This special issue focuses on an array of studies conducted using the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement-Third Edition (KTEA-3) error analysis system. These studies, based on KTEA-3 standardization and validation data with normal and clinical samples, were conducted to provide greater understanding of the kinds of errors students make in reading, writing, math, and oral language. This introduction provides a brief history of the error analysis system and outlines the organization of the special issue, which features commentaries on the articles by experts in the field. The themes throughout the special issue are patterns of errors made by students and the educational implications of these patterns.

No abstract

This study investigated developmental gender differences in mathematics achievement, using the child and adolescent portion (ages 6-19 years) of the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement-Third Edition (KTEA-3). Participants were divided into two age categories: 6 to 11 and 12 to 19. Error categories within the Math Concepts & Applications and Math Computation subtests of the KTEA-3 were factor analyzed and revealed five error factors. Multiple ANOVA of the error factor scores showed that, across both age categories, female and male mean scores were not significantly different across four error factors: math calculation, geometric concepts, basic math concepts, and addition. They were significantly different on the complex math problems error factor, with males performing better at the p < .05 significance level for the 6 to 11 age group and at the p < .001 significance level for the 12 to 19 age group. Implications in light of gender stereotype threat are discussed.

The purpose of this study was to understand and compare the types of errors students with a specific learning disability in reading and/or writing (SLD-R/W) and those with a specific learning disability in math (SLD-M) made in the areas of reading, writing, language, and mathematics. Clinical samples were selected from the norming population of the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement-Third Edition (KTEA-3) as well as matched controls. Although the authors expected to find overall differences between the groups in their area of difficulties, the study revealed that the two clinical samples were more similar than different. In particular, the SLD-M clinical group performed lower on some errors that were not related to their area of disability compared with the SLD-R/W group. Implications of the study show the importance of error analysis especially when creating goals for individual education plans. Although a student may have an SLD-R/W, he or she may still need support in certain mathematic areas, and vice versa.

This study investigated the differences in error factor scores on the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement-Third Edition between individuals with mild intellectual disabilities (Mild IDs), those with low achievement scores but average intelligence, and those with low intelligence but without a Mild ID diagnosis. The two control groups were matched with the Mild ID clinical cases on demographic variables including age, gender, and parental education. Results showed significant differences between the groups on several error factors, particularly between the Mild ID group and the two control groups, and no significant differences between all three groups on six error factors. In addition, the two control groups differed significantly on four error factors. Implications for intervention selection, diagnostic considerations, and future directions for achievement test creation are discussed.