The Concurrent and Congruent Validities of the Wide Range Achievement Test

Hopkins, Kenneth D.; Dobson, James C.; Oldridge, O.A.

doi:10.1177/001316446202200418

Educational and Psychological Measurement

1962

DOI: 10.1177/001316446202200418

|View full text |Cite

The Concurrent and Congruent Validities of the Wide Range Achievement Test

Kenneth D. Hopkins

James C. Dobson

O.A. Oldridge

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

1964

2020

Publication Types

Select...

Article5

Relationship

Self Cite1

Independent4

Authors

Journals

Cited by 8 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the few available studies in which confidential, "purified" teacher ratings have been employed (Hopkins, Dobson, & Oldridge, 1962;Kellaghan, Madaus, & Airasian, 1981;Pedulla, Airasian, & Madaus, 1980), substantial correlations have been found between the ratings and scores on standardized tests. The most extensive of these studies (Kellaghan et al, 1981 ;Pedulla et al, 1980) was done in Ireland and dealt only with two areas: language and math; the areas of science and social studies do not appear to have been investigated.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Concurrent Validity of Standardized Achievement Tests by Content Area Using Teachers' Ratings as Criteria

Hopkins

George

Williams

1985

J Educational Measurement

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To assess the concurrent validity of standardized achievement tests using teachers' ratings (and rankings) of pupils' academic achievement as criteria, 42 teachers evaluated each of their students (n = 1,032) in each of five major curricular areas prior to the administration of a battery of standardized achievement tests. The teachers were directed to rate each student's proficiency disregarding attendance, attitude, deportment, and so on. Within-class correlation coefficients were computed to eliminate rater leniency bias. The standardized achievement tests were found to have substantial concurrent validity in reading, math, language arts, science, and social studies. The normalized teacher ranks yielded significantly higher validity coefficients than did the ratings, although the magnitude of the difference was small. The concurrent validity coefficients for language arts, reading, and math were significantly higher than those in science and social studies.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Concurrent Validity of Standardized Achievement Tests by Content Area Using Teachers' Ratings as Criteria

Hopkins

George

Williams

1985

J Educational Measurement

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

How accurately do teachers’ judge students? Re-analysis of Hoge and Coladarci (1989) meta-analysis

Kaufmann

2020

Contemporary Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teachers' judgments of students' academic functioning: A comparison of actual and predicted performances.

Demaray¹,

Elliott²

1998

School Psychology Quarterly

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between teachers' judgments of students' academic achievement and students' performances on an achievement test was investigated. The major questions examined were: (a) How accurate are teachers' ratings of students' academic achievement? (b) What is the relationship between teachers' judgments, as operationalized by item predictions on a standardized achievement test, and students' actual performances on an achievement test? (c) Does a student's educational status, high-achieving versus low-achieving, affect the accuracy of teachers' judgments? The study included 12 teachers who volunteered to participate, and 47 students randomly selected from Wisconsin public schools. The students consisted of 30 females and 17 males, ranging from first-to fourthgrade levels. Teachers filled out the Academic Competence Scale from the Social Skills Rating System-Teacher version (Gresham & Elliott, 1990) and one questionnaire for each student. The questionnaire, developed by the authors of the current study, required teachers to predict how students would do on each item of the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Brief form (K-TEA; Kaufman & Kaufman, 1985). Students were then administered the K-TEA by a qualified examiner. Teachers' judgments of students' academic achievement on the Academic Competence Scale were correlated moderately high (r = .70) with students' actual K-TEA scores. Furthermore, mean percent agreement between teachers' item predictions and students' actual performances on the K-TEA was moderately high (79%) (Kappa-coefficient of 67%). Lastly, there was partial support for the prediction that teachers were better predictors of higher-achieving than lower-achieving students. Analyses demonstrated a slightly higher percent agreement between teachers and students with above-average K-TEA scores (81 %) than between teachers and students with below-average K-TEA scores (77%). This article concludes with a discussion of the practical implications of these findings for psychologists conducting academic assessments.

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

The Concurrent and Congruent Validities of the Wide Range Achievement Test

Cited by 8 publications

References 2 publications

The Concurrent Validity of Standardized Achievement Tests by Content Area Using Teachers' Ratings as Criteria

The Concurrent Validity of Standardized Achievement Tests by Content Area Using Teachers' Ratings as Criteria

How accurately do teachers’ judge students? Re-analysis of Hoge and Coladarci (1989) meta-analysis

Teachers' judgments of students' academic functioning: A comparison of actual and predicted performances.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About