School Psychology Trainees’ Administration and Scoring Errors on the Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement

Abstract

Sixty-three Woodcock–Johnson IV Tests of Achievement protocols, administered by 26 school psychology trainees, were examined to determine the frequency of examiner errors. Errors were noted on all protocols and ranged from 8 to 150 per administration. Critical (e.g., start, stop, and calculation) errors were noted on roughly 97% of protocols. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests indicated multiple subtests were more prone to both critical and non-critical (e.g., failure to record answers verbatim, failure to record qualitative observations) errors; critical errors were generally more common on subtests with objective scoring criteria (i.e., Written Expression and Spelling) and non-critical errors were more frequently observed on subtests that required the recording of answers verbatim. Based on these findings, we encourage trainers to place increased scrutiny on trainee’s objective scoring performance and on requiring recording responses verbatim. Areas of needed future research studies are also discussed.