test reviews hand out
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
1/29
Test Review Forms 1
PORTFOLIO
TEST REVIEW FORM
Description of the Test:
Title: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III (WAIS-III)
Author(s): David Wechsler
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation
Copyright Date(s): 1997
Type of Test: Intelligence
Underlying Theory: Measures an individual's potential for purposeful and useful behavior. Itevaluates many cognitive abilities: more than just ability to reason abstractly, to learn, or adapt.
Also aware of nonintellective factors: anxiety, persistence, goal awareness, etc. Responses toitems may indicate psychological disturbances.
Nature of Test Items: comprised of 14 subtest (see below). Each subtest has its own uniquenature. Ranging from question and answer to time performance on replicating block designs.
Number of Test Forms: unknown (appears to be 1 form)
Subtests:
List Names:Verbal Scales
Information: Range of knowledge
Comprehension: JudgementArithmetic: Concentration
Similarities: Abstract thinking
Digit Span: memory, anxiety
Vocabulary: Vocabulary levelLetter-Number-
Sequencing
Performance Scales
Digit Symbol: Visual-motor functioning
Picture Completion: Attention to detailPicture Arrangement: Planning ability
Block Design: Nonverbal reasoning
Object Assembly: Analysis of part-whole relationships
Matrix Reasoning
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
2/29
Test Review Forms 2
Symbol Search
Each subtest has a scaled score of 10 with a SD of 3.
Reliability Information:
Test-Retest: Done for two age groups 25-34 and 45-54. Given in a 2 to 7 week interval.Reliability coefficient ranges from a low of .67 (Object Assembly 45-54) to a high of .94
(Information 45-54). VIQ = .94 (25-34) and .97 (45-54). PIQ = .89 (25-34) and .90 (45-54). FIQ
= .95 (25-34) and .96 (45-54)
Split-Half: Spearman-Brown for all subtests except for Digit Span and Digit Symbol for age ranges
from 16-17 to 70-74. Reliability coefficient ranges from a low of .52 (Object Assembly 16-17) toa high of .96 (Vocabulary across many of the age ranges). VIQ = .97. PIQ = .93. FIQ = .97.
Alternate-Form: none given
Interitem Consistency: not done. However, correlations between subtests (intrasubtest) and VIQ,
PIQ, and FIQ are given but a Cronbach Alpha was not done.
Inter-Rater: not applicable
Standard Error of Measurement: each subtest has a SEM a low of .49 (Vocabulary 16-17) and high
of 1.91 (Object Assembly 16-17). Average SEM were VIQ 2.74, PIQ 4.14, and FIQ 2.53
Validity Information:
Face Validity: has face validity
Content Validity: has content validity
Criterion-Related Validity: with academic success, tests of achievement, and formal education
Construct Validity: convergence with similar IQ measures, no divergence given
Standardization:
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
3/29
Test Review Forms 3
Size and Composition of the Standardized Sample: 2,450 people comprised the standardization
sample reflecting ages 16-89Describe the Sampling Procedures: Stratified Random Sampling based on the most current census
data.
Administration Procedures: individual administration procedure, should be done by a trained
evaluator.
Scoring: is done by hand by the evaluator
Interpretation: guidelines for interpreting each interval of scores is given: very superior - mentally
retarded.
Comments:
Appropriate Client Use: people for whom the test was standardized. It is a test of intelligence socaution should be used when interpreting it for occupations, education, and training.
Appropriate for Which Groups of People with Disabilities: generally those people who would not
fall into the categories below.
Groups of People with Disabilities not Appropriate: people who were institutionalized for mental
illness, people with traumatic brain injuries, people with severe behavioral or emotional problems,
people with physical impairments which restrict responses to test items, people whose primary
language is other than English.
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
4/29
Test Review Forms 4
PORTFOLIO
TEST REVIEW FORM
Description of the Test:
Title: Slosson Intelligence Test
Author(s): Richard Slosson
Publisher: Western Psychological Services
Copyright Date(s): 1961, 1962, 1963, 1975
Type of Test: Intelligence
Underlying Theory: a short intelligence test for screening for both children and adults. It is similar
to the Stanford-Binet and uses a chronological and mental age.
Nature of Test Items: earlier items involve performance by young children (e.g., makes small
throaty noises other than crying; draw a circle) for later years it mostly verbal and arithmeticquestions. Mean of 100 SD of 16.
Number of Test Forms: one form now the L-M
Subtests: none
Reliability Information:
Test-Retest: .97 with a two-month interval
Standard Error of Measurement: 4.3
Validity Information:
Face Validity: has face validity
Content Validity: items are similar to those of the Stanford-Binet
Criterion-Related Validity: concurrent validity with the Stanford-Binet it has a range of
coefficients from a low of .90 (age 4 years) to a high of .98 (ages 6 and 7). Also, the Cattell Infant
Intelligence Scale .70
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
5/29
Test Review Forms 5
Construct Validity: none given
Standardization:
Size and Composition of the Standardized Sample: children and adults came from both urban and
rural populations in New York State. The referral came from cooperative nursery schools, public,
parochial and private schools, from junior and senior high schools. The came from gifted as well
as developmentally disabled classes--White, Black, and some American Indian. Some came fromthe Youth Bureau, some from a Home for Boys. The very young children resided in an infant
home. The adults came from the general population, from various professional groups, from a
university graduate school, from a state school for the developmentally disabled and from a county
jail. Many of these individuals were difficult to test as they were disturbed, negativistic,
withdrawn and many had reading difficulties. Some suffered from neurological disorders or otherphysical defects. The only cases which were excluded from this study were individuals who could
not speak English.
Describe the Sampling Procedures: none given
Administration Procedures: detailed instruction to find basal and ceiling (10 in a row right and 10
in a row wrong). Uses mental age divided by chronological age times 100.
Scoring: correct responses are given 1/2 to 3 month's credit for mental age.
Interpretation: given as a percentile but also discusses what scatter may mean (e.g., gifted,
emotionally disturbed, organic brain damage).
Comments:
Appropriate Client Use: use with norm groups people with reading problems, visually impaired,
deaf, or other language handicaps. Not to be used with an interpreter
Appropriate for Which Groups of People with Disabilities: see above
Groups of People with Disabilities not Appropriate: people with hearing impairments that need
interpreters.
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
6/29
Test Review Forms 6
PORTFOLIO
TEST REVIEW FORM
Description of the Test:
Title: Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI & MMPI-2)
Author(s): S.R. Hathaway and J.C. McKinely MMPI; J.N. Butcher, J.R. Graham, W.G.,Dahlstrom, A.M. Tellegren, and B. Kaemmer MMPI-2
Publisher: The Psychological Corporation
Copyright Date(s):
Type of Test: Assess personality characteristics that affect personal and social adjustment
Underlying Theory: Utilizes criterion-group approach to distinguish abnormal groups from normal.
Criterion-groups consisted of people with hypochondriasis, depression, hysteria, psychopathicdeviance, paranoia, psychasthenia, schizophrenia, and hypomania. Also has two content scales
masculinity-femininity and social-introversion. Has three validity scales to provide information
about the person's approach to test-taking (faking bad or good); 1) Lie (L) scale evaluate anattempt to naively portray oneself in a positive light, 2) Infrequency Scale (F) 64 items that less
than 10% are scored by the normal population, it detects attempts to fake bad, 3) K scale detects
people who attempt to deny problems and present oneself in a positive light, criterion-group was
people with normal patterns but were known to be disturbed.
Nature of Test Items: 550 items covering wide range of categories, from subjects physical
condition to moral and social beliefs. Subject responds by indicating agreement, disagreement, oruncertainty.
Number of Test Forms: two MMPI and MMPI-2
Subtests:
Lie Scale Naive attempts to fake goodF Scale Attempt to fake bad
K Scale Defensiveness
Hypochondriasis Physical complaints
Depression Depression
Hysteria ImmaturityPsychopathic Deviate Authority conflict
Masculinity-Femininity Male/female interests
Paranoia Suspicion, hostility
Psychasthenia Anxiety
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
7/29
Test Review Forms 7
Schizophrenia Alienation, withdrawalHypomania Elated mood, high energy
Social Introversion Introversion, shyness
MMPI-2
Variable Response Deals with random respondingConsistency Scale using matched items with similar content
True Response Measures acquiescence--to agree
Consistency Scale regardless of content of the item
HEA Measures health concerns
TPA Measures type A personality--harddriving, impatient, irritable
FAM Evaluates family disorders and possible
child abuse
WRK Work interference. Examines behaviors
or attitudes likely to interfere with
work performance.
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
8/29
Test Review Forms 8
Scale < T 45 60 70 T 70 T > Implications for
Marked ScoresLie (L) Willingness to admit
to common human
faults
Sees things in black
and white, there is a
wrong and right wayto behave. Highstandards for self and
others
Unusual score. Fearful of being
judged by others
Infrequency (F) No problems he/she
is aware of
Feeling badly in one
area, not too worriedabout the problem
Feeling badly, life is
not going well
Usually motivated for
therapy because ofpsychological pain
(K) Life is not going wellor has not gone well
in recent past
Life is going alongwell
Great emphasis onlife being good
Inability to seeaspects of personal
hurt
Hypochondriasis (Hs) Does not complain
about physical illnessas much as the
average person
May have had a cold
or not felt well whentaking the test
Illness is a main
focus of concern forthe person
Person does not see
main focus of howpsychological stress
affects his/her bodilycomplaint. Does not
see the need forpsychological help.
Depression (D) Optimistic Feeling blue, mayhave had a down
day
Hurting, may bemotivated for
psychological help
Person usuallymotivated for therapy
Hysteria (Hy) Believes others see
life as too easy
Optimistic, cheerful Denies the
psychological impactof problems, unaware
Lacks insight into
personal problems
Psychopathic Deviate(Pd)
Peaceable Assertive Self centered, angryif others do not put
clients needs first
Difficulty seeingneed to change own
behavior
Masculinity (Mt) Not usual score Aesthetic interests Educated, does not fit
macho role
May have some
behavioral passivity
Femininity Not usual score Rarely seen. Does not
like to seen as atypical woman
Feminine, accepts
feminine role
May have difficulty
wit appropriate sexrole identification
Paranoia (Pa) Nave or wishesothers to see him or
her that way
Sensitive. Suspicious of othersmotives
May be suspicious orwary of therapist
Psychasthenia (Pt) Non-anxious. Mayappear unmotivated
May pb organizedand puctual
Anxious, ruminatesabout problems
Anxiety maymotivate a person tocome in for therapy
Schizophrenia (Sc) Likes structure, non-imaginative
Maybe Creative Confused, hard tofollow, typically has
used wordsidiosyncratically
May have poorjudgment. May feel
different than others
Hypomaniz (Ma) Lacks energy Energetic May be hyperactive,and take one more
than one can finish
May have difficultykeeping to one task
and focusing on onetopic
Social Introversion(Si)
Extroverted. Maylike being in front of
people
Prefers the companyof people he/she
knows.
Introverted. Hurts tobe around others.
Difficulty inovercoming
introversion to comeinto therapy
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
9/29
Test Review Forms 9
Reliability Information:
Test-Retest: Using a normal population of 47 individuals over a one year interval, reliabilities
ranged form .57 for the hysteria scale to .83 for the hypomania scale. Over a one week interval onone hundred people from a normal population reliabilities ranged from .46 for the lie scale to .91
from masculinity-femininity. Over a three day interval on thirty individuals form the normal
population reliabilities ranged from .52 for psychopathic deviate scale to .93 for the K scale.
Split-Half: none
Alternate-Form: none
Interitem Consistency: none
Standard Error of Measurement: none
Validity Information:
Face Validity: none
Content Validity: using criterion-group approach content does distinguish groups
Criterion-Related Validity: bases for test construction
Construct Validity: extensive studies done for alcoholism, eating disorders, low-back pain patients,
delinquent behavior, women at risk for child abuse.
Standardization:
Size and Composition of the Standardized Sample: MMPI of a cross-section of the Minnesotapopulation, ranging from 16 to 55 and including both sexes. Also included data on 250 precollege
and college students. MMPI-2 selected 2900 subjects from seven geographic areas of the U.S.
Describe the Sampling Procedures: unknown
Administration Procedures: check reading ability and administer test
Scoring: precise scoring for true/false
Interpretation: Very complicated interpretation procedures which require training. Meehl's twopoint code (two highest scales that are elevated) gives configural patterns for identification.
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
10/29
Test Review Forms 10
Comments:
Appropriate Client Use: MMPI has been used with a variety of clients.
Appropriate for Which Groups of People with Disabilities: those with reading abilities.
Groups of People with Disabilities not Appropriate: those with out language abilities, possibly
those hearing impaired and visually impaired.
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
11/29
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
12/29
Test Review Forms 12
L: cautious, hesitant to assert own views or opinions; not sarcastic or sharp-
tongued
Self H: has good opinion of self; sees self as accepted personnally talented, andas attractive
(Sa) L: self-doubting; readily assumes blame when things go wrong; often thinks
others are better
Independence H: self-sufficient, resourceful, detached
(In) L: lacks self-confidence, seeks support from others
Empathy (Em) H: comfortable with self and well-accepted by others; understands the
feelings of others
L: ill at ease in many situations; unempathic
Responsibility H: responsible, reasonable, takes duties seriously
(Re) L: not overly concerned about duties and obligations; may be careless or lazy
Socialization H: comfortably accepts ordinary rules and(So) regulations; finds it easy to conform
L: resists rules and regulations; finds it hard to conform; not conventional
Self Control H: tries to control emotions and temper; takes(Sc) pride in being self-disciplined
L: has strong feelings and emotions, and makes little attempt to hide them;
speaks out when angry or annoyed
Good H: wants to make a good impression; tries to do what will please others
(Gi) L: insists on being himself or herself, even if this causes friction or problems
Communality H: fits in easily; sees self as a quite average
Cm) personL: sees self as different from others; does not have the same ideas,
preferences, etc., as others
Well Being H: feels in good physical and emotional health;
(Wb) optimistic about the future
L: concerned about health and personal problems; worried about the future
Tolerance H: is tolerant of others' beliefs and values, even
(To) when different from or counter to own beliefs
L: not tolerant of others; skeptical about what they say
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
13/29
Test Review Forms 13
Achievement H: has strong drive to do well; likes to work in(Ac) settings where tasks and expectation are clearly
defined
L: has difficulty in doing best work in situations with strict rules andexpectations
Achievement H: has strong drive to do well; likes to work inIndepen- settings that encourage freedom and individual
dence (Ai) initiative
L: has difficulty in doing best work in situations that are vague, poorly
defined, and lacking clear-cut methods and standards
Intellectual H: efficient in use of intellectual abilities;
(ie) can keep on at a task where others might get
bored or discouragedL: has a hard time getting started on things, and seeing them through to
completion
Psychological H: more interested in why people do what they
Mindedness do than in what they do; good judge of how people(Py) feel and what they think about things
L: more interested in the practical and concrete than the abstract; looks
more at what people do than what they feel of think
Flexibility H: flexible; likes change and variety; easily (Fx) bored
by routine life and everyday experience; may impatient, and even erratic
L: not changeable; likes a steady pace and well-organized life, may bestubborn and even rigid
Femininity H: sympathetic, helpful, sensitive to criticismMasculinity tends to interpret events from a personal point
(F/M) of view; often feels vulnerable
L: decisive, action-oriented; takes the initiative; not easily subdued; rather
unsentimental
Internality H: introversion
(v.1) L: extraversion
Norm-favoringH: conformity
(v.2) L: nonconformity
Self-Real- H: capable to cope with stresses of life;
ization (v.3) reasonable fulfilled or actualized
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
14/29
Test Review Forms 14
L: lacking resolve, vulnerable to life's trauma; not fulfilled or self-
actualized.
Validation Scales are the Well Being (raw scores below 20 are faking bad); Good Impression (raw
scores above 31 are faking good) and; Communality (raw scores below 27 are erratic and non-normal patterns of response)
Reliability Information:
Test-Retest: reliability coefficients range from a low of .43 (Communality, males) to a high of .79
(Intelligence for females).
Split-Half: none
Alternate-Form: reliability coefficients range from .42 (flexibility for females) to .83 on a number
of scales
Interitem Consistency: Cronbach's Alpha coefficient range from .46 (Self Acceptance, males) to .
85 (Self-Realization, males and males and females combined)
Standard Error of Measurement:
Validity Information:
Face Validity: not applicable
Content Validity: not applicable
Criterion-Related Validity: used as a bases for construction of the test
Construct Validity: Correlations coefficients are given for 25 other measures from the WAIS to the
Myers Briggs Type Indicator.
Standardization:
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
15/29
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
16/29
Test Review Forms 16
as sources of wisdom and perceptive insight. Betas of minimal type development may be view as
overly conforming, rigid, and unresponsive.
Gama types: are interpersonally focused, but make judgments and decisions on a highly
individualistic basis. They are skeptical and tend to question rather than accept traditional normsand values, but nonetheless remain actively involved in commerce with others. Gammas who have
reached optimal development of their type can be innovative, creative leaders who function on the
cutting edge of their fields. Gammas whose type is minimally realized may be seen as inordinatelyrebellious, selfish, and disruptive.
Delta types: Are internally focused and reserve to the themselves the prerogatives of decision-
making and direction in their lives. They tend to be fairly private and detached, but are alsoreflective. Deltas who have reached optimal realization of their type can be imaginative, creative,
and artistically talented, but their contributions may go unnoticed because they tend not to make a
production of themselves. Deltas whose type is minimally developed can be viewed as self-
defeating, withdrawn, vulnerable, and prone to decompensation.
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
17/29
Test Review Forms 17
PORTFOLIO
TEST REVIEW FORM
Description of the Test:
Title: Self-Directed Search
Author(s): John L. Holland
Publisher: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Copyright Date(s): 1975, 1977, & 1985
Type of Test: Vocational Interest
Underlying Theory: Peoples vocations are an expression of their personalities. Peoples vocational
personalities can be assumed under six personality types Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social,Enterprising, and Conventional.
Nature of Test Items: Varies with each subtest from the test-taker providing responses, toindicating likes and dislikes, and yes and no.
Number of Test Forms: one
Subtests:
Occupational Daydream allows for responses about careers daydreamed about
Activities allows for responses about work related activities the test-taker may
like or dislike
Competencies allows for responses about work related activities the test-taker can
do well or competently
Occupations allows for responses concerning attitudes and feelings of the test-
taker about a variety of occupations
Self-Estimates allows for responses rating the test-takers estimate on 12 different
work traits
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
18/29
Test Review Forms 18
Reliability Information:
Test-Retest: for the 1971 version the range of reliability coefficients was from a low of .31(Conventional, high school boys) to a high of .84 (Investigative, college freshman) for an interval
of 3-4 weeks for the high school students and 7-10 months for the college freshman. For the 1977
version the range of reliability coefficients was from a low of .56 (Occupations Conventional) to ahigh of .90 (Competencies, Realistic) for high school students predominantly female with a 1-4
week interval.
Split-Half: Odd-Even, 1977 version had a summary range of reliability coefficients from .83 to .95.
Interitem Consistency: Cronbach's Alpha for 1985 version had a summary range of reliability
coefficients from .86 (Realistic and Conventional) to .91 (Investigative).
Standard Error of Measurement: ranged from a low of 2.71 (females age 14-18, Realistic) to a high
of 3.82 (males age 14-18, Social)
Validity Information:
Face Validity: has face validity
Content Validity: has content validity
Criterion-Related Validity: predictive validity given in percentages of people who entered into
their high point code field of work after 1 to 3 years ranged from a low of 25% (Competency) to a
high of 52% daydream code.
Construct Validity: Manual indicates over 400 studies of construct validity have been done
Standardization:
Size and Composition of the Standardized Sample: mostly high school students and college
students
Describe the Sampling Procedures: not given
Administration Procedures: self-administered
Scoring: rating and additions done by hand
Interpretation: clear direction for self-interpretation using the occupational finder
Comments:
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
19/29
Test Review Forms 19
Appropriate Client Use: for reading students and adults
Appropriate for Which Groups of People with Disabilities: those that can read or have nosignificant language barriers
Groups of People with Disabilities not Appropriate: those with language barriers and nonreaders
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
20/29
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
21/29
Test Review Forms 21
student, the appropriateness and descriptiveness of responses, and the use of slang in
communication.
Production: assesses how the person produces rather than what is produced: behaviors used while
working, how group size influenced production, ability to shift tasks, organization of work space,need for stimulation to continue work, and desire to participate in tasks and task strategies.
Reliability Information:
Test-Retest: none
Split-Half: none
Alternate Form: none
Interitem Consistency: Spearman-Brown Prophesy formula: for the Secondary scale overall .99with a range from a low of .95 (social coping & pragmatic language) to a high of .96 (relationships
and production)
Inter-Rater: two teachers yield a inter-rater coefficient of .89
Standard Error of Measurement: SEM 1.60
Validity Information:
Face Validity: has face validity
Content Validity: items were selected by interviews from teachers of students with learningdisabilities.
Criterion-Related Validity: none.
Construct Validity: all subscales were highly correlated .88 to .92. Also the scale was able to
distinguish between mild to moderate problems and moderate to severe problems.
Standardization:
Size and Composition of the Standardized Sample: 82 students (46 mild to moderate; 36 moderateto severe).
Describe the Sampling Procedures: none
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
22/29
Test Review Forms 22
Administration Procedures: teacher observes and scores students after observation
Scoring: hand scored and tabulated
Interpretation: 16 profiles are given to indicate how to interpret the results and strategies are givenfor remediation.
Comments:
Appropriate Client Use: only for students age 13-18 (secondary form) who have been diagnosed
with a learning disability
Appropriate for Which Groups of People with Disabilities:
Students with learning disabilities.
Groups of People with Disabilities not Appropriate: those with other types of disabilities.
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
23/29
Test Review Forms 23
PORTFOLIO
TEST REVIEW FORM
Description of the Test:
Title: Woodcock Johnson III
Author(s): Richard W. Woodcock and M.B. Johnson (1977)
Publisher: Riverside Publishing. www.woodcock-johnson.com
Copyright Date(s): 2001
Type of Test: Assess cognitive abilities, scholastic aptitude, academic achievement, and scholastic
and nonscholastic interests
Underlying Theory: The primary value of the Woodcock-Johnson III battery of tests is that they
provide an indication of a subjects normative status and level of development in the cognitive,achievement, and interest areas they assess. By doing so, they help test administrators decide
whether a subject is in need of psychological and educational assistance and then help in the
development of a program to provide the necessary assistance.
Nature of Test Items: The WJ-III has two parts the Tests of Cognitive Ability (10standard and 10
supplemental subtests) and the Tests of Achievement (12 standard and 10 supplemental subtests).
Number of Test Forms: One battery of tests.
Subtests:
Cognitive Ability Subtests **Standard Measures the Ability
**Verbal Comprehension Identify objects: knowledge of antonyms
and synonyms; completing verbal analogies
**Visual-Auditory Learning To associate new visual symbols with
familiar words and to translate a series of
symbols into verbal sentences
**Spatial Relations Learn to and recall pictographic
representations of words
** Sound Blending Synthesizing language sounds (phonemes)**Concept formation Identify, categorize, and determine rules
**Visual Matching Rapidly locating and circling identical
numbers from a defined set of numbers
** Numbers Reversed Holding a span of numbers in immediate
awareness while reversing the sequence
**Incomplete Words Auditory closure
**Auditory working Memory Holding a mixed set of numbers and words
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
24/29
Test Review Forms 24
in immediate awareness while reorderinginto sequences
**Visual-Auditory Learning-Delayed Recalling and relearning pictographicrepresentations of words from hours to 8
days laterAnalysis-Synthesis Analyzing puzzles (using symbolic
formulations) to determine missing
components
General Information Identifying where objects are found and
what people typically do with an object
Memory for Words Repeating a list of unrelated words in
correct sequence
Retrieval Fluency Naming as many examples as possible from
a given category
Auditory Attention Identifying auditorily-presented words amid
increasingly intense background noisePicture Recognition Identifying a subset of previously presented
pictures within a filed of distracting pictures
Decision Speed Locating and circling two pictures mostsimilar conceptually in a row
Rapid Picture Naming Recognizing objects, then retrieving andarticulating their names rapidly
Planning Tracing a pattern without removing thepencil from paper or retracing any lines
Pair Cancellation Identifying and circling instances of arepeated pattern rapidly
Achievement Subtests **Standard Measures Skill in **Letter-Word Identification Reading identification skills by identifying
isolated letters and words
**Reading Fluency Reading printed statements rapidly and
responding true and false (Yes or No)
**Story Recall Listening to and recalling details of stories
**Passage Comprehension Reading a short passage and identifying amissing key word
**Understanding Directions Listening to a sequence of instructions and
then following directions
**Calculation Performing mathematical calculations
**Applied Problems Analyzing and solving practicalmathematical problems
**Math Fluency Adding, subtracting, and multiplying rapidly
**Writing Samples Writing responses to a variety of demands
**Spelling Spelling orally presented words
**Writing Fluency Formulating and writing simple sentences
**Writing Samples Writing meaningful sentences for a given
purpose
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
25/29
Test Review Forms 25
**Story Recall-Delayed Recalling previously-presented storyelements
Reading Vocabulary Reading words and supplying appropriatemeanings
Quantitative Concepts Knowledge of mathematical concepts andvocabulary
Word Attack Reading phonically regular non-words
Picture Vocabulary Identifying Objects
Oral Comprehension Identifying objects
Editing Identifying and correcting errors in written
passages
Academic Knowledge Responding to questions about science,
social studies, and humanities
Spelling of Sounds Spelling letter combinations that are regular
patterns in written English
Sound Awareness Providing rhyming words; removing,substituting, and reversing parts of words to
make new words
Punctuation & Capitalization Applying punctuation and capitalization
rules
Reliability Information:
Test-Retest: Reliability Coefficients ranged from .69 for Pair Cancellation ages 26-79 to .95 Math
Fluency ages 7-11.
Split-Half: none
Alternate Form: none
Interitem Consistency: Subtest reliability coefficients range from a low of .86 Phonemic
Awareness to a high of .98 for several test in the Cognitive Ability Tests. Reliability coefficients
range from a low of .56 Story Recall to a high of .99 for Letter-Word Identification.
Inter-Rater: Reliability Coefficients in the Writing Sample test ranged from .90 for subjects in
Grade 9 to .99 for subjects in grade 3. For the Writing Fluency test coefficients ranged from .96subjects in College to .99 subjects Adults.
Standard Error of Measurement: SEM for the Cognitive Standard battery ranged from a low of
1.41 Thinking Ability Age 4 to a high of 6.60 Cognitive Efficiency age 19. SEM forAchievement Standard batter ranged from a low of 1.66 Total Achievement age 9 to a high of 8.14
for Broad Math age 20-29.
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
26/29
Test Review Forms 26
Validity Information:
Face Validity: has face validity
Content Validity: items were selected by contributions from outside experts, experienced teachersand psychologists.
Criterion-Related Validity: none.
Construct Validity: Confirmatory factor analyses were done. Nine factors were identified.
Standardization:
Size and Composition of the Standardized Sample: 8,818 subjects were participants in the
normative sample. Norm ages ranged from pre-school (2) to adult (90). Data were obtained in 27states.
Describe the Sampling Procedures: Stratified random sampling
Administration Procedures: Battery of tests can be administered, scored, and interpreted by a
variety of personnel including school psychologists, and special education teachers. People should
be trained before administration.
Scoring: hand scored and by observation.
Interpretation: Subtests give information about normative status of individual in areas of cognitive
ability
Comments:
Appropriate Client Use: only for people ages 2-90
Appropriate for Which Groups of People with Disabilities:
Students with learning disabilities.
Groups of People with Disabilities not Appropriate: those with language barriers and nonreaders.
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
27/29
Test Review Forms 27
PORTFOLIO
TEST REVIEW FORM
Description of the Test:
Title: Wide Range Achievement Test III (WRAT3)
Author(s): Gary S. Wilkinson
Publisher: Wide Range: Willmington, Delaware
Copyright Date(s): 1993
Type of Test: Achievement
Underlying Theory: The purpose of the WRAT3 is to measure the codes which are needed to learnbasic skills of reading, spelling, and arithmetic. Absolute scores, standard scores, and grade scores
are provided for each of these three subtests which can be used to comare the achievement levelsof one person to another from kindergarten through adulthood. When used in conjunction with a
test measuring general intelligence which has the same standard deviation units as the WRAT3, it
can be a valuable tool in determination of learning ability or learning disability.
The WRAT3 was intentionally designed to eliminate, as totally as possible, the effects of
comprehension.
When dealing with areas of learning disabilities, especially reading, it is essential to determine
whether the problem is due to an inability to learn the codes which are necessary to acquire the
skill or whether the problem is due to an inability to derive meaning from the codes.
Since the WRAT3 scores are free from the contaminating effects of comprehension, it is possible
to compare WRAT3 standard scores with comprehension scores from other tests such as theWechsler scales. One can then determine precisely where the individual is having difficulty and
can prescribe those remedial/educational programs which will target treatment for the specific
defect. It is a grave mistake to emphasize comprehension if the person lacks the coding skills to
learn the mechanics of reading. It is an equally grave mistake to emphasize reading mechanics inan already good reader whose problems is an inability to comprehend or get meaning.
Nature of Test Items: Reading words, Spelling words, completing mathematics caluclations
Number of Test Forms: two Blue form and Tan form
Subtests: Reading, Spelling, Arithmetic
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
28/29
Test Review Forms 28
Reliability Information:
Test-Retest: Reliability coefficients ranged from .91 to .98
Split-Half: The Rasch person separation indices were performed which are equivalent to the KR20
estimation of internal consistency. Reliability coefficients ranged from .98 to.99
Alternate-Form: The two forms had reliability coefficients that raged from .82 Arithmetic to .99
Reading
Interitem Consistency: Reliability coefficient alpha was computed which ranged from .85 to .95.
Inter-Rater: none
Standard Error of Measurement: Ranged from +/- 12 to +/- 6
Validity Information:
Face Validity: has face validity
Content Validity: Easy items, hard items, and in-between items have been selected to measure therespective variables measured by the WRAT3. Many of the items were first developed with
previous editions of the WRAT dating back to 1938.
Criterion-Related Validity: WRAT3 was correlated with the WISC III and WAIS-R Verbal Scale
with a low verbal correlation of .53 and a high of .72. California Test of Basic Skills 4th Ed. on the
Verbal reading a low of .62 and high of .67. California Achievement Test Form E Total readinga low of .49 and high of .72/ Standford Achievement Test a Total reading a low of .75 and a high
of .87.
Construct Validity: The WRAT3 scores demonstrated an ability to discriminate between studentsthat were Gifted, Learning Disabled, [Mild Cognitively Delayed], and Normal.
Standardization:
Size and Composition of the Standardized Sample: 4,433 subjects from 4 regions of the US East,
North Central, South, and West. Ages ranging from 5 years to 74 years.
Describe the Sampling Procedures: Stratified Random Sampling
-
7/31/2019 Test Reviews Hand Out
29/29
Test Review Forms 29
Administration Procedures: Individually administered timed tests on Reading Words and small
group of no more than 5 on Spelling, and Arithmetic.
Scoring: Hand scored, points awarded for correct answers.
Interpretation: Interpretation tables are given.
Comments:
Appropriate Client Use: for people ages 5 through 74
Appropriate for Which Groups of People with Disabilities: for students and adults that read andcommunicate
Groups of People with Disabilities not Appropriate: Visually impaired, non-reading, and with
communication disorders.