Woodcock-JohnsonÂ® III - Riverside Publishing

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 4.Means and Standard Deviations of the WJ III NU Clusters for the Canadian (CND) and U.S. Samples (N = 310)CNDMCNDSDU.S.MU.S.SDDiff. t p aIntellectual AbilityGeneral Intellectual Ability–Standard (GIA-Std) 98.57 13.52 100.52 15.72 1.95 1.84 .066General Intellectual Ability–Extended (GIA-Ext) 98.88 13.73 100.74 15.77 1.86 1.78 .075Brief Intellectual Ability (BIA) 100.62 13.06 100.78 15.48 .16 .15 .882CPM ClustersVerbal Ability–Standard 101.25 14.37 100.08 15.91 -1.17 1.10 .276Verbal Ability–Extended 99.98 14.45 100.42 16.39 .44 .41 .685Thinking Ability–Standard 98.05 13.52 101.01 15.66 2.96* 2.75 .006Thinking Ability–Extended 98.79 13.36 101.35 14.88 2.56* 2.52 .012Cognitive Efficiency–Standard 99.79 16.12 101.65 15.26 1.86 1.47 .143Cognitive Efficiency–Extended 101.11 15.69 102.55 15.42 1.44 1.22 .225CHC ClustersComprehension-Knowledge 99.98 14.45 100.42 16.39 .44 .41 .685Long-Term Retrieval 95.05 15.59 100.52 15.09 5.47* 4.84 .000Visual-Spatial Thinking 97.90 15.02 100.23 14.06 2.33* 2.08 .038Auditory Processing 100.18 14.62 101.07 16.21 .89 .77 .441Fluid Reasoning 98.92 13.08 100.09 15.51 1.17 1.07 .284Processing Speed 100.07 15.92 101.39 14.45 1.32 1.16 .248Short-Term Memory 100.78 16.00 102.05 15.62 1.27 1.04 .299a The 16 cognitive cluster comparisons were evaluated at the p = .003 (p = .05/16 = .003) level of significance to reflect an overall familywise error rate perthe Bonferroni adjustment. N = 310 for all clusters for both samples. All t tests had df = 309.*Designates significant differences. Significant at the .05 level. All t tests had df = 309.A review of the CPM clusters (see Table 4) again indicates that the U.S. sample scoreswere slightly higher. However, no significant differences were reported between thetwo samples on any of the CPM clusters. Given that the Thinking Abilities cluster iscomprised of tests from the Fluid Reasoning, Long-Term Retrieval, Auditory Processing,and Visual-Spatial Thinking clusters, this difference is not surprising. An examination ofthe tests that impact the Long-Term Retrieval cluster revealed that the Visual-AuditoryLearning test was the primary reason for the significant difference. A summary of thestandard scores and differences across the WJ III NU COG tests for the Canadian andU.S. samples are highlighted in Table 5. A review of the mean score test comparisons(Table 5) indicated that on the 14 primary cognitive tests, the samples only differedsignificantly on the Visual-Auditory Learning test, with the Canadian subjects (M =94.09, SD = 16.78) scoring approximately 6 standard score points lower than the U.S.subjects (M = 100.28, SD = 15.40), t(309) = 5.27, p = .000.12
Table 5.Means and Standard Deviations of the WJ III NU COG Tests for the Canadian (CND) and U.S. Samples (N = 310)CNDMCNDSDU.S.MU.S.SDDiff. t p aVerbal Comprehension 101.25 14.37 100.08 15.91 -1.17 -1.09 .277General Information 99.16 14.11 101.15 16.18 1.99 1.86 .063Visual-Auditory Learning 94.09 16.78 100.28 15.40 6.19* 5.27 .000Retrieval Fluency 98.24 14.37 99.86 15.11 1.62 1.38 .168Spatial Relations 99.05 16.29 100.59 15.53 1.54 1.21 .228Picture Recognition 97.71 15.03 99.75 13.78 2.04 1.79 .074Sound Blending 98.41 14.05 99.83 16.41 1.42 1.27 .207Auditory Attention 101.97 14.49 101.04 12.80 -.93 -.86 .391Concept Formation 98.78 12.26 99.99 16.02 1.21 1.11 .268Analysis-Synthesis 99.86 14.52 100.64 14.52 .78 .70 .484Visual Matching 100.65 15.12 100.81 13.98 .16 .14 .887Decision Speed 98.95 15.94 101.26 14.98 2.31 1.96 .051Numbers Reversed 99.11 16.65 101.44 15.61 2.33 1.78 .076Memory for Words 101.81 15.84 101.47 15.34 -.34 -.29 .774a The 14 cognitive test comparisons were evaluated at the p = .004 (p = .05/14 = .004) level of significance to reflect an overall familywise error rate per theBonferroni adjustment. N = 310 for all tests for both samples. All t tests had df = 309.*Designates significant differences. Significant at the .05 level. All t tests had df = 309.The means and standard deviations, as well as the mean score comparisons, for the WJNU III Tests of Achievement clusters and tests for both samples are summarized in Tables6 and 7, respectively. While the Canadian sample scored slightly higher (M = 101.30,SD = 14.16) than the U.S. sample (M = 100.90, SD = 15.37) on the Total Achievementcluster, the difference was not statistically significant (t[309] = -.37, p = .715). Whilethe Canadian sample scored higher than the U.S. sample (although not statisticallysignificant) on 7 of the 14 WJ III NU ACH clusters, the achievement cluster scores aremore variable, with the Canadian sample tending to score higher on some clusters (e.g.,Broad Reading, Broad Written Language, Math Reasoning, Academic Fluency). However,it is important to note that the Canadian and U.S. samples displayed no statisticallysignificant achievement cluster differences.At the test level (Table 7), five statistically significant differences are noted (ReadingFluency, Reading Vocabulary, Quantitative Concepts, Editing, and Oral Comprehension).The Canadian sample scored significantly higher on the Reading Fluency, QuantitativeConcepts, and Oral Comprehension tests, while the U.S. sample scored statisticallyhigher on the Reading Vocabulary and Editing tests.13
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 12 and 13: Table 3.Descriptions of WJ III NU A
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?