What is KABC-II ? An individually administered measure of the cognitive processing abilities of children and adolescents ages 3 to 18. useful for bilingual students It was constructed using dual theoretical models Popular testing instrument used by practitioners in the psychoeducational Assessment of students struggling with academic problems. 18 subtests 1. Word order >Gestalt closure >Rebus learning delayed 2. >Number recall >Block counting >Face recognition >Hand movements >Pattern reasoning >Riddles Rover >Story completion >Expressive vocabulary Triangles Atlantis >Verbal knowledge >Conceptual thinking <Atlantis delayed >Face recognition >Rebus learning K - ABC First version of K-ABC was designed for children between the ages of 2 ½ and 12 ½. A. Mental Processing B. Achievement KABC - II Second version widened the scope and age range of the test to children and adolescents between 3 and 18 years of age. A. Cognitive Abilities B. Processing Abilities School Settings Clinical Settings (to assess neurological status) Through Digital Kits or Paper-and-Pencil Designed to measure intellectual functioning as well as cognitive abilities and academic strength and weaknesses. KABC-II allows the clinician to administer a Nonverbal Scale to children that are limited English proficient and have speech/language disabilities. Individually administered that can either incorporate or exclude verbal ability PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES Test-retest reliability coefficients, indicated that the global scales are quite stable but that stability improved decidedly with increasing age; mean coefficients of 0.83, 0.88, and 0.92 were obtained for ages 2’ to 4 years, 5 to 8 years, and 9 to 12 ½ years. The global mean reliabilities range from .86 to .93 for the preschool age children and .89 to .97 for school age children. The internal consistency reliability coefficient for core and supplementary subtests demonstrate the KABC-II has good reliability. Retest reliabilities of the global scales ranged from 0.72 to 0.94 where retest stability increasing with age. The median reliability for the 3-6 age band is .85 (range .69-.92) and .87 (range .74-.93) for 7-18. ADMINISTER Test Item Security ○Examiners, and facilitator if applicable, must follow Terms and Conditions ●Disruptions ○All atypical events during testing are to be recorded during testing ■Telepractice Assessment ■In-Person Assessment SCORING AND ANALYSIS Measures cognitive processing abilities 3 years to 18 years old Consists of 18 subtests 2 Theoretical Models Scoring Age-based standard Scores Mean = 100 Standard Deviation = 15 Age equivalents Mean = 10 Standard Deviation = 3 Percentile Rank Demographics tab Grade Race/Ethnicity Model - CHC (FCI), Luria (FCI) or Nonverbal (NVI) Raw score tab C = Core subtest S = Supplementary subtest Nonverbal Scale CHAPTER 6: Woodcock Johnson Battery for Children Background The most comprehensive system for evaluating strengths and weaknesses among contemporary measures of achievement, oral language, and cognitive abilities. • Difference between WJ III (Woodcock et al., 2000) and WJ IV: - WJ III was a psychoeducational test package consisting of two co-normed batteries (the Test of Achievement and the Tests of Cognitive Abilities). - WJ IV consists of three co-normed batteries (the Tests of Achievement, Tests of Cognitive Abilities and the new Tests of Oral Language). • The Woodcock- Johnson IV is the updated and redesigned edition of one of the most widely used batteries of individually administered psycho-educational tests. - The Woodcock-Johnson (WJ IV) (Schrank, McGrew, Mather, & Woodcock, 2014) is the latest generation of the time-honored WoodcockJohnson psychoeducational test batteries. • The design of three independent, complementary, and co-normed batteries facilitate the evaluation of strengths and weaknesses within – and among – measures of academic performance, oral language competence, and cognitive abilities: ➢ Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (WJ IV ACH), ➢ WoodcockJohnson IV Tests of Cognitive Abilities (WJ IV COG), ➢ Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language (WJ IV OL) • According to the WJ IV manual, the battery may be used with persons as young as 2, and as old as 90 (or older). • Based on Cattel-Horn-Carrol (CHC) theory of cognitive abilities, the WJ IV yields a multitude of measures including: ➢ ➢ ➢ ➢ • Measure of general intellectual ability (GIA) Measure of fluid abilities (Gf) Measure of crystallized abilities (Gc) Measure of fluid/crystallized composite (Gf-Gc) WJ IV’s focus on evaluation of relative strengths and weaknesses will help assessment professionals identify and describe patterns of performance across achievement, language, and cognitive domains that are key to diagnosing learning problems and developing targeted interventions for individual needs. - In general, the extended battery will be used to obtain the most comprehensive and detailed evaluation of an assessee’s strengths and weaknesses or educational progress. • The WJ IV features a carefully constructed organization plan, new tests and clusters, an updated theoretical model, and customized interpretive analyses. • It can be a potent tool for diagnostic decision-making, evidence-based intervention, educational planning, and program evaluation. Proponents The Woodcock–Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities is a set of intelligence tests first developed in 1977 by Richard Woodcock and Mary E. Bonner Johnson. It was revised in 1989, again in 2001 and most recently in 2014; this last version is commonly referred to as the WJ IV. In 1997, Woodcock and three new coauthors; Fredrick A. Schrank, Kevin S. McGrew, and Nancy Mather entered into a contract with Riverside Publishing Company to publish a third revision to the Battery and was leter published in 2001. RICHARD W. WOODCOCK ➢ Dr. Richard Wesley Woodcock is an internationally renowned psychologist, psychometrician, and statistician who was born on January 29, 1928. ➢ He has an extensive background in education and psychology. In fact, he holds a B.S. degree in Psychology, an M.Ed. degree in Special Education, and an Ed.D. in Psycho-Education and Statistics from the University of Oregon. Following a Postdoctoral Fellowship in Neuropsychology at Tufts University School of Medicine. ➢ He is an author of numerous cognitive, achievement, neuropsychological test batteries and has published more than 135 professional books and articles in total. ➢ He is widely regarded as the world's foremost educational test developer and one of the most prolific and important figures in applied psychological assessment. His Woodcock-Johnson set of cognitive, achievement, and reading exams are widely utilized in the United States and around the world. ➢ He is renowned for setting the standard for cognitive and achievement assessments worldwide as the author of such tests namely: • • • • • Woodcock–Johnson® III (WJ IIITM) Tests of Achievement WJ III Tests of Cognitive Abilities Batería III Woodcock–Muñoz® Dean–Woodcock™ Neuropsychological Battery Woodcock–Muñoz Language Survey®—Revised. ➢ Dr. Woodcock is also credited for his work in developing and introducing the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory and the Rasch statistical methods into individual psychometric measures. ➢ Dr. Woodcock has profound backgrounds in the fields of psychology, cognitive theories, and neuropsychology. Additionally, he is known for the integration of these fields into psychological testing. FREDRICK A. SCHRANK ➢ Dr. Fredrick A. Schrank is the senior author of the Woodcock-Johnson IV, which is one of the most widely used and respected individually administered batteries of cognitive, oral language and achievement tests. ➢ He is an experienced educator specializing in psychoeducational assessment, a licensed psychologist, and a board-certified specialist in school psychology from the American Board of Professional Psychology (ABPP). ➢ He worked in elementary, middle, and secondary schools before earning a PhD from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. ➢ Dr. Schrank then taught at Truman State University and the University of Puget Sound prior to a 25-year career devoted almost exclusively to the development and publication of the Woodcock-Johnson family of tests. KEVIN S. MCGREW ➢ Kevin S. McGrew is an American psychologist and intelligence researcher. He is the founder and director of the Institute for Applied Psychometrics, as well as a visiting professor of educational psychology at the University of Minnesota. ➢ Dr. McGrew holds a PhD in Educational Psychology (Special Education) from the University of Minnesota and an MS in School Psychology and a BA in Psychology from Minnesota State University–Moorhead. ➢ He was a practicing school psychologist for 12 years in Iowa and Minnesota and has served as a measurement consultant to a number of psychological test publishers, national research studies, and organizations. ➢ He has authored numerous publications and made state, national, and international presentations in his primary areas of research interest in human intelligence, intellectual assessment, human competence, applied psychometrics, and the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of cognitive abilities. ➢ Dr. McGrew was the primary measurement consultant for the WJ-R and served in the same capacity as coauthor of the following tests: • • • • • • • • Mini-Battery of Achievement (MBA) Sharpe-McNear-McGrew Braille Assessment Inventory (BAI) WJ III Woodcock-Johnson Diagnostic Supplement to the Tests of Cognitive Abilities Batería III Woodcock-Muñoz® (Batería III) Woodcock-Johnson III Normative Update (WJ III NU) Woodcock-Johnson III–Australian Adaptation • WJ IV NANCY MATHER ➢ Dr. Nancy Mather has served as a learning disabilities teacher, a diagnostician, a university professor, and an educational consultant. ➢ She holds an MA in Behavior Disorders and a PhD from the University of Arizona in Special Education and Learning Disabilities. She completed a postdoctoral fellowship under the mentorship of Dr. Samuel Kirk at the University of Arizona. ➢ Dr. Mather assisted Dr. Richard Woodcock with several aspects of test development for the WoodcockJohnson Psycho-Educational Battery–Revised, including coauthoring the Examiner’s Manuals for the WJR Tests of Cognitive Ability and Achievement. ➢ Dr. Mather has also coauthored two books on interpretation and application of the WJ IV: WoodcockJohnson IV: Recommendations, Reports, and Strategies and Essentials of WJ IV Tests of Achievement Assessment. ➢ In addition, she has coauthored Essentials of Dyslexia: Assessment and Intervention with Barbara J. Wendling. ➢ Aside from that, she has also published numerous articles, conducts workshops on assessment and instruction both nationally and internationally, and has coauthored several books linking assessment and intervention including the following: • • • • • Learning Disabilities and Challenging Behaviors: A Guide to Intervention and Classroom Management Evidence-Based Interventions for Students with Learning and Behavioral Challenges Essentials of Assessment Report Writing Essentials of Evidence-Based Academic Interventions Writing Assessment and Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities Theoretical background The Woodcock–Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities is a set of intelligence tests first developed in 1977 by Richard Woodcock and Mary E. Bonner Johnson (although Johnson's contribution is disputed). It was revised in 1989, again in 2001, and most recently in 2014; this last version is commonly referred to as the WJ IV. ● The Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ III) (Woodcock, McGrew, & Mather, 2001a) consists of two distinct, co-normed batteries: the WJ III Tests of Cognitive Abilities (WJ III COG) (Woodcock, McGrew, & Mather, 2001c) and the WJ III Tests of Achievement (WJ III ACH) (Woodcock, McGrew, & Mather, 2001b). Together, these batteries comprise a wide age-range, comprehensive system for measuring general intellectual ability (g), specific cognitive abilities, oral language, and academic achievement. The theoretical foundation of the WJ III is derived from the CattellHorn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities (CHC theory). Two major empirically derived sources of research on the structure of human cognitive abilities informed the development of the WJ III batteries. ● The Woodcock-Johnson IV is the updated and redesigned edition of one of the most widely used batteries of individually administered psycho-educational tests. The WJ IV focus on evaluation of relative strengths and weaknesses will help assessment professionals identify and describe patterns of performance across achievement, language, and cognitive domains that are key to diagnosing learning problems and developing targeted interventions for individual needs. Based on the evolution of CHC theory, new tests and interpretive clusters place emphasis on the most important and diagnostically useful measures of academic achievement, oral language, and cognitive abilities. The design of three independent and co-normed batteries facilitates the evaluation of strengths and weaknesses within—and among—measures of academic performance, oral language competence, and cognitive abilities. ● The Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (WJ IV ACH; Schrank, Mather, & McGrew, 2014) is an individually-administered, norm-referenced instrument that is useful for screening, diagnosing, and monitoring progress in reading, writing, and mathematics achievement areas for persons ages 2-90+ years. The WJ IV Tests of Achievement consist of 11 tests in the Standard Battery with an additional nine tests in the Extended Battery. The clusters measure academic achievement in the areas of Reading, Mathematics, Written Language, and areas of academic skills and knowledge. ● The Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Cognitive Abilities –Fourth Edition (WJ-IV COG; Schrank, McGrew, & Mather, 2014) is an individually-administered, norm-referenced instrument that measures general intellectual ability (g) and specific cognitive abilities in persons age 2 to 90+ years old. The Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Cognitive Abilities is a system of tests and clusters that are designed to provide a broad breadth of coverage for individually administered assessment of important abilities in a variety of settings. Versions Woodcock-Johnson IV - Tests of Achievements ● The WJ IV ACH includes 20 tests for measuring four broad academic domains: reading, written language, mathematics, and intellectual knowledge. A completely new configuration supports a wide range of diagnostic assessment needs for various professionals with further tests and clusters. ● A completely new configuration, with further tests and clusters, supports a broad range of diagnostic assessment needs for various professionals. ● There are three Standard Battery forms of the WJ IV Tests of Achievement (Form A, Form B, and Form C). ● The WJ IV ACH Standard Battery's three-form configuration supports current assessment practices based on shared assessment and communication responsibilities among a team of professionals. NEW TESTS The Oral Reading test provides a standardized assessment of oral reading performance that increases the scope of reading fluency assessment in the WJ IV. The Reading Recall test assesses reading comprehension in a format that closely parallels classroom reading comprehension tasks. The Word Reading Fluency test expands the usefulness of the WJ IV for the evaluation of reading rate. Number Matrices assesses mathematics problem-solving in a matrix reasoning format. TESTS IN THE WJ IV ACH Standard Battery • Test 1: Letter-Word Identification • Test 6: Writing Samples • Test 2: Applied Problems • Test 7: Word Attack • Test 3: Spelling • Test 8: Oral Reading—NEW • Test 4: Passage Comprehension • Test 9: Sentence Reading Fluency • Test 10: Math Facts Fluency • Test 5: Calculation • Test 11: Writing Fluency Extended Battery • Test 12: Reading Recall—NEW • Test 17: Reading Vocabulary • Test 13: Number Matrices—NEW • Test 18: Science • Test 14: Editing • Test 19: Social Studies • Test 15: Word Reading Fluency—NEW • Test 20: Humanitie • Test 16: Spelling of Sounds NEW ACHIEVEMENT CLUSTERS The new WJ IV Reading Fluency cluster combines a measure of silent reading fluency and an estimate of oral reading fluency. The WJ IV, Reading Speed cluster, assesses the quick word comparison and sentence comprehension skills necessary for academic success. These clusters complement the other reading clusters in the WJ IV diagnostic system: Broad Reading, Basic Reading Skills, Reading Comprehension, and a new three-test and multi-faceted measure called Reading Comprehension - Extended. CLUSTERS IN THE WJ IV ACH • Reading—NEW • Mathematics—NEW • Academic Skills • Broad Reading • Broad Mathematics • Academic Applications • Basic Reading Skills • Math Calculation Skills • Academic Fluency • Reading • Math • Academic Knowledge Comprehension Solving—NEW • Reading • Written Comprehension • Phoneme-Grapheme Language— NEW • Broad Extended—NEW • Reading Problem Fluency— NEW Knowledge • Brief Written Language Achievement— NEW • Broad Achievement • Basic Writing Skills • Reading Rate—NEW • Written Expression A NEW BENEFIT FOR ASSESSING ACADEMIC KNOWLEDGE The Academic Knowledge cluster score, when used in conjunction with other WJ IV achievement clusters, now provides—within the achievement battery alone—a beneficial comparison between an individual’s overall level of academic knowledge and stories of academic achievement. This comparison will permit diagnostic achievement evaluators to quickly determine whether an individual’s levels of academic achievement are commensurate with, or discrepant from, their broad theoretical knowledge. WJ IV TESTS OF ORAL LANGUAGE The WJ IV OL tests also function as a stand-alone battery of tests useful for oral language assessment, determination of English (and Spanish) language proficiency, and comparing strengths and weaknesses among oral language and language-related abilities for a complete reading writing or dyslexia evaluation. NEW COGNITIVE-LINGUISTIC TEST the new Segmentation test offers examiners a highly predictive three-part test for measuring critical reading-related skills involved in breaking works into parts and phonemes. This test complements the Sound Blending test that measures the counterpart skill of blending sounds into words. TESTS IN THE WJ IV OL • Test 1: Vocabulary • Test 2: Comprehension Picture Naming Oral • Test 3: Segmentation— NEW • Test 4: Rapid Picture • Test 5: Repetition • Test Sentence • Test 6: Understanding Directions • Test 7: Sound Blending 8: Retrieval Fluency • Test 9: Awareness Sound • Test 10: Vocabulario sobre dibujos • Test 11: Comprensión oral • Test 12: Comprensión de indicaciones NEW COGNITIVE-LINGUISTIC CLUSTERS The new Phonetic Coding cluster assesses two essential abilities—combining sounds into whole words and breaking whole words into parts. The new Speed of Lexical Access cluster assesses rapid automatic naming and fluent associative retrieval of words. - - The new three-test Broad Oral Language cluster can be used to compare current levels of academic achievement. For Spanish-language test administration, the WJ IV OL includes procedures for the use of an ancillary examiner. The ancillary examiner procedure allows evaluators who are not proficient in Spanish to train and utilize a Spanish-proficient examiner to make this critical comparison. Comparing English oral language ability to Spanish oral language can also be an essential first step in a comprehensive evaluation of an English-Spanish bilingual individual. The WJ IV OL also includes distinct clusters for evaluation of Listening Comprehension and Oral Expression. A brief Sound Awareness test may be administered to screen for any phonological problems that may suggest the need for further evaluation. CLUSTERS IN THE WJ IV OL • Oral Language • Broad Oral Language— NEW • Oral Expression • Listening Comprehension • Phonetic Coding— NEW • Phonetic CodingExtended—NEW • Speed of Access—NEW Lexical • Vocabulary*—NEW • Oral Language (Spanish)—NEW • Broad Oral Language (Spanish)—NEW • Listening Comprehension (Spanish)—NEW Psychometric properties Reliability • Internal Consistency – According to Villareal (2015), untimed tests with dichotomously scored items were assessed using the split-half procedure based on odd and even items in measuring internal consistency reliabilities. These tests' reliabilities were mostly in the satisfactory to excellent range (.84.94). Moreover, reliabilities for tests comprising multiple-point items were computed using mean square error values; hence these tests have high reliability range (.90-.96). WJ IV ACH cluster scores had higher reliabilities (.92-.97) than individual tests and match minimum requirements for scores needed to make significant judgments (Ysseldyke & Nelson, 2012), hence cluster scores are recommended for interpretation. Further, the WJ IV ACH's reliability estimations appear to be better than those published for the WJ III ACH. • Test-retest – The test–retest model with only one-day time period was used to calculate reliability for speeded tests. Test–retest correlations were generally satisfactory to excellent (.83–.95), showing acceptable test–retest stability. Reliabilities for speeded tests appear to be improving over the WJ III ACH, and cluster scores that include speeded tests have reliabilities that are acceptable for making crucial decisions. Validity • Content validity. The content was created to cover the core Multidimensional curricular topics as well as the accomplishment standards set scaling is a visual forth by federal legislation. Multidimensional scaling (MDS) was representation of employed as a supplemental empirical tool in addition to content distances or dissimilarities between sets of objects. review by the test authors and content-area specialists. The Technical Manual (McGrew, LaForte, & Schrank, 2014) contains Objects that are more thorough information on the results of MDS analyses of the WJ similar IV tests, and the results indicate satisfactory content validity. Construct validity. According to reported intercorrelations, similar (or have longer correlations between related WJ IV ACH tests are higher than distances). correlations between unrelated WJ IV ACH tests. The correlations between related WJ IV ACH clusters are extremely strong. Because many of the clusters use the same tests, this is to be expected. The Reading, Broad Reading, and Basic Reading Skills clusters, for example, use Test 1 (Letter-Word Identification) to calculate scores. Confirmatory multivariate statistical approaches revealed that reading and writing tests on the CHC Reading and Writing domain had moderate to high factor loadings, indicating that the reading and writing clusters are valid. Validity support was also supplied by moderate to strong math test loadings on the CHC Quantitative Knowledge domain. • Concurrent validity. The relationship between WJ IV ACH scores and scores from the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement–Second Edition (KTEA-II; Kaufman & Kaufman, 2004), the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test–Third Edition (WIAT-III; Wechsler, 2009), and the Oral and Written Language Scales– Written Expression was explored in five studies (OWLS-WE; CarrowWoolfolk, 1996). The measures of similar KTEA-II and WIAT-III domain composites had the strongest relationships with WJ IV ACH clusters. While the OWLS-WE total score had moderate to strong relationships with the WJ IV ACH written language groups. Overall, these results show that concurrent validity is adequate. For further information on these analyses, see the WJ IV ACH Technical Manual. • Clinical validity. The findings of a clinical validity study that evaluated at the correlation between test scores and group membership status are also included in the Technical Manual. The evaluation of test scores for examinees diagnosed as having learning disabilities (LDs) in reading, math, or writing is particularly relevant to the WJ IV ACH. While specific reading test scores were common across the three LD groups, the LD-reading group's mean score was lower than the mean group scores for both the LD-writing and LD-math groups. In math and written language assessments, however, there were no discernible differences between the three LD groups. These findings not only add to the validity of the reading tests, but they also show that test results should be interpreted in conjunction with other relevant data. How to administer Testing Considerations before administering • Testing room should be comfortable, and only have two people inside the room, which is the examiner and the participant who will take the test. • • • • Test is validated and sufficiently can measure what needs to be measured. Examiner's manual should be explained before the start of the test. Examiner should be familiar with the material. Examiner should make the test-taker comfortable before the start of test taking. What does it measure? 1. Cognitive Battery There are 18 different versions of this test and has its purpose to measure. • • 1-10 are Standard Battery 11-18 are Extended Battery The WJ IV Tests of Cognitive Abilities also offer a new Gf-Gc Composite for comparison with other cognitive abilities, oral language, and achievement. Understanding relative strengths and weaknesses in comparison to the Gf-Gc Composite can lead to individualized instruction designed to target identified learning needs. The skills that is measured in this section are the comprehension knowledge, long term retrieval, visual spatial thinking, auditory processing, fluid reasoning, processing speed, short term memory, mathematics, and reading-writing ability. 2. Achievement Battery The Achievement battery is available in three forms (A, B, C) with parallel content, providing the means to monitor progress two to three times per year once a proficiency level is established and interventions are implemented with a student. The parallel forms also provide flexibility to examiners who wish to alternate the three forms to reduce examinees’ familiarity with test content. This measures what a person learned in school. Like reading, writing, mathematics, and cross-domain clusters. 3. Oral Language Battery The WJ IV Tests of Oral Language can be used to determine and describe an individual’s strengths and weaknesses with regard to expressive language. The 12-test battery includes nine English tests and three Spanish tests, all of which are included in a single test easel. Depending on the purpose and extent of the assessment, an examiner can use any of these tests independently or in conjunction with the WJ IV COG and/or WJ IV ACH. This measures oral comprehension, picture vocabulary, segmentation, rapid picture learning, understanding directions, retrieval fluency, sound awareness, and sentence repetition. MATERIALS NEEDED 1. Testing Booklet- where is the test material itself. 2. Scoring Booklet- where examiner should put the test scores. 4. Answer sheet- for the test takers. TO ADMINISTER • • • • Woodcock Johnson IV is a one-on-one session between the examiner and testtaker. Woodcock test takes 60-90 minutes to administer. Some questions had its time to answer (3-10 minutes). The examiner should have its booklet in folded and facing the test-taker diagonally. Scoring and Analysis The Woodcock Johnson III and Woodcock Johnson IV Tests of Achievement are 22section achievement tests, which assess both academic achievement (what children have learned in school) and cognitive development. They are sometimes paired with an intelligence test to qualify children for gifted and talented programs. How is the Woodcock-Johnson Scored? Three types of statistics or scores are generated by the Woodcock Johnson-IV. • • • Level of development Comparison with peers Degree of proficiency Level of Development Age equivalent An age equivalent (AE), or age score, reflects the child’s performance in terms of age level in the norming sample at which the average score is the same as the child’s score. Grade equivalent A grade equivalent (GE), or grade score, likewise reflects the child’s performance in terms of the grade level of the norming sample at which the average score is the same as the child’s raw score. Comparison with Peers Standard Score The standard score (SS) on the WJ-IV describes a child’s performance relative to the average performance of the comparison group. The scale is the same as the IQ test. In other words, the average standard score is 100 with a standard deviation of 15. Percentile Rank A percentile rank (PR) describes a child’s relative standing to his or her peers on a scale of 1 – 100. CHAPTER 7: Personality Assessment • • • Personality: an individual’s unique constellation of psychological traits that is relatively stable over time Personality assessment: the measurement and evaluation of psychological traits, states, values, interests, attitudes, worldview, acculturation, sense of humor, cognitive and behavioral styles, and/or related individual characteristics Personality trait: “any distinguishable, relatively enduring way in which one individual varies from another” Personality type: a constellation of traits that is similar in pattern to one identified category of personality within a taxonomy of personalities John Holland argued that most people can be categorized as one of six personality types: Artistic, Enterprising, Investigative, Social, Realistic, or Conventional. Meyer Friedman and Ray Rosenman developed a two-category personality typology: • Type A personality: a personality type characterized by competitiveness, haste, restlessness, impatience, feelings of being time-pressured, and strong needs for achievement and dominance • Type B personality: a personality type that is completely opposite of type A personality, characterized as being mellow or laid-back. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) is frequently discussed in terms of the patterns of scores that emerge, referred to as a profile. • Personality profile: a narrative description of the extent to which a person has demonstrated certain personality traits, states, or types Personality state: the transitory exhibition of some personality trait; a relatively temporary predisposition •Measuring personality states amounts to a search for and an assessment of the strength of traits that are relatively transitory or situation specific. PURPOSE Aspects of personality could be explored in: • Identifying determinants of knowledge about health • Categorizing different types of commitment in intimate relationships • Determining peer response to a team’s weakest link • The service of national defense to identify those prone to terrorism • Tracking trait development over time • Studying some uniquely human characteristic such as moral judgment. Who is being assessed and who is assessing? – Self-report methods are very common when exploring an assessee’s self-concept • Self-concept: one’s attitudes, beliefs, opinions, and related thoughts about oneself • Some self-concept measures are based on the notion that states and traits related to self-concept are to a large degree context-dependent – Self-concept differentiation: the degree to which a person has different self-concepts in different roles Who is being assessed and who is assessing? – In some situations, the best available method for assessment of personality and/or behavior involves a third party (e.g., a parent, teacher, or spouse). – It is necessary to proceed with caution when using a third-party referent for personality assessment. – Knowledge of the context of the evaluation and the dynamic of the relationship between the rater and the assessee is important. – Raters may vary in the extent to which they are neutral. What is assessed when a personality assessment is conducted? – Some tests are designed to measure particular traits (e.g., introversion) or states (e.g., test anxiety). – Other tests focus on descriptions of behavior, usually in particular contexts. What is assessed when a personality assessment is conducted? – Response style: a tendency to respond to a test item or interview question in some characteristic manner regardless of the content of the item or question. Validity scale: a subscale of a test designed to assist in judgments regarding how honestly the testtaker responded and whether responses were products of response style, carelessness, deception, or misunderstanding. ADMINISTER: Traditional sites include schools, clinics, hospitals, academic research laboratories, employment counseling, vocational selection centers, and the offices of psychologists and counselors. Personality assessors can also be found observing behavior and making assessments in natural settings. How are personality assessments structured and conducted? – The scope of an evaluation may be very wide, seeking to take a general inventory of an individual’s personality. – Some instruments purport to measure a much narrower scope. – Instruments used in personality assessment vary in the extent to which they are based on a theory of personality. How are personality assessments structured and conducted? – Personality may be assessed by many different methods, such as face-to-face interviews, computer-administered tests, behavioral observation, paper-and-pencil tests, evaluation of case history data, evaluation of portfolio data, and recording of physiological responses. – Measures of personality vary in terms of their structure, with some measures being very structured and others being relatively unstructured. How are personality assessments structured and conducted? – Frame of reference: aspects of the focus of exploration such as the time frame (the past, present, or the future) as well as other contextual issues that involve people, places, and events – Q-sort technique: an assessment technique in which the task is to sort a group of statements, usually in perceived rank order ranging from most to least descriptive. • Carl Rogers utilized this technique to identify the discrepancy between the perceived actual self and the ideal self. How are personality assessments structured and conducted? – Personality measures differ with respect to the way conclusions are drawn from the data they provide. – Nomothetic approach: characterized by efforts to learn how a limited number of personality traits can be applied to all people – Idiographic approach: characterized by efforts to learn about each individual’s unique constellation of personality traits. Issues in personality test development and use – Personality assessment that relies exclusively on self-report is vulnerable to false outcomes because there is no way of knowing with certainty the extent of the truth of the assessee’s answers. – Building validity scales into self-report tests provides some protection against false results. – Assessors can also affirm the accuracy of self-reported information by consulting external sources such as peer raters. Data reduction methods – The Big Five Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992) is a measure of five major dimensions of personality and 30 facets that define each dimension (extraversion, neuroticism, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness). Criterion groups – Criterion: a standard on which a judgment or decision can be made – Criterion group: a reference group of testtakers who share specific characteristics and whose responses to test items serve as a standard according to which items will be included or discarded from the final version of a scale • Empirical criterion keying: the process of using criterion groups to develop test items THE MMPI The MMPI has three scales built in to the measurement to combat the problems inherent in self-report methods: the L scale (the Lie scale), the F scale (the Frequency scale), and the K (Correction scale). – The L scale will call into question the examinee’s honesty – The F scale contains items that are infrequently endorsed by nonpsychiatric populations and do not fall into any known pattern of deviance, which can help determine how serious an examinee takes the test as well as identify malingering – The K score is associated with defensiveness and social desirability. Personality Assessment and Culture • Before any tool of personality assessment can be employed, and before data is imbued with meaning, the assessor must consider important issues with regard to individual characteristics (such as cultural background) of the assessee. • Acculturation: an ongoing process by which an individual’s thoughts, behaviors, values, worldview, and identity develop in relation to the thinking, behavior, customs, and values of a particular cultural group – Acculturation begins at birth and proceeds throughout development. discussion of acculturation is a understanding of values Instrumental values: guiding principles to help one attain some objective (e.g., honesty and ambition) Terminal values: guiding principles and a mode of behavior that is an endpoint objective (e.g., a comfortable life and a sense of accomplishment)
