Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Transcript of WIAT-III
-an individual’s strength and weaknesses
-assist professionals who are determining whether a student is eligible for special educational services
or has a learning disability
-aid in the educational placement of students
- help with creating instructional objectives or interventions. (p. 286)
Vaughan-Jensen, et al. (2011) Designed to provide:
- more accurate recommendations for interventions,
- in-depth subtest analyses, Burns (2010).
“A noted strength is that it provides domain-specific coverage in every required academic area specified
by [US] federal law for identifying a learning disability”
(Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, as cited in Burns, 2010, p. 234). Measures scores in:
- total reading
-reading comprehension and fluency
Burns, 2010, p. 234 Theoretical Perspective
The WIAT-III uses a concordance-discordance model which compares an individual’s academic ability
and their intellectual potential.
Although a calculation of discordance between the two factors is not determined in the WIAT-III, “it
does examine the child’s strengths and weakness in such a way that can be used for comparative
Burns, 2010, p. 234 Population
-The WIAT-III is a test that must be administered by an individual who is qualified.
-Individual attention is crucial during administration because of the various rules in the protocol.
-May be administered to students in grades Prekindergarten through 12 or individuals age 4 years 0 months through 19 years 11 months
Vaughan-Jensen, 2011, p. 286 Administration
The length of time required to administer the test can vary from approximately 29 to 144 minutes,
- age and performance level of the examinee
- skill level of the administrator
- number of subtests being administered
In order to prevent practice effects from interfering with the results, it is imperative that the WIAT-III is
not administered more than twice a year.
Vaughan-Jensen, 2011, p. 286 Format
-The examiner is either showing or reading items, or having the examinee listen to the items presented
-The examinee then responds verbally, can point out an answer, or may write answers
-A score for each individual item is awarded
-Individual scores from 16 subtest scores
-Subtests are combined to produce eight standardized composite scores
Vaughan-Jensen, 2011, p. 286 Interpretation
- includes: standard scores, percentiles, normal curve equivalents, stanines, age and grade equivalents,
as well as growth scale values (Vaughan-Jensen, 2011, p. 288).
- scoring rules were improved in response to reviews by expert researchers, teachers and clinicians
- comes with a scoring assistant computer program, designed to eliminate human calculation errors
- provides graphs and comparisons between subtests.
-discrepancy analysis of strengths and weaknesses
-has enhanced skill analysis
-intervention goal statements can be used for students, with individualized education goals, in the
Dumont & Willis, 2010, pp. 243-244 Standardization
-Standardization sample of 2775 students age 4-19
-Standardization considered age, grade, sex, race/ethnicity, parental education level, and geographic region (McCrimmon and Climie, 2009, p. 153)
-Special education students were also included in the standardization sample (Dumont and Willis, 2010, p. 240).
-The test developers were transparent about their standardization procedures and include the information in the WIAT-III manual (Dumont and Willis, 2010, p. 240). Validity
-Content validity: McCrimmon and Climie (2009) state that the final assessment items adequately measure what they intend to (p.154).
-Response process: test questions that consistently resulted in incorrect responses or misunderstandings were revised (Vaughan-Jensen et al., 2009, p. 290).
-Internal Structure: Developers of the WIAT-III created “two or more subtests for each composite area, which improved validity based on internal structure” (Vaughan-Jensen et al., 2009, p. 290).
-Construct validity: The relationship between the
WIAT-III and other assessments indicate that construct validity is acceptable (McCrimmon and Climie, 2011, p. 154). Reliability
-Split-half reliability and test-retest stability coefficients were both used to obtain internal consistency scores for many of the WIAT-III subtests (Vaughan et al., 2011, p. 289).
-Subtest reliability coefficients ranged from very good to excellent, with the exception of the alphabet writing fluency component (McCrimmon and Climie, 2011, p.153).
-Test-retest reliability for subtests ranged from adequate to excellent, depending on the type of subtest (McCrimmon and Climie, 2011, p. 153).
-Interrater reliability ranged from high to very high in both objective and subjectively scored sections (Vaughan-Jensen, 2009, p. 290). Strengths
-Subtests that allow for a “better understanding of students academic strengths, weaknesses” (McCrimmon and Climie, 2009, p. 148).
-Subtests assess all academic areas required to identify a learning disability (Burns, 2010, p.234).
-Canadian focused test questions that attempt to lack an American bias (McCrimmon and Climie, 2009, p. 155).
-Improved floor and ceiling of subtests, with most having a minimum of two standard deviations above the mean (Dumont and Willis, 2010, p. 240).
-strong technical adequacy and strong reliability and validity are also benefits of this assessment (McCrimmon and Climie, 2009, p. 155).
-Administration Strengths: technical manual and CD, instructions are clear, free from ethnic bias, assessment materials appeal to intended population (Vaughan-Jensen et al., 2011, p. 291). The assessment also, comes in easel format for presenting subtests, has a large number of scoring examples, a scoring workbook, and a computer scoring program for calculations and graphs (Dumont and Willis, 2010, p. 240).
-The WIAT-III is an appropriate and highly useful assessment tool when assessing academic achievement Limitations
-Length: McCrimmon and Climie (2011) state that the WIAT-III can take up to 2 hours to administer (p. 155).
-Cost is another drawback. Recording forms have increased from $130 to $140 for 25 forms (McCrimmon and Climie, 2011, p. 155).
-Language: WIAT-III is only available in English and can only be used on highly verbal students (Vaughan et al., 2009, p.291).
-Lack of Collage/Adult Norms: Burns (2010) states
that the publishers of the WIAT-III intend to include adult norms in their next edition (p. 236).
-Limited floor for the lowest ability levels in very young students (Dumont and Willis, 2010, p. 240).
-Sample Size: the sample size seems large but when you break it down into age and grade norms the norms are based on a small number of students (Vaughan et al., 2011, p. 291).
-Conclusion: The WIAT-III is a significant improvement upon the WIAT-II and has several
assets which outweigh the limitations of this assessment tool. The WIAT-III is a useful and exceptional test which can be used to gain a better understanding of student achievement (McCrimmon and Climie, 2011, p. 156). Would We Use It? -As teachers we believe it is a great way to identify learning needs.
-Provides direct remedial information for students with special needs.
-Easy to pinpoint specific skills to provide remediation for students who struggle in specific subject areas (e.g. reading).
-Provides targeted interventions.
-Can reduce the cost & time required to administer the test by only using the necessary subtests.