284 ESSENTIALS OF KTEA™-3 AND WIAT®-III ASSESSMENT

Table 4.5 Split-Half Reliability Coefficients for the New KTEA-3 ORF Composite Score

Source: Reading Fluency and Decoding composite reliabilities are from the KTEA-3 Technical & Interpretive Manual (Kaufman & Kaufman, 2014b); Grade-based reliability data are from Table 2.1 and age-based reliability data are from Table 2.2. Oral Reading Fluency composite reliabilities are in the Digital Resources for this book.

As shown in Table 4.5, the split-half reliability coe cients for the new ORF composite are excellent. For comparison purposes, reliability coe cients are also provided for the Reading Fluency and Decoding composite scores. As these data show, the new ORF composite score is highly reliable and comparable to other KTEA-3 composite scores. Generally, reliabilities of .90 or higher support the use of a score for making educational decisions.

111111111

Accommodations for Visual, Hearing, and Motor Impairments

Visual Impairments

The digital (Q-interactive) and paper content of the KTEA-3 and WIAT-III were designed with accessibility guidelines in mind to facilitate use by individuals who are visually impaired or color blind. To the extent possible, font contrast and color was carefully chosen to enhance text readability, reliance on color coding was avoided except on color critical items, and colors used on color critical items were selected carefully to ensure that contrast was maintained when viewed with common variations in color-vision (color-blindness).

Large-print editions and braille editions are not published by Pearson. However, the American Printing House for the Blind (APH) has adapted previous editions of the KTEA and WIAT to provide customers with large-print and braille editions. Examiners who create or use large print editions of the KTEA-3 or WIAT-III Stimulus Books for visually impaired examinees must report the assessment results as a non-standard administration and explain how the materials were changed.

Hearing Impairments

As a group, examinees that are hard of hearing have a range of hearing di erences, which should be considered in the administration and interpretation of the KTEA-3 and WIAT-III. Note, however, the KTEA-3 and WIAT-III are not intended for use with examinees who are deaf. If an examinee uses assistive technology (e.g., hearing aids, cochlear implants, or assisted listing device such as an FM system), examiners

CLINICAL APPLICATIONS 285

should ensure that the device is working properly prior to beginning assessment (Wechsler, 2015). Those that are hard of hearing will benefit from a testing environment that has limited background noise. For examinees with hearing impairments, the volume of the audio files used to present listening comprehension items to examinees may be adjusted as needed to the suit the preference of the examinee. Similarly, examiners may adjust the volume of the audio files presented on the iPad using Q-interactive. Finally, consider that some examinees who are hard of hearing may also depend heavily on visual cues from speech reading.

Motor Impairments

The KTEA-3 and WIAT-III items require examinees to provide pointing, oral, or written responses. Subtests on the KTEA-3 and WIAT-III that depend on graphomotor speed or production are not appropriate to use with examinees with severe motor impairments, such as measures of written expression, written spelling, math fluency, and writing fluency. However, examinees with severe motor impairments may respond orally on the following KTEA-3 and WIAT-III subtests that typically require a written response but are not designed to measure written expression or graphomotor skills:

•KTEA-3 Math Computation

•WIAT-III Numerical Operations

111111111

Ongoing Research on Gender Differences in Writing and the Utility of Error Analysis

Developmental gender di erences in academic achievement have been reported by many researchers, but the size and consistency of those findings appear to vary depending on the academic area (e.g., math, reading, writing), the general ability level, and the age of the subjects (Scheiber, Reynolds, Hajovsky, & Kaufman, 2015). In reading, small and occasionally moderate advantages are seen in school-age females (Mullis, Martin, Kennedy, & Foy, 2007; Reynolds, Scheiber, Hajovsky, Schwartz, & Kaufman, 2015). In data reported from NAEP reading assessment, females in both fourth and eighth grades outperformed males (National Center for Education Statistics, 2012). However, other researchers have not consistently found these gender di erences across all age groups. For example, Kaufman, Kaufman, Liu, and Johnson (2009) did not find significant gender di erences in reading in their adult sample, nor did Camarata and Woodcock (2006).

Similar inconsistency has been reported in gender di erences in math. In kindergarten, elementary school, or middle school samples, Camarata & Woodcock (2006) found no gender di erences in math. However, in high school, males outperform females in mathematics problem solving (Hyde, Fennama, & Lamon, 1990). Generally, gender di erences in the domains of math and reading are small (to moderate), and are deemed inconclusive during school-age years (Scheiber et al., 2015). In contrast, across the domain of writing, females have an advantage over males

286 ESSENTIALS OF KTEA™-3 AND WIAT®-III ASSESSMENT

that appears to increase with age (Camarata & Woodcock, 2006; Malecki & Jewell, 2003). These gender di erences in various academic domains have been specifically researched using the KTEA-II Comprehensive and KTEA-II Brief, and key findings are detailed in the sections that follow.

Female Advantage in Writing on KTEA-II Brief and Comprehensive Forms

Reynolds and his colleagues (2015) used the KTEA-II Comprehensive form as the primary instrument to measure gender di erences in reading, math, and writing, and Scheiber and her colleagues (2015) utilized the KTEA-II Brief form to study these di erences. On both the KTEA-II Comprehensive and Brief forms, a small advantage for females was found in reading. However, in these samples no gender di erences in math achievement were found overall on the KTEA-II Comprehensive or Brief Forms. Reynolds et al. (2015) did find that females did show an advantage in a specific area of math on the KTEA-II Comprehensive form: Math Computation.

Relative to the other areas of achievement, on both the KTEA-II Comprehensive and Brief Forms, females show larger advantages over males in written language (Reynolds et al., 2015; Scheiber et al., 2015). In research with the KTEA-II Brief Form, females showed a small advantage in writing through age 10, that became an even more pronounced e ect by ages 15–18. Research using the Comprehen-

111111111

sive Form, also found a female advantage in writing, but an increase in the female advantage in writing was not found with age. One di erence between the Comprehensive and Brief forms that may have a ected results of these studies is that the KTEA-II Brief Form includes spelling in the scoring criteria for writing, but on the Comprehensive Form, spelling is not part of the Written Expression subtest. However, even though the developmental trend was not equally shown on research with these instruments, girls had an advantage in writing even at the youngest age levels in studies with the KTEA-II Brief and Comprehensive Form. These findings are also supported with findings from other individually administered writing tests (e.g., Camarata & Woodcock, 2006).

Hypotheses about why females may have an advantage in writing have been put forth by researchers. Reynolds and his colleagues (2015) noted that Gf and Gc are two cognitive abilities required for successful writing, but processing speed (Gs) may also have a role in writing. Gender di erences favoring females have been found on some Gs measures, and have been noted in studies that examine both writing and Gs in the same sample (Camarata & Woodcock, 2006). Reynolds et al. (2015) hypothesized that “Gs may di erentially a ect writing and because gender di erences in Gs emerge early on, those di erences may also contribute to the early sustained gender di erence in writing” (p. 230). Although this finding of a female cognitive advantage in processing speed is a robust finding across many instruments, including the WPPSI-IV and WISC-V, research has yet to establish a causal link between processing speed and writing (Kaufman, Raiford, & Coalson, 2015; Palejwala & Fine, 2015).

CLINICAL APPLICATIONS 287

TEST YOURSELF

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1. The samples with specific learning disabilities (SLD) reported from the KTEA-3 and WIAT-III normative data were unique because they were pure samples of SLD-Reading, SLD-Writing, and SLD-Math (e.g., no comorbid SLDs).

(a) True

(b) False

2. Both the Modern Operational Definition of Specific Learning Disabilities and the Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses Model that were described in this chapter can be used with the WIAT-III and KTEA-3.

(a) True

(b) False

3. The CHC Broad ability of Ga and Lurian sequential processing are measured by the

(a) KTEA-3 Phonological Processing subtest

(b) WIAT-III Early Reading Skills subtest

(c) Both

(d) Neither

4. Which of the following is not one of the seven reading-related learning

22222222111111111

disability subtypes included in the Intervention Guide for LD Subtypes in Q-global?

(a)Phonological subtype

(b)Deep (acquired) dyslexia

(c)Language subtype/Oral and Written Language Learning Disability (OWL-LD)

(d)Comprehension subtype

5.The KABC-II Knowledge/Gc Index correlated most highly with the KTEA-3 Academic Skills Battery and Reading Composites. Which KABC-II Index showed the lowest correlations across all KTEA-3 composites (Rapid Reference 4.6)?

(a)Sequential/Gsm

(b)Simultaneous/Gv

(c)Learning/Glr

(d)Planning/Gf

6.Administration of which of the following process subtests from the WISC-V Integrated can be especially important when evaluating a student with a possible language-based learning disorder?

(a)Written Arithmetic, Vocabulary, Visual Digit Span

(b)Block Design No Time Bonus, Digit Span Forward, Digit Span Backward

(c)Longest Digit Span Forward, Longest Digit Span Backward, Cancellation

(d)Vocabulary Multiple Choice, Similarities Multiple Choice, and Comprehension Multiple Choice

288ESSENTIALS OF KTEA™-3 AND WIAT®-III ASSESSMENT

7.In addition to five CHC Broad Abilities measured by the KABC-II, the KTEA-3 Comprehensive Form measures which three additional Broad Abilities?

(a)Auditory Processing (Ga)

(b)Processing Speed (Gs)

(c)Reading and Writing (Grw)

(d)Quantitative Knowledge (Gq)

(e)Decision Speed/Reaction Time (Gt)

8.The KTEA-3 and WIAT-III Dyslexia Index Scores (provided in the Digital Resources for this book) are intended for which the following purposes?

(a)To provide a reliable and valid measure of the key symptoms of dyslexia

(b)To be used on their own to diagnose dyslexia

(c)To identify subtypes of dyslexia

(d)None of the above

9.The new KTEA-3 Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) composite (provided as a Digital Resource for this book) is useful for which of the following purposes?

(a)Measuring oral reading fluency of single words and pseudowords

(b)Identifying students who exhibit weaknesses in oral reading fluency but not in silent reading fluency22222222111111111

(c)Facilitating a direct comparison of a basic reading accuracy and basic reading fluency by comparing the KTEA-3 ORF composite score with the KTEA-3 Decoding composite score

(d)All of the above

10.Research has shown that females tend to score higher than males in the area of writing. Females also tend to show an advantage in which cognitive processing area that is related to writing ability?

(a)Fluid Reasoning (Gf )

(b)Processing Speed (Gs)

(c)Working Memory (Gwm)

(d)Auditory Processing (Ga)

(e)Females do not show an advantage in any particular area of cognitive processing.

Answers: 1. b; 2. a; 3. c; 4. b; 5. a; 6. d; 7. a, c, d; 8. a; 9. d; 10. b.