Diagnostic Accuracy of the Cognitive Levels Test, the KeyMath-Revised, and the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-Revised

Abstract

Sixty-six regular classroom children and 52 ch'ildren with learning disabilities were administered the Cognitive Levels Test (CLT), the KeyMath-Revised (KMR), and the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-Revised (WRMTR). For both groups, correlations between the CLT and WRMTR scores were found to be higher than those typically found in the literature for cognitive and reading measures. For both groups, correlations between the CLT and KMR scores were also higher than those commonly found in the literature for cognitive and math measures. With regard to differences between means, 70% of the CLT-achievement differences were significant for the learning disabled group. For the regular classroom group, only 3% of the CLT-achievement differences were significant. Overall, 81% of the combined subjects were correctly classified using the three-instrument battery.Criterion-related validity studies are common fare in the measurement literature. In their simplest form, validity coefficients are computed between some predictive instrument (e.g., a test of intelligence) and a criterion measure (e.g., reading achievement). The magnitudes of these correlations represent the amount of variance in the criterion measure that can be explained solely from a knowledge of examinees' performances on the predictive instrument.Taken another step, hypotheses regarding differences between the mean scores of the predictor and criterion variables may be constructed. For instance, no difference between IQ and reading achievement means would be hypothesized for normal subjects. On the other hand, many state definitions of learning disabilities mandate a significant discrepancy between IQ and academic achievement. A finding of significant 163 at Yale University Library on May 16, 2015 aei.sagepub.com Downloaded from

The Relationship Between Mathematics and Language: Academic Implications for Children With Specific Language Impairment and English Language Learners

“…In order to have a baseline measure of children's mathematics skills on a traditional, language-heavy, symbolheavy task, participants completed the KeyMath3 (Connolly, 2007), a developmental assessment of mathematical concepts that has been used frequently in research, including studies with exceptional populations (Baylor, 1998;Eaves, 1992;Flores, 2009;Kratochwill & Demuth, 1976;Tinney, 1975). 4 2 The parent questionnaire was available in both English and Spanish.…”

KeyMath, Revised: Normative Updates for the United States and Canada

“…Eaves, Vance, Mann, and Parker-Bohannon (1990) reported fairly high correlations with a test of cognitive ability; however, the reported results provide more of a comment on the cognitive test than on KMR/KMR-NU. Eaves (1992) in a follow-up investigation examined the issue of diagnostic accuracy when three tests, a aftermentioned cognitive measure, a reading measure, and KMR, were administered. He reported an 81% classification agreement (normal versus learning disabled), which can be interpreted as suggesting that KMR in combination with two specific other measures can provide useful diagnostic classification evidence for learning disabled children.…”

ElKeymath Diagnostic Arihmetic Testcomo instrumento para la intervención psicopedagógica: una revisión

“…Las diferencias entre medias se calcularon mediante Análisis de la varianza, el cual tuvo como resultado un efecto no significativo para los tests. Concluyen que en muestras como la que se utilizó en el estudio (38 alumnos con una edad media de 10 años), el CLT puede calcular el rendimiento en Matemáticas de un modo muy similar al proporcionado por el KM-R. Dos años mas tarde, Eaves (1992) Walker y Arnault (1991) estudiaron la validez de constructo del KM-R poniendo a prueba el modelo factorial propuesto por su autor. Los resultados confirmaron dicho modelo.…”