Kaufman Test Of Educational Achievement Research Articles

43 Interactions of Decoding, Working Memory, and Mind Wandering on Reading Comprehension

Objective:Reading is an important skill, and becomes even more so beyond elementary years, when the focus shifts to comprehension as a means of learning and understanding academic material across subjects (Kamil et al., 2008; Shanahan et al., 2010; Snow, 2002). One construct receiving much recent interest in research, especially that related to academic achievement, is mind wandering (MW). MW has been defined as "a shift away from a primary task toward internal information" (Smallwood & Schooler, 2006). Though it is known to be ubiquitous among people (McVay & Kane, 2012), there are numerous theories about why MW occurs, in different contexts, and in relation to various other factors, and no one theory is currently dominant. MW and other factors such as working memory (WM) and decoding are all known to influence functional outcomes such as reading comprehension (RC), but there is little information on how all of these factors interact with one another with regard to RC. Most prior work focuses on adults and thus generalization to children is still needed. Therefore, the goals of this project were to examine the roles of WM, MW, decoding, and their interactions in relation to RC. It was hypothesized that each would demonstrate a significant relationship with the outcome of RC and that they would interact with one another beyond their individual main effects.Participants and Methods:The sample included 214 6th and 7th grade students with a larger proportion of struggling readers. Participants were each administered the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement -Third Edition (KTEA-3; Kaufman & Kaufman, 2014) Letter Word Recognition subtest (decoding), the Weschler Intelligence Scale for Children - Fifth Edition (WISC-5; Wechsler, 2014) Digit Span and Picture Span subtests(WM), and the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests - Fourth Edition (GMRT-4; MacGinitie, 1978) Comprehension subtest (RC). Four measures of MW were administered: the trait-based Mind Wandering Questionnaire (MWQ; Mrazek et al., 2013); two task-based (or state-dependent) retrospective reporting (TBRR) questionnaires (Matthews et al., 2002), and a researcher-generated single-item task-based retrospective report administered after four tasks. Correlations and regression were utilized to evaluate the relationships among predictor variables, and with regard to RC, including how predictors moderate one another.Results:All three key predictors demonstrated a significant relationship with RC both via zero-order correlations and main effects in the context of interactive relationships. WM and decoding demonstrated positive relationships with RC and MW demonstrated a negative relationship with RC, though only when one (MWQ) measure of MW was used, rather than the TBRR measure. There was a significant interaction of decoding and MW as measured by the TBRR questionnaires on the outcome of RC. Other interactions were not significant.Conclusions:These results clarify the interactive relationships of these three key predictors on the important academic achievement outcome of RC, ultimately suggesting that intervention strategies for achievement problems in areas such as RC should consider MW in conjunction with decoding abilities in order to implement effective strategies that capitalize on individual children's strengths and build on their particular weaknesses.

45 Gender Differences in Mathematics and its Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Predictors in Community College Students.

Objective:Historically, numerous studies have supported a male advantage in math. While more recent literature has shown that the gender gap is either decreasing or non-significant, a gender difference remains for higher level math (high school and college) (Hyde et. al. 1990; Casey et. al. 1995). It is known that both cognitive and non-cognitive factors influence math performance. There is little evidence for gender differences in working memory (Miller & Bichsel, 2004), which is a key predictor for mathematics. There is, however, evidence for gender differences in the non-cognitive domain, including math anxiety, with females having higher levels (Miller & Bichsel, 2004; Goetz, et. al. 2013). This study evaluates gender differences in both standardized and everyday math performances, and the way that cognitive and non-cognitive factors impact math. The study is focused on a very understudied group with high levels of math difficulty, namely community college students. We expected to find gender differences in math, and expect these to be in part accounted for by gender differences in strong mathematical predictors, particularly non-cognitive factors.Participants and Methods:Participants included 94 community college students enrolled in their first math class (60 female; 34 male). Participants were administered the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement - 3rd edition (KTEA3): Math Computation (MC) and Math Concepts Application (MCA) subtests, as well as an original Everyday Math (EM) measure which assessed their math ability in the context of common uses for math (e.g., financial and health numeracy). Additional measures included math anxiety, self-efficacy, and confidence. Finally, complex span working memory tasks were administered to assess verbal and spatial working memory. Analyses were performed using correlation and regression to examine relationships between the cognitive and non-cognitive variables and standardized and everyday math measures.Results:Correlations showed that all cognitive and non-cognitive variables are significantly correlated with all three math measures (all p < .05). There were no significant gender differences for any of the math measures, nor the working memory, or non-cognitive measures. Regression showed that across all three math outcomes, math anxiety and verbal working memory are significantly predictive of math performance. Overall R2 values were significant (range 27% to 37%, all p < .001). Working memory and math anxiety were unique predictors in all three regressions (all p < .05), but other non-cognitive variables such as self-efficacy did not show unique prediction (all p >.05).Conclusions:There was no evidence for gender differences on any studied variable. This stands in contrast to prior studies, although few studies have included community college students. On the other hand, both cognitive and non-cognitive factors were complimentary in the prediction of math outcomes, which is consistent with prior work. Among non-cognitive predictors, math anxiety was particularly prominent. This study clarifies prior conflicting work regarding gender differences, and highlights the role of both math anxiety and working memory as relevant for multiple math outcomes.

Multidimensional Scaling of Cognitive Ability and Academic Achievement Scores.

Multidimensional scaling (MDS) was used as an alternate multivariate procedure for investigating intelligence and academic achievement test score correlations. Correlation coefficients among Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fifth Edition (WISC-5) and Wechsler Individual Achievement Test, Third Edition (WIAT-III) validity sample scores and among Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition (KABC-II) and Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Second Edition (KTEA-2) co-norming sample scores were analyzed using multidimensional scaling (MDS). Three-dimensional MDS configurations were the best fit for interpretation in both datasets. Subtests were more clearly organized by CHC ability and academic domain instead of complexity. Auditory-linguistic, figural-visual, reading-writing, and quantitative-numeric regions were visible in all models. Results were mostly similar across different grade levels. Additional analysis with WISC-V and WIAT-III tests showed that content (verbal, numeric, figural) and response process facets (verbal, manual, paper-pencil) were also useful in explaining test locations. Two implications from this study are that caution may be needed when interpreting fluency scores across academic areas, and MDS provides more empirically based validity evidence regarding content and response mode processes.

Beyond Simple Mean Differences: Analysis of Sex Similarities and Differences in Academic Achievement With the Kaufman Tests of Educational Achievement, Third Edition

Simple mean differences summarized in meta-analyses do not always adequately describe sex similarities and differences. We investigated sex similarities and differences in academic achievement test scores during childhood and adolescence multiple ways based on composite and subtest scores from the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (Third edition) norming sample. Sex differences in means were investigated across achievement domains and ability levels. Test score variance and percentages of scores at different parts of score distributions were also compared across sex. The largest and most consistent sex differences were female advantages in writing tests: Larger advantages were found in more complex writing tasks. Females also showed consistent advantages in silent reading fluency. Males demonstrated advantages in math problem solving that emerged at the average ability level. Females were more likely to be high achievers in reading fluency and written expression, whereas males were more likely to be low achievers in reading fluency and aspects of writing, and very low achievers in word recognition, word recognition fluency, and reading vocabulary. Males were more likely to be high achievers in math problem solving. Analysis that goes beyond simple mean differences reveals important sex differences regarding academic achievement, and theories should account for overall patterns of academic achievement similarities and differences.

Equivalency of In-Person Versus Remote Assessment: WISC-V and KTEA-3 Performance in Clinically Referred Children and Adolescents.

Teletesting has the potential to reduce numerous barriers to patient care which have only become exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although telehealth is commonly utilized throughout medicine and mental health practices, teletesting has remained limited within cognitive and academic evaluations. This may be largely due to concern for the validity of test administration via remote assessment. This cross-sectional study examined the equivalency of cognitive [Wechsler Intelligence Scales for Children - Fifth Edition (WISC-V)] and academic [Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement - Third Edition (KTEA-3)] subtests administered via either teletesting or traditional in-person testing within clinically referred youth. Chart review using a retrospective, cross-sectional design included a total of 893 children and adolescents, ranging from 4 to 17 years (Mean age = 10.2 years, SD = 2.9 years) who were administered at least one subtest from the aforementioned cognitive or academic assessments. Of these, 285 received teletesting, with the remaining (n = 608) receiving in-person assessment. A total of seven subtests (five from the WISC-V and two from the KTEA-3) were examined. A series of inverse probability of exposure weighted (IPEW) linear regression models examined differences between groups for each of the seven subtests after adjustment for numerous demographic, diagnostic, and parent-reported symptom variables. Only two significant differences were found, such that WISC-V Visual Puzzles (p < .01) and KTEA-3 Math Concepts (p = .03) scores were slightly higher in the teletesting versus in-person groups. However, these differences were quite small in magnitude (WISC-V Visual Puzzles, d = .33, KTEA-3 Math Concepts, d = .18). Findings indicate equivalency across methods of service delivery without clinically meaningful differences in scores among referred pediatric patients.

Adventures in Direct Instruction Implementation: The Devil Is in the Details.

This article tells the story of how a public charter school serving students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) adopted Direct Instruction (DI) as their primary form of instruction. The journey from recognizing the need for evidence-based curriculum focused on academic skills to integrating DI on a daily basis was outlined using a common implementation framework. We measured results of the implementation process on student outcomes using reading scores obtained from the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (KTEA-II Brief). Results for 67 students who participated in a DI reading program for at least 2 years suggest that the implementation of DI led to significantly improved reading scores; with some students demonstrating greatly accelerated rates of learning for their age. Our study suggests that the road to adoption of DI may be long, but the results are powerful for the individuals served. We offer our steps to implementation as a guide and resource to educators and behavior analysts eager to utilize DI in their settings.

The Simple Views of Reading and Writing in the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, 3rd Edition

The simple views of reading (SVR) and writing (SVW) provide useful foundations for the interpretation of psychoeducational achievement batteries. Research has established that oral language, decoding, and transcription explain significant variance in reading comprehension and written composition, respectively. However, the specific task demands of subtests influence the relationships among these constructs. As a result, the degree to which the KTEA-3’s tasks conform to findings associated with the SVR and SVW are not known. These analyses evaluated the degree to which the KTEA-3 oral language and decoding or transcription tests explained variance in reading comprehension, and written expression. Results inform practitioners as to the relative contributions of each component and useful knowledge when determining which battery to use in psychoeducational evaluation.

Teacher Trainees’ Administration and Scoring Errors on the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement

Achievement tests are used to make high-stakes (e.g., special education placement) decisions, and previous research on norm-referenced assessment suggests that errors are ubiquitous. In our study of 42 teacher trainees, utilizing five of the six core subtests of the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Third Edition (KTEA-3), we found that while most trainees make errors, they do not make a large number per person with the exception of a few error-prone trainees. In addition, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests indicated that reading comprehension was the most prone subtest to administration ( T = 120; p &lt; .001) and clerical ( T = 45; p &lt; .01) errors. However, subtests pairwise comparisons indicated nonsignificant differences between error rates across subtests. Based on these findings, we recommend that training programs focus extra attention on reading comprehension and remediating students who make a disproportionate number of errors. Implications for future research are also noted.

Identifying dyslexia with confirmatory latent profile analysis

AbstractConfirmatory latent profile analysis (CLPA) was used with the normative sample from the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, 3rd ed. (KTEA‐3) to determine whether it was possible to identify a latent class of individuals whose scores were consistent with the academic strengths and weaknesses related to dyslexia. The CLPA identified a class of individuals consistent with dyslexia across four‐grade level groups (first–second, third–fifth, sixth–eighth, and ninth–twelfth). The results of the CLPA were applied to the KTEA‐3 clinical samples of those with known clinical diagnoses. Individuals with Specific Learning Disorder in Reading and/or Written Expression had a higher probability of being in the dyslexia latent class. The use of CLPA as a tool for learning disability diagnosis appears plausible, though much more research is needed. The strengths, limitations, and future directions for the use of CLPA in diagnosis are discussed.

Gifted and learning-disabled: A study of strengths and weaknesses in higher-order processing

ABSTRACTStudents who exhibit giftedness alongside a learning disability (GLD) often display asynchronous academic development, and a combination of strengths that mask areas of struggle. Early identification and intervention may offset students experiencing low self-confidence and motivation, ineffective self-efficacy, or a loss of love for learning (Reis, McGuire, & Neu, 2000). It is essential to understand the unique patterns of strengths and weaknesses that gifted students (GTs) with specific learning disabilities (SLDs) display in order to develop interventions that leverage strengths while targeting weaknesses. In this study, we compared GLDs’ performances to those of GTs and SLDs on the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Third Edition (KTEA-3). While GTs outperform GLDs and GLDs outperform the SLDs across all of the academic subtests, the analysis of the academic error scores indicate GLDs only differ from GTs for basic phonic decoding and math calculation. GLDs had fewer errors than SLDs across all error scores with the exceptions of intermediate letter-sound knowledge, basic phonic decoding, and addition. Consequently, GLDs have a unique profile of errors that indicates that their ability to decode is comparable to the SLD sample, and their error patterns in other areas suggest academic difficulties.

Relational memory is associated with academic achievement in preadolescent children

Abstract Objectives Cognitive functions supported by the hippocampus, including relational memory and the implementation of effective learning strategies, are purported to be vital to academic success. Yet there is little evidence tying performance on standardized measures of academic achievement to performance on hippocampal-dependent tasks. Methods This study tested the association between relational memory performance and academic achievement. Preadolescent participants (N = 181; mean age = 8.7 years; 97 females) completed the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, 2nd edition (KTEA-II) along with the Mnemonic Similarity Task (MST) and a task designed to assess both spatial relational memory and the resolution of memory for highly similar studied objects. A subset of participants (n = 40) completed an additional spatial reconstruction relational memory task. Results While performance on the MST and object memory resolution were not significantly associated with academic achievement, relational memory performance was positively associated with mathematics, written language, and overall academic achievement. The association between relational memory and academic achievement remained significant even after controlling for demographic factors including age, sex, and socioeconomic status. Conclusions These findings suggest that the processes underlying relational memory performance are critical for academic success during preadolescence.

A Quantile Regression Analysis of Cognitive Ability and Spelling Predictors of Written Expression: Evidence of Gender, Age, and Skill Level Moderation

Cognitive ability and spelling predictors of written expression were examined between gender groups as well as across age and writing skill levels using quantile regression with the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children–Second Edition and the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement–Second Edition conormed standardization sample data (N = 2,117). Quantile regression is an analytic tool that allows for examination of predictors at different levels of the achievement distribution. Spelling predicted differing levels of writing competency for both genders. For girls, retrieval fluency and crystallized ability predicted lower and higher levels of writing competency, respectively. From a bifactor model interpretation, general intelligence was the largest and most consistent predictor of writing competency. Using a higher order model interpretation, learning efficiency predicted lower to average writing competency for girls, whereas for boys, visual processing predicted all levels of writing competency, and retrieval fluency predicted average to higher levels of writing competency. Although results are preliminary, researchers and practitioners are encouraged to consider that predictors of writing competency may differ markedly in strength across the continuum of writing achievement.

Common Examiner Scoring Errors on Academic Achievement Measures

This study examined the scoring errors across three widely used achievement tests (Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement–Second Edition [KTEA-2], Woodcock–Johnson Tests of Achievement–Third Edition [WJ-III], and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test–Third Edition [WIAT-III]) by novice examiners. A total of 114 protocols were evaluated for differences between the measures on the frequency and type of scoring errors. Within-measure analyses were also conducted to identify particular composites or subtests that might be more prone to error. Among the three measures, the WIAT-III was found to have the most scoring elements and was, therefore, the measure most susceptible to errors in scoring. Irrespective of the measure, more errors occurred on composites requiring greater examiner inference and interpretation, similar to previous studies on the propensity of scoring errors on cognitive measures. Results are discussed in relation to assessment fidelity and to assessment training practices.

Exploratory Factor Analysis of the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, 3rd Edition

The Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, 3rd edition (KTEA-3) is a popular battery for the assessment of students’ academic skills. Its manual includes a series of confirmatory factor analyses to support construct validity. Its five-factor model did not include all available subtests in the battery and required covarying residuals between certain subtests, which could suggest that it measures additional abilities beyond its specified factors. Further, its factors appear highly correlated which suggests the presence of a general factor. This investigation supplements the analyses in the manual with both an oblique rotation and a higher-order exploratory factor analysis using a Schmid-Leiman rotation within multiple grade ranges. Results suggest that the KTEA-3 is factorally complex. The Schmid-Leiman rotation indicates that it is a measure of both a general ability, and perhaps an additional naming facility factor.

Relationship between reading and long-term storage and retrieval (Glr) in college students

ABSTRACTThe purpose of this study was to (a) identify the relationship between specific types of reading ability, different forms of learning, and long-term memory and retrieval (Glr); and then (b) to determine the degree to which self-assessed reading ability and a Glr measure could predict objective reading ability. College students were administered three different reading assessments from the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Second Edition (KTEA-II): word reading, reading comprehension, and nonsense word decoding. They were also given two pairs of Glr subtests that consisted of immediate and delayed versions from the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition (KABC-II). One set was embedded within context, whereas the other was not. Results showed that although overall reading ability and reading comprehension correlated the highest with Glr measures that were embedded in context, word reading, and nonsense word decoding were correlated the highest with delayed measures of Glr. Second, the self-assessment accounted for 23% of the variability in overall reading ability. Not only do these results show the strength of the relationship between Glr and reading, but also the ability to use these measures along with self-assessment to screen for reading disabilities.

What Do Phonological Processing Errors Tell About Students’ Skills in Reading, Writing, and Oral Language?

The kinds of errors that children and adolescents make on phonological processing tasks were studied with a large sample between ages 4 and 19 ( N = 3,842) who were tested on the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement–Third Edition (KTEA-3). Principal component analysis identified two phonological processing factors: Basic Phonological Awareness and Advanced Phonological Processing. Canonical analysis and correlation analysis were conducted to determine how each factor related to reading, writing, and oral language across the wide age range. Results of canonical correlation analysis indicated that the advanced error factor was more responsible for reading, writing, and oral language skills than the basic error factor. However, in the correlation analysis, both the basic and advanced factors related about equally to different aspects of achievement—including reading fluency and rapid naming—and there were few age differences.

Beyond the Mask

An understanding of the strengths, weaknesses, and achievement profiles of students with giftedness and learning disabilities (G&amp;LD) is needed to address their asynchronous development. This study examines the subtests and error factors in the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement–Third Edition (KTEA-3) for strength and weakness patterns of students with G&amp;LD in higher and lower level thinking skills by comparing G&amp;LD students ( n = 196) with academically gifted (GT; n = 69) and specific learning disability (SLD) students ( n = 90). Several one-way MANCOVAs were conducted with subtest error factor scores as dependent variables and grouping variable (G&amp;LD, GT, or SLD) as the independent variable. The G&amp;LD means scores across subtests were in between the two control groups. On many higher level thinking tasks, the G&amp;LD group scored similar to the gifted group. The results support the use of error analysis to gain further understanding into the profile of students with G&amp;LD.

Implications of Error Analysis Studies for Academic Interventions

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.

Error Analysis

This commentary will take an historical perspective on the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (KTEA) error analysis, discussing where it started, where it is today, and where it may be headed in the future. In addition, the commentary will compare and contrast the KTEA error analysis procedures that are rooted in psychometric methodology and the process approach to error analysis which is derived primarily from cognitive neuropsychology.

Exploratory Factor Analysis of Reading, Spelling, and Math Errors

Norm-referenced error analysis is useful for understanding individual differences in students’ academic skill development and for identifying areas of skill strength and weakness. The purpose of the present study was to identify underlying connections between error categories across five language and math subtests of the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement–Third Edition (KTEA-3) through exploratory factor analyses (EFAs). The EFA results were supportive of models with two or three factors for each of the five subtests. Significant inter-factor correlations within subtests were identified in all subtests, except between two factors within the Math Concepts and Application (MCA) subtest. There was also consistency in the covariance patterns of some error categories across subtests, particularly within the Nonsense Word Decoding (NWD) and Spelling (SP) subtests. This consistency was supportive of the proposed factor structures. The factor structures yielded by these analyses were used as the bases for the other articles in this special issue.