Canonical Analysis of Reading Readiness Measures and the Frostig Developmental Test of Visual Perception

Ohnmacht, Fred W.; Olson, Arthur V.

doi:10.1177/001316446802800232

Cited by 17 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results obtained verify the findings of other investigators dealing with this instrument (Corah & Powell, 1963;Ohnmacht & Olson, 1968;Olson, et al, 1968;Rosen & Ohnmacht. 1968).…”

Section: Subjectssupporting

confidence: 90%

Structure and Predictive Validity of the Frostig Developmental Test of Visual Perception in Grades One and Three

Olson

Johnson

1970

J Spec Educ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 1958, Marianne Frostig produced a developmental test of visual perception that has since been revised and standardized. This test, based on her clinical observations and the works of Thurstone (1944), Wedell (1960), and Cruickshank (1957), designated five abilities, which were presumed to be developmentally mutually exclusive. She did not assume that the five abilities were the only ones involved in visual perception, but only that there was a specific relationship between these abilities and the student's ability to learn and adjust. The five abilities identified were: (1) eye-motor co-' ordination, (2) figure-ground, (3) form constancy, (4) position in space, and (5) spatial relations.The purposes of the present study were to determine if the Frostig Developmental Test of Visual Perception (FDTVP) measures several different perceptual abilities, and to determine how well the instrument predicts reading achievement from first to third grade. METHOD SubjectsThe subjects (N=148) were drawn from three elementary schools in a city of approximately 50,000 people in the southeastern part of the United States. The three schools were selected to give an economic cross-section of the community.When the study was begun, the population consisted of 218 first grade children. The mean chronological age for this population was six years and three months, with a standard deviation of seven months. As measured by the WISC, the mean Verbal IQ was 92.44, s.d. 17.18, and the Performance IQ was 97.44, s.d. 16.92. The subjects for the third grade part of the study (N=148) are a lesser nurn-

show abstract

“…The results obtained verify the findings of other investigators dealing with this instrument (Corah & Powell, 1963;Ohnmacht & Olson, 1968;Olson, et al, 1968;Rosen & Ohnmacht. 1968).…”

Section: Subjectssupporting

confidence: 90%

Structure and Predictive Validity of the Frostig Developmental Test of Visual Perception in Grades One and Three

Olson

Johnson

1970

J Spec Educ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One school of thought (Dunteman & Bailey, 1967;Kahn, 1969;Ohnmacht & Olson, 1968;Thorndike, Weiss, & Dawis, 1968b;Vestre & Lorei, 1967; and others) has used canonical weights for these interpretations, while a much smaller group (notably Porebski, 1966a) has used correlations between the canonical variates and the original variables. The two sets of statistics can be very different-some variables can have high weights and low correlations, while other variables can have low weights and high correlations.…”

Section: Interpreting the Nature Of Canonical Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Canonical Variate Analysis and Related Techniques

Darlington

Weinberg

Walberg

1973

Review of Educational Research

193

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses statistical methods for studying relations between two sets of variables, when each set contains more than one variable. The number of methods discussed is about 20 or 25, depending on how one counts. About a third of the methods are old methods criticized here, another third are old methods mentioned favorably, and the rest are new methods published here for the first time.It has not been adequately recognized that problems involving two sets of variables arise frequently in almost every area of the behavioral sciences, as the following list of examples will attest:

show abstract

“…The decision to use standardized canonical weights to interpret the significant canonical-correlations was based on research completed by Denteman and Bailey (1967), Kahn (1969), Ohnmacht and Olson (1968), Thorndike, Weiss, and Dawis (1968), and Vestre and Lorei (1967). It was determined that only canonical correlations significant at the .05 level of confidence would be reported.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%