Introduction
The Wechsler Individual Achievement Test was developed by David Wechsler to assess the academic achievement of a population aged between 4 and 85 years. The test is used to assess a wide range of academic skills or a particular area of interest. The test measures the academic achievement of learners using four scales: writing, math, oral language, and reading. In terms of reading abilities, the test assesses the word reading abilities, reading comprehension and phonetic decoding abilities. It tests whether learners can achieve the reading comprehension skills learned in class and phenotypic and decoding skills that enable them to read and understand. In mathematics, the test assesses the ability of the population to do numeric operations such as computations, counting and solving mathematical problems. It also tests the reasoning ability of students in a maths class. Furthermore, the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test assesses the written language skills of the study group, including spelling and written expressions.
Thesis Statement
The use of the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test to assess the academic achievement of students in four areas of learning is essential in identifying academic weaknesses and strengths of individuals, and its results can be used to develop effective intervention plan for learners and improve overall academic performances in education, research and clinics. This view is supported by the psychometric properties of the test categorized into: normative sample, reliability and validity. The normative sample included 2,775 students who were nationally standardized in the US. The reliability of internal consistency was measured at 0.80 except for sentence completion and listening skills which were measured at 0.79 and 0.75 respectively. In the four areas measured, validity was determined in terms of inter-correlations range from 0.46 to 0.93. However, there were stronger correlations between reading composites and weaker correlations between math composites. These validities, reliabilities and suitable normative sample affirm the thesis statement, and the results of the test can be relied upon to inform good decisions in education, health science and research.
Article Summary
- Duckworth, A.L., Quinn,P.D. and Tsukayama, E. (2012). What No Child Left Behind Leaves Behind: The Roles of IQ and Self-Control in Predicting Standardized Achievement Test Scores and Report Card Grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(2), 439–451.
This article suggests that standardized tests that assess students’ learning abilities tend to focus on competencies that are determined by intelligence rather than self-control. The article observes that intelligence is important for solve problems and learn things without necessarily being given formal instructions. It enables them to complete their homework, behave well and study appropriately at school. This article uses two lonbgitudinal studies on middle school students. Both studies indicated that intelligence influenced the scores of achievement test scores, including the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test. On the other hand, self-control caused changes in report card grades. Therefore, this research concludes that assessing students using achievement test scores disregards the importance of other metrics of student achievement, including self-control.
- Burns, T.G. (2010). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test III: What is Gold Standard for Measuring Academic Achievement? Applied Neuropsychology, 17, 234-236.
Burns (2010) suggests that the main strength of WIAT-III is that it covers specific domains in particular academic fields in order to identify learning disability. The research also indicates that WIAT-III can be used to identify diagnostic approach to the learning disability. The article postulates that the aspect of cultural bias in standardized achievement tests has been eliminated in WIAT-III by changing the test stimuli. However, this article contends that the test is still long and complicated to administer. The study uses a sample of 116 children who were tested using WIAT-III to determine their intellectual and academic capacity. Clinical groups were used to identify children with learning disorders and mild intellectual disability. The researcher then concludes that the WIAT-III academic achievement test is useful in neuropsychological tests to determine the learning disabilities and intellectual abilities of learners, but the cost of administration may be a possible challenge to this outcome.
- McNair, D.J. and Curry, T.L. (2013), The Forgotten: Formal Assessment of the Adult Writer. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 26(1), 5 – 19.
McNair and Curry (2013) review assessment practices that are currently used in the adult population. The article uses literature review approach to determine the effectiveness of assessment of written expressions for adults. It gives a particular focus to WIAT-II and WIAT-III. The study argues that this academic achievement test method could be a very important tool for the assessment of writing ability in adults, but developers of recent tests have failed to incorporate the adult population into these WIAT-II &WIAT-III tests. McNair and Curry (2013) use the example of omitted grade-based scores for college students and inadequately written test prompts for the adult population. The researchers also argue that the use of WIAT-II and WIAT-III tests can help in the identification of functional impairments in adults.
- McDermott, P.A. and Fantuzzo, J.W. (1990). Just Say No to Subtest Analysis: A Critique on Wechsler Theory and Practice. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 8, 290-302.
In this article, McDermott and Fantuzzo (1990) criticize the achievement tests of Wechsler. The article suggests that Wechsler’s beliefs in human intelligence and achievement abilities have significantly influenced contemporary theory and practice. However, the article observes that Wechsler uses global indices. The authors suggest that evidence-based interpretation of Wechsler’s theories should be provided in terms of specific abilities not global abilities. The authors provide evidence from literature and past researches to show that attempts to measure global intelligences using test scores have been unsuccessful at best.
- Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S. and Compton, D.L. (2004). Identifying Reading Disabilities by Responsiveness-to-Instruction: Specifying Measures and Criteria. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27(4), pp. 216-227.
This article identifies Wechsler’s achievement tests as important tools for the identification of reading disabilities and essential intervention mechanisms. Standard treatment protocol is considered as one of the key type of assessment which determines the level of reading a\disability in children. The article analyses how classification and measurement criteria can be used to assess learners’ responsiveness to instruction. Two related studies are also used to provide evidence and support the arguments of the article. However, the authors find out that the use of standardized achievement methods such as WIAT can result in unreliable diagnosis.
- Smith, B.L. (1999). Relationship between the Wide Range Achievement Test 3 and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test. Psychological Reports, 83(3), 963-967. DOI: 10.2466/PR0.83.7.963-967.
This article focus on the effectiveness of WIAT in assessing children with learning disabilities, compared to Wide Range Achievement Test 3. This comparison is important because it rates the validity of WIAT test of academic achievement. The study used a sample of 87 children with learning disabilities. It used the Pearson product-moment correlation to show the correlation between various scores based on the two measures. Results show that the P-D correlation was not significantly different, but it showed a great variance in terms of math reasoning, spelling, and reading. The two methods of testing academic achievement were generally effective in determining learning disabilities, and the results are similar.
- Canivez, G.L. Incremental criterion validity of WAIS-IV factor index scores: relationships with WIAT-II and WIAT-III subtest and composite scores. Psychological Assessment, 25(2), DOI: 10.1037/a0032092.
Canivez (2013) examines the validity of WIAT-III in predicting academic achievement. The subtest score variance in WIAT-III and WIAT-IV was also identified. The study found that there was small to trivial contributions of WIAT test in prediction of academic achievement. The researchers suggest that WIAT test should retain its primary subtest approach in order to enhance valid results.
Conclusion
The WIAT achievement test involved assessment of the academic achievement of a population aged between 4 and 85 years, measuring the academic achievement of learners using four scales: writing, math, oral language, and reading. A sample of 2,775 students was used in the study, and the results showed that there were stronger correlations between reading composites and weaker correlations between math composites. Various articles have used the WIAT test method because it is becoming a common [art of contemporary practice, and it elicits interest for research. The researchers show that there are strengths and weaknesses of the study. Others cite cultural bias and unreliability, but most of them support the thesis statement – that WIAT is an effective team in testing for learning abilities, strengths and weakness of learners in order to provide interventions.
References List
Burns, T.G. (2010). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test III: What is Gold Standard for Measuring Academic Achievement? Applied Neuropsychology, 17, 234-236.
Canivez, G.L. Incremental criterion validity of WAIS-IV factor index scores: relationships with WIAT-II and WIAT-III subtest and composite scores. Psychological Assessment, 25(2), DOI: 10.1037/a0032092.
Duckworth, A.L., Quinn,P.D. and Tsukayama, E. (2012). What No Child Left Behind Leaves Behind: The Roles of IQ and Self-Control in Predicting Standardized Achievement Test Scores and Report Card Grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(2), 439–451.
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S. and Compton, D.L. (2004). Identifying Reading Disabilities by Responsiveness-to-Instruction: Specifying Measures and Criteria. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27(4), pp. 216-227.
McDermott, P.A. and Fantuzzo, J.W. (1990). Just Say No to Subtest Analysis: A Critique on Wechsler Theory and Practice. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 8, 290-302.
McNair, D.J. and Curry, T.L. (2013), The Forgotten: Formal Assessment of the Adult Writer. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 26(1), 5 – 19.
Smith, B.L. (1999). Relationship between the Wide Range Achievement Test 3 and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test. Psychological Reports, 83(3), 963-967. DOI: 10.2466/PR0.83.7.963-967.
