Standardized Achievement Tests Used with Learning Disabled and Non-Learning Disabled Adolescent Boys

McCullough, B. Claire; Zaremba, Barbara A.

doi:10.2307/1510826

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some researchers validated instruments designed to efficiently screen large populations of young children for possible learning disabilities (Beatty, 1979;Colligan, 1979;Dinero, Donah, & Larson, 1979). Others appraised the capacity of a variety of tests, including the Bender Visual-Motor Gestalt Test, the Developmental Test of Motor Behavior, the KeyMath Diagnostic Arithmetic Test, and Woodcock Reading Mastery Test, to wholly or partially diagnose learning disabilities in children (Ackerman, Peters, & Dykman, 1979;Harber, 1979;McCullough & Zaremba, 1979). Still others attempted to devise and validate general measures of intellectual functioning, such as the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Ability (Reeve, Hall, Zakreski, 1979) and the Slosson Intelligence Test (Baum & Kelly, 1979).…”

Section: The Elevation Of Psychometrymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Actuarial Turn in the Science of Learning Disabilities

Danforth

2011

Learning Disability Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the mid-1970s, Donald Hammill and his col leagues authored three scathing critiques of the two most trusted scientific traditions of learning disability treatment -movement education and psycholinguistic training (Hammill, 1972; Hammill & Larsen, 1974; Hammill, Goodman, & Wiederholt, 1974). These critical reviews of research rejected the older model of clinical science that had served as the foundation of the field of learning disabilities and celebrated an actuarial form of research. Was Hammill actually proclaiming a change in the orientation toward scientific research, a paradigm shift involving philosophi cal commitments and methodological practices? This article explores the history of both the foundational clinical science and the new actuarial science that rose to prominence in the field of learning disabilities in the 1970s.

show abstract

Section: The Elevation Of Psychometrymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Actuarial Turn in the Science of Learning Disabilities

Danforth

2011

Learning Disability Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…McCullough and Zaremba (1979) found acceptable levels of reliability for the 1973 version of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test (WRMT) in children with learning disabilities (LD) when examining the total test score. A sample of 384 boys with LD and 603 boys without LD (ages 12-17), some of whom had delinquent records, participated in this study.…”

Section: Nationally Normed Measures Of Decoding and Spellingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies have examined the test stability over short time intervals of nationally normed achievement tests, such as the Peabody Individual Achievement Test (PIAT; Dean, 1979;Naglieri & Pfeiffer, 1983;Smith & Rogers, 1978) and the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test (WRMT; McCullough & Zaremba, 1979), in populations with RD. Some more recent studies that focused on stability indices of reliability for achievement measures unfortunately did not include a specific population of individuals with RD (e.g., Shull-Senn, Weatherly, Morgan, & Bradley-Johnson, 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric Stability of Nationally Normed and Experimental Decoding and Related Measures in Children with Reading Disability

Cirino

Rashid²,

Sevcik

et al. 2002

J Learn Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Achievement and cognitive tests are used extensively in the diagnosis and educational placement of children with reading disabilities (RD). Moreover, research on scholastic interventions often requires repeat testing and information on practice effects. Little is known, however, about the test—retest and other psychometric properties of many commonly used measures within the beginning reader population, nor are these nationally normed or experimental measures comparatively evaluated. This study examined the test—retest reliability, practice effects, and relations among a number of nationally normed measures of word identification and spelling and experimental measures of achievement and reading-related cognitive processing tests in young children with significant RD. Reliability was adequate for most tests, although lower than might be ideal on a few measures when there was a lengthy test—retest interval or with the reduced behavioral variability that can be seen in groups of beginning readers. Practice effects were minimal. There were strong relations between nationally normed measures of decoding and spelling and their experimental counterparts and with most measures of reading-related cognitive processes. The implications for the use of such tests in treatment studies that focus on beginning readers are discussed.

show abstract

“…Reading proficiency was determined by one of the authors, who did the advance reviewing of school performance (reading grades and whether or not reading services were provided); another author administered the decoding section on the Wide Range Achievement TestRevised (WRAT-R; Jastak & Wilkinson, 1984) after the behavioral data were gathered. Achievement measures like the WRAT-R have been traditionally used for making screening and placement decisions (Johnson & Myklebust, 1967;McCullough & Zaremba, 1979). Additionally, the WRAT-R is one of the most frequently used measures of word reading (Newville & Hamm, 1985) and can be considered relatively stable (Naglieri & Parks, 1980).…”

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contrast Sensitivity Differences Between Proficient and Disabled Readers Using Colored Lenses

et al. 1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Colored overlays or lenses (e.g., Irlen lenses) have been used in attempts to remediate reading difficulties. The present study included four middle-socioeconomic status (SES) adults and four middle-SES children with reading disabilities as well as an equal number of nondisabled readers of the same age groups and SES. Examined were (a) the relationship of wavelength (lens color) to visual grating performance, (b) the effect of reading disability on performance with each lens-color/luminosity-grating combination, (c) group performances on a visual detection task with the clear and chromatic lenses, and (d) peripheral retinal brightness thresholds. The spatial frequency of the gratings (and not the lens color) permitted subjects with reading disabilities to be differentiated from the proficient readers. Subjects with reading disabilities displayed significantly lower contrast sensitivity when tested with sine-wave gratings, as well as displaying higher brightness thresholds in the peripheral retina.

show abstract

Standardized Achievement Tests Used with Learning Disabled and Non-Learning Disabled Adolescent Boys

Cited by 9 publications

References 3 publications

The Actuarial Turn in the Science of Learning Disabilities

The Actuarial Turn in the Science of Learning Disabilities

Psychometric Stability of Nationally Normed and Experimental Decoding and Related Measures in Children with Reading Disability

Contrast Sensitivity Differences Between Proficient and Disabled Readers Using Colored Lenses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About