Woodcock-JohnsonÂ® III - Riverside Publishing

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 3.Descriptions of WJ III NU ACH Clusters and Tests Used in the StudyTest RequirementTotal AchievementTests 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, & 11Provides an overall score of achievement.Curricular AreaReading (Grw)Broad ReadingTests 1, 2, & 9Basic Reading SkillsTests 1 & 13Reading ComprehensionTests 9 & 17Test 2: Reading Fluency: Reading printed statements rapidly and responding true or false.Test 1: Letter-Word Identification: Identifying and pronouncing printed letters and words; sight wordrecognition.Test 13: Word Attack: Pronouncing nonwords that conform to English spelling rules.Test 9: Passage Comprehension: Identifying a missing key word that makes sense in the context of a writtenpassage.Test 17: Reading Vocabulary: Reading words and providing synonyms, and antonyms; completinganalogies.Math (Gq)Broad MathTests 5, 6, & 10Math Calculation SkillsTests 5 & 6Math ReasoningTests 10 & 18Test 5: Calculation: Performing various mathematical calculations.Test 6: Math Fluency: Adding, subtracting, and multiplying rapidly.Test 10: Applied Problems: Analyzing and solving orally presented, practical mathematical problems.Test 18: Quantitative Concepts: Identifying math terms and formulae; identifying number patterns.Written Language (Grw)Broad Written LanguageTests 7, 8, & 11Basic Writing SkillsTests 7 & 16Written ExpressionTests 8 & 11Special Purpose ClustersAcademic SkillsTests 1, 5, & 7Academic FluencyTests 2, 6, & 8Academic ApplicationsTests 9, 10, & 11Academic KnowledgeTest 19Test 7: Spelling: Spelling letter combinations that are regular patterns in written English.Test 16: Editing: Identifying and correcting errors in written passages.Test 8: Writing Fluency: Formulating and writing simple sentences rapidly.Test 11: Writing Samples: Writing meaningful sentences for a given purpose.Overall measure of basic achievement skills.Overall measure of academic fluency.Overall measure of application of academic knowledge.A measure of information in curricular areas of science, social studies, and humanities.10
Statistical AnalysesTwo sets of analyses were completed to determine if the WJ III NU scores from theCanadian sample were similar to the scores for the U.S. sample. The first analysisevaluated the comparability of the U.S. and Canadian samples based on the similarityof each sample's distribution (variance) of general intelligence and overall achievement.The second analysis evaluated mean score differences for the WJ III NU cognitive andachievement clusters and individual tests.ResultsCanadian/U.S. Sample ComparabilityA two-sample test for the equality of variance for the WJ III NU General IntellectualAbility Index–Extended (GIA-Ext) score was nonsignificant (F[309] = 1.14, p = .26),indicating that the distribution of general intelligence in the U.S. (W-score variance= 195.46) and Canadian (W-score variance = 172.00) samples was not significantlydifferent. The two-sample test for the equality of variance for the WJ III NU TotalAchievement cluster score was also nonsignificant (F[309] = 0.99, p = .93), indicatingthat the distribution of overall achievement (reading, math, and written languagecombined) in the U.S. (W-score variance = 486.81) and Canadian (W-score variance= 492.01) samples was also similar. These findings indicate that the sample matchingprocess was successful in producing two samples that were similar in their distribution ofgeneral intelligence and overall academic achievement abilities.Canadian and U.S. WJ III NU Score ComparisonsTo better understand the performance of the Canadian sample compared to the U.S.standardization sample, means and standard deviations of the tests and clusters for boththe Canadian and U.S. sample were calculated. Paired sample t tests (see Table 4) werecalculated to evaluate differences between the results of the Canadian and U.S. samples.Due to the large number of t tests conducted, which can produce significant findingsbased on chance alone, each set of t-test comparisons was evaluated against familywisebonferroni corrected p values. The results indicate that while the U.S. sample typicallyscored slightly higher than the Canadian sample on the WJ III NU COG clusters, thedifferences were not statistically significant with one exception—the Long-Term Retrievalcluster. The mean difference of the General Intellectual Ability–Extended (GIA-Ext) scorefor the U.S. sample (M = 100.74, SD = 15.77) was not significant compared to the meandifference for the Canadian sample (M = 98.88, SD = 13.73). Specific CHC cluster scoresfor the Canadian sample ranged from 95.05 on the Long-Term Retrieval cluster to 100.78on the Short-Term Memory cluster, while the range for the U.S. sample was from 100.09on the Fluid Reasoning Cluster to 102.05 on the Short-Term Memory cluster. While theoverall standard deviation is somewhat smaller for the Canadian sample, indicating aslightly more restricted range than the range of scores for the U.S. sample, the previouslydiscussed tests of the equality of variances for general intelligence and total achievementindicates that, overall, these differences are not significant.11
Page 6 and 7: III DS). In addition to the CHC clu
Page 8 and 9: 6education level (chi-square = 4.56
Page 10 and 11: InstrumentationCanadian participant
Page 14 and 15: Table 4.Means and Standard Deviatio
Page 16 and 17: Table 6.Means and Standard Deviatio
Page 18 and 19: ReferencesAmerican Educational Rese
Page 20 and 21: Saklofske, D. H., Hildebrand, D. K.
Page 24: 3800 Golf Road, Suite 100Rolling Me

Woodcock-JohnsonÂ® III - Riverside Publishing

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?