Woodcock-Johnson III Advantages And Disadvantages

The report will critique Woodcock Johnson III Diagnostic Reading Battery (WJ III DRB) and compare my report to the Mental Measurement Yearbook (MMY). The assessment will include the evaluation, in relation to Woodcock et al.’s (1989) WJ III DRB, on the description and purpose of such tests along with ease of use, administrating and interrupting results based on converting raw scores to standard scores including analyzing the results. Finally, assess the overall quality of the test.

This study examined administration and scoring errors made by graduate students when administering the Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities (WJ III COG). In the past studies have been conducted on graduate student errors made on other assessment of cognitive abilities, such as the Wechsler Scales. This study's findings were similar to previous studies.

Reliability generalization examines reliability of scores from tests and detect the causes of measurement error (Kline, 2005).

Reliability measures come in the form of interrater reliability, test-retest for subtest high, internal consistency of .80 or higher, and decision consistency of classification (Brooks, Sherman, & Strauss, 2010; Davis & Matthews, 2010). Internal consistency used the split-half and Cronbach's Alpha. Concurrent validity for intellectual functioning used the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fourth Edition (.34-.58), Differential Abilities Scales–Second Edition, and Wechsler Nonverbal Scale of Ability (.53-.64); academic validity used Wechsler Individual Achievement Test–Second Edition (WIAT-II) (Brooks, Sherman, & Strauss, 2010; Davis & Matthews,

This scale was normed on a population of 500 people aged 65 to 90 (mean age of 77.35 years, SD = 7.11). Of the 500 people, only 35% of people had a high school diploma, 19% had college, 20% had a bachelor’s degree and 26% did not graduate high school (Miller, Davidson, Schindler, & Messier, 2013). Two distinct differences between the batteries is that the older adult assessment contains fewer subtest and has a shorter administration time. Another difference between the assessments is that there are fewer stimuli items in the older adult assessment. Regardless of the differences both batteries still asses the same construct, they are just specified to a different age group. Overall the WMS-IV has good reliability. For all indexes, the overall internal-consistency reliability coefficients are in the 90s (Flanagan & Harrison,

Test worthiness is utilized to determine if an assessment/test is appropriate or suitable to be used. The four criteria for an assessment consist of validity, reliability, cross-cultural fairness, and practicality (Neukrug & Fawcett, 2015). These characteristics should resemble a how a counselor should portray themselves in a Christian worldview because a Christian must be able to utilize testing in a trustworthy manner that would allow for critical thinking to make the best interpretation to treat and encourage clients/patients that is worthy of their humanity. It is important to be able to provide a testing that is consistent and accurate in able to provide an understanding that leads to a better conceptualization and treatment plan. Being

Construct validity. The items on the BDEFS-CA were developed from Barkley’s Hybrid Theory of Executive Functioning. Items on the BDEFS-CA reflect the major components of this theory, indicating high face validity. The author contends that neuropsychological

When choosing a test it is important that you choose one that is standardized and gives you the results you are looking for when testing a student. The Woodcock Johnson III is an excellent and reliable tool for testing students when determining their cognitive abilities. The Woodcock Johnson is a cognitive ability test, which means it test students learned performance and gives an inside on how a student might perform in the future. For most of the educators that give this assessment there is an acronym that they use to talk about this test. They refer to it as the WJ-III. The Woodcock Johnson III was published in the year 2007 and was authored by Richard W. Woodcock, Kevin S. McGrew, and Nancy Mather. This assessment

Although the content validity, test-retest reliability and internal reliability were established previously, researchers decided to use this method to determine the effectiveness of each item on the test. Point biserial correlation used as bivariate measures in this case. This process helps to determine which question or item was problematic and must be discarded based on the p value and Pearson product moment coefficient. In this analysis the values of r shows the relationship between any item scores and the total test scores. These values range from -1.00 to 1.00. Positive values are more desired since they indicate that more participants are able to answer that item

2003 analyzed the test items as a whole with a Rasch analysis. They also analyzed the three subtests individually with Cronbach’s alpha, and then explored the verbal, numerical, and figural content of each subtest using a multidimensional random-coefficients multinomial logit model (Sternberg, et al., 2006). These analyses demonstrated that the STAT works best as a three-factor, between item model (analytical, practical, creative), as opposed to a one-factor model (Sternberg, et al., 2006). Furthermore, Sternberg et al. 2006 also demonstrated that a three-factor model (verbal, numerical, figural), within each subtest was only necessary for the analytical subtest. That being said, reliability measures of the three subtests were not high. Measures of .67, .56, and .72 for analytical, practical, and creative subtests, respectively, were provided (Sternberg et al., 2006). Moreover, the Rasch analysis of the STAT, as a whole, were slightly

The cognitive ability will be objectively evaluated using Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale.17 While this test include different subsets, only the scores from processing speed and working memory subsets-because of their potential role on postural control- will be used in regression models to identify predictors of poor postural control.

The Woodcock Johnson is an academic achievement test; it is a standard battery norm-referenced test. The scores are based on that of the test takers peers and abilities. I have seen test taking process a few time, when working as a paraprofessional at a local school district. However, I hadn’t ever performed the test. The basic information on how to administrate the test came from mock attempts in class. The student I tested is a twelve-year-old male, who is in the sixth grade. On the day of the test, the student was not feeling well, however, I believe he tried his best and remained focused the

Assessors would chose instruments that answer the referral questions. Therefore, the chosen instrument must be able to provide information that is well-found and to accurately identify a targeted trait and/or phenomena (Groth-Marnat, 2009). A number of criticisms on the Rorschach are related to its reliability and validity. Such criticism pointed to the importance of organized coding system. Due to Rorschach’s passing shortly after publishing the test, the instrument was utilized without a standard system. The comprehensive system (CS), which was introduced by J. E. Exner, Jr., has provided much needed standardization to the assessment method (Groth-Marnat, 2009; Weiner, 1999, 2001). More recently, another group of researchers developed a system known as the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) (Meyer & Eblin, 2012; see Meyer, Viglione, Mihura, Erard, & Erdberg, 2011). These systems have been proposed in the effort towards standardlization and increased validity (Choca, 2013). Of these two systems, CS is the most frequently used (Groth-Marnat,

In order to determine the content domain of any given test, the developer needs to first define the construct that they wish to measure and then identify specific content that contains their domain of interest. To do this, a literature search and source materials are often located so that the developer can sample appropriate content from the materials (Griffith, 2017). As part of the methods used in this case, the reliability material was research using two sources of content: (1) the class textbook called Psychological Testing: Principles, Applications, and Issues (Kaplan & Saccuzzo, 2013); and (2) the lecture from the third week of class on reliability (Griffith, 2017). These two sources of content were selected primarily because they

Discriminant validity shows the distinctiveness of a construct compared to the others (Carmines and Zeller 1979). It is verified using the cross loadings and Fornell-Larcker criterion. The table shows that the loadings of the items corresponding to one construct is greater than the loadings on the other constructs. According to Fornell-Larcker(1981) criterion the pairwise correlations among the constructs is to be compared with the Average variance extracted. If the square root of AVE (depicted along the diagonal) for each construct is significantly higher than the cross-correlations shown along the off diagonal in the following table 5.6.