Assessment

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kahana, S. Y.
Right arrow Articles by Glutting, J. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kahana, S. Y.
Right arrow Articles by Glutting, J. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Assessment, Vol. 9, No. 1, 82-93 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/1073191102009001010

Factor and Subtest Discrepancies on the Differential Ability Scales

Examining Prevalence and Validity in PredictingAcademic Achievement

Shoshana Y. Kahana

syk4{at}po.cwru.edu.

Eric A. Youngstrom

Case Western Reserve University

Joseph J. Glutting

University of Delaware

Past literature has largely ignored the population frequency of multivariate factor and subtest score discrepancies. Another limitation has been that statistical models imperfectly model the clinical assessment process, whereby significant discrepancies between both factors and subtests are included in predictions about an individual’s academic achievement. The present study examined these issues using a nationally representative sample (N = 1,185) completing the Differential Ability Scales. Results indicate that approximately 80% of children in a nonreferred sample show at least one statistically significant ability discrepancy. In addition, the global estimate of cognitive ability was the most parsimonious predictor of academic achievement, whereas information about ability discrepancies did not significantly improve prediction. Findings suggest that when predicting academic achievement, there is little value in interpreting cognitive scores beyond the global ability estimate.

Key Words: cognitive testing • predictions of academic achievement • global measure of intelligence • factor and subtest interpretation


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Special EducationHome page
J. J. Glutting, M. W. Watkins, T. R. Konold, and P. A. McDermott
Distinctions Without a Difference: The Utility of Observed Versus Latent Factors From the WISC-IV in Estimating Reading and Math Achievement on the WIAT-II
Journal of Special Education, August 1, 2006; 40(2): 103 - 114.
[Abstract] [PDF]