Do Cognitive Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses Differentially Predict Errors on Reading, Writing, and Spelling?

Liu, Xiaochen; Marchis, Lavinia; DeBiase, Emily; Breaux, Kristina C.; Courville, Troy; Pan, Xingyu; Hatcher, Ryan C.; Koriakin, Taylor A.; Choi, Dowon; Kaufman, Alan S.

doi:10.1177/0734282916668996

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, students with similar broad ability profiles may have differed in their profile of narrow abilities, which could have increased heterogeneity within groups. In contrast to the findings of the present study, Liu et al (2017) found that particular profiles of strengths and weaknesses differentially predict error performance across several tests of reading and writing, and Koriakin et al (2017) found that particular profiles of strengths and weaknesses differentially predict error performance across tests of mathematics. The results of the present study along with the Liu et al and Koriakin et al studies suggest that the measures used to determine profiles may be an important sampling consideration for identifying group differences.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Directionscontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Due to sample size limitations, distinct phonological and orthographic groups were not feasible. However, the error factor scores of students with phonological processing weaknesses may differ from those of students with orthographic processing weaknesses, as shown in Liu et al (2017). Combining these profiles into one group may have obscured group differences in error factor scores.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses on the WISC-V, DAS-II, and KABC-II and Their Relationship to Students’ Errors in Oral Language, Reading, Writing, Spelling, and Math

Breaux

Avitia

Koriakin

et al. 2016

Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the relationship between specific cognitive patterns of strengths and weaknesses and the errors children make on oral language, reading, writing, spelling, and math subtests from the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement-Third Edition (KTEA-3). Participants with scores from the KTEA-3 and either the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fifth Edition (WISC-V), Differential Ability Scales-Second Edition (DAS-II), or Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children-Second Edition (KABC-II) were selected based on their profile of scores. Error factor scores for the oral and written language tests were compared for three groups: High Gc paired with low processing speed, long-term memory, and/or reasoning abilities; Low Gc paired with high speed, memory, and/or reasoning; and Low orthographic and/ or phonological processing. Error factor scores for the math tests were compared for three groups: High Gc profile; High Gf paired with low processing speed and/or long-term memory; and Low Gf paired with high processing speed and/or long-term memory. Results indicated a difference in Oral Expression and Written Expression error factor scores between the group with High Gc paired with low processing speed, long-term memory, and/or reasoning abilities; and the group with Low Gc paired with high speed, memory, and/or reasoning.

show abstract

Section: Limitations and Future Directionscontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses on the WISC-V, DAS-II, and KABC-II and Their Relationship to Students’ Errors in Oral Language, Reading, Writing, Spelling, and Math

Breaux

Avitia

Koriakin

et al. 2016

Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a rapid letter naming task, respondents read letters aloud and the time spent naming the letters is recorded. For example, Liu et al (2017) used the Letter Naming Facility task from the Kaufman Test of Education Achievement (Kaufman & Kaufman, 2014) to measure orthographic processing.…”

Section: Existing Assessments Of Orthographic Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

An innovative measure of orthographic processing: Development and initial validation

Chen

Wilson²,

Irey

et al. 2020

Language Testing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Orthographic processing – the ability to perceive, access, differentiate, and manipulate orthographic knowledge – is essential when learning to recognize words. Despite its critical importance in literacy acquisition, the field lacks a tool to assess this essential cognitive ability. The goal of this study was to design a computer-based assessment of orthographic processing and investigate its psychometric properties. The rationale for designing specific items was discussed, methods used to separate orthographic processing from word recognition and spelling ability were presented, and item suitability was examined. Person separation reliability was .91 for this assessment. Validity evidence was gathered and reported.

show abstract

“…Liu and colleagues (2017) also found that Gc was an important broad ability for basic reading skills, reading comprehension, and written expression. In almost every case, the high Gc group outperformed all other groups in the study on the phonological processing, word reading, and decoding error factors.…”

Section: Performance On Cognitive and Linguistic Processes Also Informentioning

confidence: 90%

Implications of Error Analysis Studies for Academic Interventions

Mather

Wendling

2016

Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We reviewed 13 studies that focused on analyzing student errors on achievement tests from the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement-Third edition (KTEA-3). The intent was to determine what instructional implications could be derived from in-depth error analysis. As we reviewed these studies, several themes emerged. We explain how a careful analysis of errors is key to planning the most appropriate instructional interventions.

show abstract

Do Cognitive Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses Differentially Predict Errors on Reading, Writing, and Spelling?

Abstract: This study investigated the relationship between specific cognitive patterns of strengths and weaknesses (PSWs) and the errors children make in reading, writing, and spelling tests from the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement-Third Edition (KTEA-3).

Cited by 8 publications

References 52 publications

Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses on the WISC-V, DAS-II, and KABC-II and Their Relationship to Students’ Errors in Oral Language, Reading, Writing, Spelling, and Math

Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses on the WISC-V, DAS-II, and KABC-II and Their Relationship to Students’ Errors in Oral Language, Reading, Writing, Spelling, and Math

An innovative measure of orthographic processing: Development and initial validation

Implications of Error Analysis Studies for Academic Interventions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About