CHC Cog-Ach Relations Research Synthesis

4,785 views
4,652 views

Published on

This presentation presents an update of the "CHC COG-ACH correlates research synthesis" project described and hosted at IQ's Corner (www.intelligencetesting.blogspot.com) and IAP (www.iapsych.com). The viewer should first read the background materials regarding this project at these sites (how to access is also included in first slide). The current slides present my preliminary analysis and conclusions of the relations between CHC cognitive abilities and basic reading skills, reading comprehension, basic math skills, and math reasoning as a function of age (developmental status). The results are part of a manuscript that is in preparation. Revisit IQ's Corner to keep abreast of updates.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
8 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
4,785
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
13
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
29
Comments
0
Likes
8
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

CHC Cog-Ach Relations Research Synthesis

  1. 1. National Association of School Psychology (NASP) Conference Feb 27, 2009 Boston, MA Kevin S. McGrew, PhD Woodcock-Munoz Foundation (WMF) University of Minnesota (Ed. Psych.) CHC cognitive and achievement relations research synthesis: What we’ve learned from 20 years of research (Formative materials…..this presentation is not yet completed)
  2. 2. Conflict of interest disclosure for Kevin McGrew A large portion of the research summarized in the project summarized in this presentation has been based on the WJ-R and WJ III. Dr. Kevin McGrew has a financial interest in the WJ III as a co-author of the WJ III Battery
  3. 3. CHC Cognitive-Achievement Relations: What We Have Learned From the Past 20 Years of Research Kevin S. McGrew Woodcock-Muñoz Foundation University of Minnesota Barbara J. Wendling Woodcock-Muñoz Foundation (manuscript in preparation, 2009) Click the above image to visit the actual internet-based EWOK (evolving web of knowledge) in order to learn more about the research project that is the basis of the current set of slides If that does not work go to IQ’s Corner Blog ( www.intelligencetesting.blogspot.com ) and click on CHC COG-ACH res. synthesis link under IQ’s Corner Information section It is strongly recommended that the viewer first review this background information prior to attempting to review and understand the results in this current set of slides
  4. 4. Prior CHC Cog-Ach Relations Research Syntheses Included in Cross-Battery Texts
  5. 5. Sample synthesis table from McGrew & Flanagan ITDR, 1997)
  6. 6. <ul><li>Lack of explicitly (operationally) defined search, evaluation, analysis, and/or interpretation procedures </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Would be difficult to replicate </li></ul></ul><ul><li>The combining of studies under the broad dependent variable (DV) domains of reading, math, and writing </li></ul><ul><li>The lack of clear age-differentiation of findings </li></ul><ul><li>Specification error </li></ul><ul><ul><li>e.g., Wagner et al. (1997) – included measures of Gc, Ga, Glr…..but no measures of Gsm, Gf, Gs, and Gv </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Purpose of current research (McGrew @ Wendling, 2009) designed to address these limitations </li></ul>Limitations of existing CHC Cog-Ach relations research syntheses
  7. 7. Research methods in current review <ul><li>Identification of potential research studies </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A search of the IAP Reference Database (n=30,000+ references) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A search of the ProQuest digital dissertations database </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A search of the PsycINFO literature database </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A request was made for known published and unpublished research via the NASP and CHC professional listservs . </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Research methods in current review <ul><li>Study inclusion criteria </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A study was designed specifically as per the CHC (or Gf-Gc) cognitive abilities framework. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A study directly investigated the relations between the primary CHC cognitive variables (independent or predictor variables; IV's) and achievement variables in reading and math (dependent or criterion variables; DV's) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Information regarding the relevant strength between the CHC IV's and achievement DV's was quantified in the study via the reporting of statistical difference tests or effect sizes </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Benson, N. (2009).  Integrating psychometric and information processing perspectives to clarify the process of mathematical reasoning .  Manuscript in preparation. Benson, N. (2008) . Cattell-Horn-Carroll cognitive abilities and reading achievement. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 26 (1), 27-41. Evans, J. J., Floyd, R. G., McGrew, K. S., & Leforgee, M. H. (2002) . The relations between measures of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities and reading achievement during childhood and adolescence. School Psychology Review, 31 (2), 246-262. Flanagan, D. P. (2000) . Wechsler-based CHC cross-battery assessment and reading achievement: Strengthening the validity of interpretations drawn from Wechsler test scores. School Psychology Quarterly, 15 (3), 295-329. Floyd, R. G., Bergeron, R., & Alfonso, V. C. (2006) . Cattell-Horn-Carroll cognitive ability profiles of poor comprehenders. Reading and Writing, 19 (5), 427-456. Floyd, R. G., Evans, J. J., & McGrew, K. S. (2003) . Relations between measures of Cattell- Horn- Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities and mathematics achievement across the school- age years. Psychology in the Schools, 40 (2), 155-171. Floyd, R. G., Keith, T. Z., Taub, G. E., & McGrew, K. S. (2007) . Cattell-Horn-Carroll cognitive abilities and their effects on reading decoding skills: g has indirect effects, more specific abilities have direct effects. School Psychology Quarterly, 22 (2), 200-233. Ganci, M. (2004 ). The diagnostic validity of a developmental neuropsychological assessment (NEPSY) - Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-third edition (WISC-III) based cross battery assessment . Retrieved from ProQuest UMI Dissertation Publishing (UMI Microform 3150999) . Hale, J. B., Fiorello, C. A., Dumont, R., Willis, J. O., Rackley, C., & Elliott, C. (2008 ). Differential Ability Scales-Second Edition (Neuro) psychological predictor of math performance for typical children and children with math disabilities. Psychology in the Schools, 45 (9), 838- 858. Keith, T. Z. (1999) . Effects of general and specific abilities on student achievement: Similarities and differences across ethnic groups. School Psychology Quarterly, 14 (3), 239-262. McGrew, K. (2007) .  Prediction of WJ III reading and math achievement by WJ III cognitive and language tests .  Unpublished data analysis available at IQs Corner Blog. Studies included in research synthesis (continued on next page)
  10. 10. McGrew, K. (2008) .  Cattell-Horn-Carroll g and specific ability effects on reading and math: Reanalysis of Phelps et al. (2007).  Unpublished data analysis available at IQs Corner Blog. McGrew, K. S. (1993 ). The relationship between the WJ-R Gf-Gc cognitive clusters and reading achievement across the lifespan. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, Monograph Series: WJ R Monograph,  39-53. McGrew, K. S., Flanagan, D. P., Keith, T. Z., & Vanderwood, M. (1997). Beyond g:  The impact of Gf-Gc specific cognitive abilities research on the future use and interpretation of intelligence tests in the schools . School Psychology Review, 26 (2), 189-210. McGrew, K. S., & Hessler, G. L. (1995) . The relationship between the WJ-R Gf-Gc cognitive clusters and mathematics achievement across the life-span. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 13 , 21-38. Miller, B. D. (2001) . Using Cattell-Horn-Carroll cross-battery assessment to predict reading achievement in learning disabled middle school students . Retrieved from ProQuest UMI Dissertation Publishing (UMI Microform 9997281). Proctor, B. E., Floyd, R. G., & Shaver, R. B. (2005) . Cattell-Horn-Carroll broad cognitive ability profiles of low math achievers. Psychology in the Schools, 42 (1), 1-12. Taub, G. E., Floyd, R. G., Keith, T. Z., & McGrew, K. S. (2008) . Effects of general and broad cognitive abilities on mathematics achievement. School Psychology Quarterly, 23 (2), 187- 198. Vanderwood, M. L., McGrew, K. S., Flanagan, D. P., & Keith, T. Z. (2002) . The contribution of general and specific cognitive abilities to reading achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 13 , 159-188. Studies included in research synthesis (cont)
  11. 12. <ul><li>19 research reports </li></ul><ul><ul><li>43 samples </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>134 separate analyses (many samples were analyzed with different methods – see last column of table) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Studies can be differentiated by manifest vs latent variable </li></ul><ul><li>Most studies are with normal subjects </li></ul>
  12. 13. Coding of studies
  13. 14. Coding of studies Important note – most all (90+%) of the studies based entirely, or partially, on WJ-R/WJ III
  14. 15. Coding of studies
  15. 16. Visual-graphic explanations of the primary research designs that have been used in the contemporary CHC Cog-Ach relations research studies are presented next (and are the basis of “analysis method” in Table 1--prior slide)
  16. 17. Figure 1(a): Simultaneous or Standard Multiple Regression ( MR ) -Manifest/Measured Variables ( MV) - rectangles -no g (full scale IQ) included -Cog. IVs either at broad and/or narrow stratum levels -Ach DVs either at broad and/or narrow stratum levels -b1..bn th represent regression weights Te Cog. Test or Cluster 1 Te Cog. Test or Cluster 2 Te Cog. Test or Cluster 4 Te Cog. Test or Cluster 3 Te Cog. Test or Cluster 5 Te Cog. Test or Cluster 6 Te Cog. Test or Cluster 7 Te Cog. Test or Cluster 8 Te Cog. Test or Cluster n th Ach. Test or Cluster (Note : Double headed arrows representing correlations between all pairs of cog. test or cluster variables omitted for readability purposes) Independent Variables (IV) – Cog. Dependent Variable (DV) – Ach. b1 b2 b4 b3 b6 b5 b7 b8 bn th
  17. 18. Figure 1(a): Simultaneous or Standard Multiple Regression ( MR ) : Example
  18. 19. Figure 1(a): Simultaneous or Standard Multiple Regression ( MR ) : Example
  19. 20. Figure 1(b): Structural Equation Modeling ( SEM ) – Type 1 -Manifest/Measured Variables ( MV) – rectangles -Latent Variables (LV) - ovals - g (conceptually similar to full scale IQ) included -LVs at general (thick linked oval), broad (regular thickness oval) , and/or narrow (dashed oval) strata levels for Cog. IVs and broad and narrow strata for Ach DVs -dashed arrows represent factor loading paths (the measurement model) -solid arrows represent causal effect paths (the structural model) -g has d irect effect on Brd Ach and indirect effects on Ach LV1, LV2, LV3, and LV4 (mediated through) g  Brd Ach. - g has indirect effects on Ach LV4 (mediated through g  Cog LV2) and Ach LV1 (mediated through g  Cog LV1) -Cog LV1  Ach LV1 and Cog LV2  Ach LV4 are examples of specific ability direct effects (Note : Residuals and significant correlations between residuals are omitted from the diagram for readability purposes Te Cog. Test 1 Te Cog. Test 2 Te Cog. Test 4 Te Cog. Test 3 Te Cog. Test 5 Te Cog. Test 6 Te Cog. Test 7 Te Cog. Test 8 Te Cog. Test n th Independent Variables (IV) – Cog. Dependent Variables (DV) -- Ach Cog LV2 Cog LV n th g Cog LV1 Ach LV1 Te Ach. Test 1 Te Ach. Test 2 Te Ach. Test 4 Te Ach. Test 3 Brd Ach Ach LV3 Ach LV4 Ach LV2 Cog LV3
  20. 22. Figure 1(c): Structural Equation Modeling ( SEM ) – Type 2 -Manifest/Measured Variables ( MV) – rectangles -Latent Variables (LV) - ovals - g (conceptually similar to full scale IQ) included -LVs at general (thick linked oval), broad (regular thickness oval) , and / or narrow (dashed oval) stratum levels for Cog. IVs but only at narrow stratum for Ach. DVs -dashed arrows represent factor loading paths (the measurement model) -solid arrows represent causal effect paths (the structural model) - g has no direct effect on Ach LV1 but has indirect effect on Ach LV1 (mediated through) g  Cog LV1 -Cog LV1  Ach LV1 is an example of a specific ability direct effect (Note : Residuals and significant correlations between residuals are omitted from the diagram for readability purposes Te Cog. Test 1 Te Cog. Test 2 Te Cog. Test 4 Te Cog. Test 3 Te Cog. Test 5 Te Cog. Test 6 Te Cog. Test 7 Te Cog. Test 8 Te Cog. Test n th Independent Variables (IV)) – Cog. Dependent Variable (DV) – Ach. Cog LV2 Cog LV n th g Cog LV1 Te Ach. Test 2 Te Ach. Test 1 Ach LV1 Cog LV3
  21. 23. Figure 1(c): Structural Equation Modeling ( SEM ) – Type 2 Example
  22. 24. Figure 1(d): Structural Equation Modeling ( SEM ) – Type 3 -Manifest/Measured Variables ( MV) – rectangles -Latent Variables (LV) - ovals - g (conceptually similar to full scale IQ) included -LVs at general (thick linked oval), broad (regular thickness oval) , and / or narrow (dashed oval) stratum levels for Cog. IVs but only at narrow stratum for Ach. DVs -dashed arrows represent factor loading paths (the measurement model) -solid arrows represent causal effect paths (the structural model) - g has direct effect on all Ach LVs - g has indirect effects on Ach LV1; mediated through; g  Cog LV n th  Cog LV3; g  Cog LV2 - g has indirect effects on Ach LV2; mediated through; g  Cog LV n th  Cog LV3  Ach LV1; g  Cog LV2  Ach LV1; g  Ach LV1 - g has indirect effects on Ach LV3; mediated through; g  Cog LV n th  Cog LV3  Ach LV1  Ach LV2; g  Cog LV2  Ach LV1  Ach LV2; g  Ach LV1  Ach LV2; g  Ach LV2 -Cog LV2  Ach LV1 and Cog LV3  Ach LV1 are examples of a specific ability direct effects (Note : Residuals and significant correlations between residuals are omitted from the diagram for readability purposes Te Cog. Test 1 Te Cog. Test 2 Te Cog. Test 4 Te Cog. Test 3 Te Cog. Test 5 Te Cog. Test 6 Te Cog. Test 7 Te Cog. Test 8 Te Cog. Test n th Independent Variables (IV)) – Cog. Dependent Variable (DV) – Ach. Cog LV2 Cog LV n th g Cog LV1 Cog LV3 Te Ach. Test 2 Te Ach. Test 1 Ach LV1 Te Ach. Test 4 Te Ach. Test 3 Ach LV2 Te Ach. Test 6 Te Ach. Test 5 Ach LV3
  23. 25. Figure 1(d): Structural Equation Modeling ( SEM ) – Type 3 Example
  24. 26. BR Ga Ga: PC Ga: US/UR Gc: K0 Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS Gf: RQ Glr Glr: MA Gs Gs: P Gsm Gsm: MS Gsm: MW g CHC Ability 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n =9 ) 9-13 yrs (n =14) 6 to 8 yrs (n =14) % significant samples in prediction of Basic Reading Skills by CHC abilities by three age groups Note: Included CHC abilities had to have at least 2 sample results reported (number above each bar is the number of samples included).CHC abilities with “% significant samples” less than 20% excluded from figure 4-3-2 7 9 8 3-3 14 14 9 11 3 4 14 4 2 2 7 8 7 8 7 6 5 6 6 4 10 9 6 5 4-4 9-8-5
  25. 27. BR Ga Ga: PC Gc: K0 Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS Gf Gf: RQ Glr Glr: MM Glr: NA Gs Gs: P Gsm Gsm: MS Gsm: MW Gv: MV g 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples CHC Ability % significant samples in prediction of Reading Comprehension by CHC abilities by three age groups 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Note: Included CHC abilities had to have at least 2 sample results reported (number above each bar is the number of samples included).CHC abilities with “% significant samples” less than 20% excluded from figure 5-4-3 4 7 9 8 7 11-13-8 3-3-3 3-3-3 4 2 2 4 6 2-2 3 3 4 7 7 7 5 3 3 8-8 5 3-3-3 5-6-3 2
  26. 28. Ga: PC Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS Gc: VL Gf Gf: RQ Gf: RG Glr: MA Glr: MM Glr: NA Gs Gs: AC/EF Gs: P Gsm Gsm: MW Gv: SS g 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples CHC Ability % significant samples in prediction of Basic Math Skills by CHC abilities by three age groups 14-19 yrs (n=10) 9-13 yrs (n=12) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 12) Note: Included CHC abilities had to have at least 2 sample results reported (number above each bar is the number of samples included).CHC abilities with “% significant samples” less than 20% excluded from figure 4-4 4 12 12 10 2-2-2 2 10 9 8 2-2-2 2-2-2 3 2 2-2-2 8 7 6 2 2 2 4-4-4 4 5-5-5 5-5-3 2
  27. 29. BM Ga: PC Ga: US/UR Gc: K0 Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS Gf Gf: RQ Gf: RG Glr: MA Glr: MM Gs Gs: AC/EF Gs: P Gsm Gsm: MS Gsm: MW g 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples CHC Ability % significant samples in prediction of Math Reasoning by CHC abilities by three age groups 14-19 yrs (n=12) 9-13 yrs (n=14) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 13) Note: Included CHC abilities had to have at least 2 sample results reported (number above each bar is the number of samples included).CHC abilities with “% significant samples” less than 20% excluded from figure 2-3-3 6-6 5 2 13 14 10 2-2 2 2 2-2 12 11 8 2-2-2 2 4 2 8 8 2 5 6 5 5-5 3 5 5-5-5 6-7-5
  28. 30. Basic Reading Skills: Consistency of findings Lets break it down to better understand the results and conclusions
  29. 31. The following BRS study coding tables served as the “raw material” for the subsequent visual-graphic figures used in drawing conclusions. Original (and more readable) copies of these tables are available at the original EWOK site (see first slide)
  30. 37. BR Ga Ga: PC Ga: US/UR Gc: K0 Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS Gf: RQ Glr Glr: MA Gs Gs: P Gsm Gsm: MS Gsm: MW g CHC Ability 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n =9 ) 9-13 yrs (n =14) 6 to 8 yrs (n =14) % significant samples in prediction of Basic Reading Skills by CHC abilities by three age groups Note: Included CHC abilities had to have at least 2 sample results reported (number above each bar is the number of samples included).CHC abilities with “% significant samples” less than 20% excluded from figure 4-3-2 7 9 8 3-3 14 14 9 11 3 4 14 4 2 2 7 8 7 8 7 6 5 6 6 4 10 9 6 5 4-4 9-8-5
  31. 38. BR Gsm: MW g 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n =9 ) 9-13 yrs (n =14) 6 to 8 yrs (n =14) Basic Reading Skills: Consistency of findings ( high ) <ul><li>When g is present in the analysis (see SEM1/3 models) it always demonstrates a significant effect on BRS at all ages </li></ul><ul><li>In SEM1/3 models the BR (Broad Reading) latent variable always demonstrates a significant effect on the BRS sub-skills at all ages </li></ul>9-8-5 4-3-2
  32. 39. Ga: PC 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n =9 ) 9-13 yrs (n =14) 6 to 8 yrs (n =14) Basic Reading Skills: Consistency of findings ( medium ) <ul><li>Narrow Ga ability of phonetic coding (PC ) (but not broad Ga ) significantly related to BRS at all ages and possibly more consistently so at the youngest ages (6-13) </li></ul><ul><li>Broad Gs significantly related to BRS, most consistently at younger ages (6-13 ) </li></ul><ul><li>Narrow Gs ability of P (perceptual speed) consistently related to BRS at all ages </li></ul>9 8 11 Gs Gs: P 7 8 7 6 5
  33. 40. Gc: K0 Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n =9 ) 9-13 yrs (n =14) 6 to 8 yrs (n =14) Basic Reading Skills: Consistency of findings ( medium ) 14 14 9 3 14 4 4 <ul><li>Broad Gc (LD/VL) significantly related to BRS at all ages, and consistency of finding increases with increasing age </li></ul><ul><li>Narrow Gc ability of K0 (general information) significantly related to BRS, particularly during middle to later school-age years (i.e., 9-19 years) </li></ul><ul><li>Narrow Gc ability of LS (listening ability) significantly related to BRS only during early school years (6-8 years) </li></ul>
  34. 41. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n =9 ) 9-13 yrs (n =14) 6 to 8 yrs (n =14) Basic Reading Skills: Consistency of findings ( medium ) <ul><li>Broad Gsm significantly related to BRS, most consistently at middle to older ages (9-19). May be developmental trend in consistency of findings </li></ul><ul><li>Narrow Gsm abilities of MS (memory span) and MW (working memory) consistently related to BRS at middle to older ages (9-19), with MW being the most consistently related to BRS at all ages (more so than broad Gsm and narrow MS ). Working memory (MW) appears to be the primary component of Gsm involved at all age s </li></ul>Gsm 6 6 4 10 9 6 5 4-4 Gsm: MS Gsm: MW
  35. 42. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n =9 ) 9-13 yrs (n =14) 6 to 8 yrs (n =14) Basic Reading Skills: Consistency of findings (low) <ul><li>Broad Glr significantly related to BRS but only during early school years (6-8) </li></ul><ul><li>Narrow Glr ability of MA (associative memory) is significantly related to BRS but only during early school years (6-8) </li></ul>Glr Glr: MA 7 8
  36. 43. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n =9 ) 9-13 yrs (n =14) 6 to 8 yrs (n =14) Basic Reading Skills: Abilities NOT consistently related or findings that can only be viewed tentatively or as speculative <ul><li>No Gv consistently related. Broad Ga found to be related to BRS at ages 6-8 in some studies, but not consistently enough to be classified as high, medium or low. Also not at older ages (9-19). </li></ul><ul><li>Narrow Ga abilities of US/UR (speech sound discrimination; resistance to auditory stimulus distortion) , are findings based on single-test (versus composite/cluster) multiple regression manifest variable study of McGrew (2007) and are specific to a WJ III test . Number of studies (3) is also small at each age group. </li></ul><ul><li>Narrow Gf ability of RQ (quantitative reasoning) are findings based on single-test (versus composite/cluster) multiple regression manifest variable study of McGrew (2007) and are specific to a WJ III test. Number of studies (2) is also small at each age group </li></ul>7 Ga 3-3 Ga: US/UR 2 2 Gf: RQ Gv
  37. 44. Basic Reading Skills: Consistency of findings Lets put it all back together
  38. 45. Ga: PC Gc: K0 Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n =9 ) 9-13 yrs (n =14) 6 to 8 yrs (n =14) Basic Reading Skills: Consistency of findings summary 9 8 11 14 14 9 3 14 4 4 Gsm 6 6 4 10 9 6 5 4-4 Gsm: MS Gsm: MW Gs Gs: P 7 8 7 6 5 9-8-5 4-3-2 7 Ga 3-3 Ga: US/UR 2 2 Gf: RQ Glr Glr: MA 7 8 BR g Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign Gv Note: Included CHC abilities had to have at least 2 sample results reported (number above each bar is the number of samples included).CHC abilities with “% significant samples” less than 20% excluded from figure
  39. 46. Reading Comprehension: Consistency of findings Lets break it down to better understand the results and conclusions
  40. 47. The following three RC study coding tables served as the “raw material” for the subsequent visual-graphic figures used in drawing conclusions. Original (and more readable) copies of these tables are available at the original EWOK site (see first slide)
  41. 51. BR Ga Ga: PC Gc: K0 Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS Gf Gf: RQ Glr Glr: MM Glr: NA Gs Gs: P Gsm Gsm: MS Gsm: MW Gv: MV g 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples CHC Ability % significant samples in prediction of Reading Comprehension by CHC abilities by three age groups 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Note: Included CHC abilities had to have at least 2 sample results reported (number above each bar is the number of samples included).CHC abilities with “% significant samples” less than 20% excluded from figure 5-4-3 4 7 9 8 7 11-13-8 3-3-3 3-3-3 4 2 2 4 6 2-2 3 3 4 7 7 7 5 3 3 8-8 5 3-3-3 5-6-3 2
  42. 52. BR g 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) 5-4-3 5-6-3 <ul><li>When g is present in the analysis (see SEM1/3 models) it always demonstrates a significant effect on RC at all ages </li></ul><ul><li>In SEM1/3 models the BR (Broad Reading) latent variable always demonstrates a significant effect on the RC sub-skills at all ages </li></ul><ul><li>Broad Gc (LD/VL) consistently related to RC across all age groups (6-19) </li></ul>Reading Comprehension: Consistency of findings ( high ) Gc: LD/VL 11-13-8
  43. 53. Ga Ga: PC Gs: P 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) 7 7 5 9 7 8 4 7 Reading Comprehension: Consistency of findings ( medium ) <ul><li>Broad Ga consistently related to RC primarily at the younger ages (6-8). Narrow Ga ability of PC (phonetic coding) more consistently related (across ages 6-19) to RC than broad Ga. </li></ul><ul><li>Narrow Gs ability of P (perceptual speed) , but not broad Gs , consistently related to RC across all ages, and possibly more so at early (6-8) and middle (9-14) ages. </li></ul><ul><li>Broad Gsm possibly (note small number of total studies) related to RC at youngest (6-8) and oldest (9-14) ages. </li></ul>Gsm 3 3
  44. 54. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Reading Comprehension: Consistency of findings ( low ) <ul><li>None in the “low” classification category </li></ul>
  45. 55. Gv Gf Gf: RQ Glr Glr: MM Glr: NA Gs Gsm: MS Gv: MV 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) 2 2 2-2 3 5 4 6 4 3 7 4 2 Reading Comprehension: Abilities NOT consistently related or findings that can only be viewed tentatively or as speculative 8-8 <ul><li>Broad Gf , Glr and Gs not consistently related to RC across ages, with possible exception of Glr at the youngest ages (6-13) </li></ul><ul><li>Narrow Gf ability of RQ (quantitative reasoning) , Glr narrow abilities of MM (meaningful memory) and NA (naming facility), and Gv narrow ability of MV (visual memory) are findings based on single-test (versus composite/cluster) multiple regression manifest variable study of McGrew (2007) and are specific to certain WJ III tests . Number of samples is also small in each age group. </li></ul><ul><li>Narrow Gsm ability of MW (working memory) consistently related to RC across all age groups (4-19), although findings based on single-test multiple regression manifest variable study of McGrew (2007) and a small number of samples in each age group. Narrow Gsm ability of MS (memory span) results are reported in a decent number of samples (5-8), but results are inconsistent. Significant MS consistency only noted at oldest ages (14-19) </li></ul>Gsm: MW 3-3-3 Gc: K0 Gc: LS 3-3-3 3-3-3 (continues on next slide)
  46. 56. Gv 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Reading Comprehension: Abilities NOT consistently related or findings that can only be viewed tentatively or as speculative (continued) <ul><li>Narrow Gc abilities of K0 (general information) and LS (listening ability) are findings based on single-test (versus composite/cluster) multiple regression manifest variable study of McGrew (2007) and are specific to certain WJ III tests . Number of samples is also small in each age group. </li></ul><ul><li>Broad Gv not consistently related to RC at any age level </li></ul>Gc: K0 Gc: LS 3-3-3 3-3-3
  47. 57. Reading Comprehension: Consistency of findings Lets put it all back together
  48. 58. Gv BR Ga Ga: PC Gc: K0 Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS Gf Gf: RQ Glr Glr: MM Glr: NA Gs Gs: P Gsm Gsm: MS Gsm: MW Gv: MV g 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Note: Included CHC abilities had to have at least 2 sample results reported (number above each bar is the number of samples included).CHC abilities with “% significant samples” less than 20% excluded from figure 5-4-3 4 7 9 8 7 11-13-8 3-3-3 3-3-3 4 2 2 4 6 2-2 3 3 4 7 7 7 5 3 3 8-8 5 3-3-3 5-6-3 2 Reading Comprehension: Consistency of findings summary Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign
  49. 59. Comparison of CHC abilities by BRS and RC
  50. 60. Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Gc : BRS and RC comparisons Gc: K0 Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS 3-3-3 3-3-3 11-13-8 Gc: K0 Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS 14 14 9 3 14 4 4 BRS RC
  51. 61. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Ga Ga: PC 9 7 8 4 7 Ga: PC 9 8 11 Ga : BRS and RC comparisons BRS RC 3-3 Ga: US/UR Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign 7 Ga
  52. 62. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Gs: P 7 7 5 Gs 7 4 Gs Gs: P 7 8 7 6 5 Gs : BRS and RC comparisons BRS RC Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign
  53. 63. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Gsm 3 3 Gsm: MW 3-3-3 Gsm: MS 5 8-8 Gsm 6 6 4 10 9 6 5 4-4 Gsm: MS Gsm: MW BRS RC Gsm : BRS and RC comparisons Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign
  54. 64. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Glr Glr: MM Glr: NA 2-2 3 6 4 3 Glr Glr: MA 7 8 Glr : BRS and RC comparisons BRS RC Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign
  55. 65. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Gf Gf: RQ 2 2 4 2 2 Gf: RQ Gf : BRS and RC comparisons Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = Not sign. or tentative/speculative BRS RC
  56. 66. Gv Gv 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Gv: MV 2 BRS RC Gv : BRS and RC comparisons Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign
  57. 67. Basic Math Skills: Consistency of findings Lets break it down to better understand the results and conclusions
  58. 68. The following three BMS study coding tables served as the “raw material” for the subsequent visual-graphic figures used in drawing conclusions. Original (and more readable) copies of these tables are available at the original EWOK site (see first slide)
  59. 72. Ga: PC Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS Gc: VL Gf Gf: RQ Gf: RG Glr: MA Glr: MM Glr: NA Gs Gs: AC/EF Gs: P Gsm Gsm: MW Gv: SS g 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples CHC Ability % significant samples in prediction of Basic Math Skills by CHC abilities by three age groups 14-19 yrs (n=10) 9-13 yrs (n=12) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 12) Note: Included CHC abilities had to have at least 2 sample results reported (number above each bar is the number of samples included).CHC abilities with “% significant samples” less than 20% excluded from figure 4-4 4 12 12 10 2-2-2 2 10 9 8 2-2-2 2-2-2 3 2 2-2-2 8 7 6 2 2 2 4-4-4 4 5-5-5 5-5-3 2
  60. 73. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=10) 9-13 yrs (n=12) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 12) Basic Math Skills: Consistency of findings ( high ) Gs: P g 4-4-4 5-5-3 <ul><li>When g is present in the analysis (see SEM1/3 models) it always demonstrates a significant effect on BMS at all ages </li></ul><ul><li>The Gs narrow ability of P (perceptual speed) was consistently related to BMS across all ages (6-19) </li></ul>
  61. 74. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples Basic Math Skills: Consistency of findings ( medium ) <ul><li>Narrow Ga ability of PC (phonetic coding) consistently related to BMS at youngest ages (6-13) </li></ul><ul><li>Broad Gc (LD/VL) significantly related to BMS at middle to older ages (9-19), and consistency of finding increases with increasing age </li></ul><ul><li>Broad Gf consistently related to BMS at all ages (6-19) </li></ul><ul><li>Broad Gs ability consistently related to BMS at all ages (6-19) </li></ul>14-19 yrs (n=10) 9-13 yrs (n=12) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 12) Gc: LD/VL 12 12 10 Gs 8 7 6 Ga: PC 4-4 4 Gf 10 9 8
  62. 75. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples Basic Math Skills: Consistency of findings ( low ) <ul><li>None in the “low” classification category </li></ul>14-19 yrs (n=10) 9-13 yrs (n=12) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 12)
  63. 76. Gc: LS Gc: VL Gf: RQ Gf: RG Glr: MA Glr: MM Glr: NA Gs: AC/EF Gsm Gsm: MW Gv: SS 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 2-2-2 2 2-2-2 2-2-2 3 2 2-2-2 2 2 2 4 5-5-5 2 Basic Math Skills: Abilities NOT consistently related or findings that can only be viewed tentatively or as speculative <ul><li>Broad Gsm not consistently related to BMS, but narrow Gsm ability of MW (working memory) was highly consistent ( high) at all ages, but these findings are based on single-test (versus composite/cluster) multiple regression manifest variable study of McGrew (2007) and are specific to the WJ III working memory tests </li></ul><ul><li>Although Gf narrow abilities of RQ (quantitative reasoning ) and RG (gen. sequential reasoning ) are based on single-test WJ III manifest variable studies (McGrew, 2007), the results are consistent with the medium broad Gf classification (see prior slides). Similarly, the Gc narrow abilities of LS (listening ability ) and VL (lexical knowledge) (based on the same single-test WJ III manifest variable studies) are consistent with the broad Gc medium classification at ages 9-19. </li></ul>(continues on next slide) Gv 14-19 yrs (n=10) 9-13 yrs (n=12) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 12)
  64. 77. Gc: LS Gc: VL Gf: RQ Gf: RG Glr: MA Glr: MM Glr: NA Gs: AC/EF Gsm Gsm: MW Gv: SS 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 2-2-2 2 2-2-2 2-2-2 3 2 2-2-2 2 2 2 4 5-5-5 2 Basic Math Skills: Abilities NOT consistently related or findings that can only be viewed tentatively or as speculative (continued) <ul><li>Although Gs narrow abilities of AC/EF (attention-concentration; executive function) based on single-test WJ III manifest variable studies (McGrew, 2007), the results are consistent with the high narrow Gs classification for P (perceptual speed ) (see prior slides). </li></ul><ul><li>Glr narrow abilities of MA (associative memory) , MM (meaningful memory) and NA (naming facility) and Gv narrow ability of SS (spatial scanning) are based on single-test WJ III manifest variable studies (McGrew, 2007) </li></ul><ul><li>Broad Gv not consistently related to BMS at any age level. </li></ul>Gv 14-19 yrs (n=10) 9-13 yrs (n=12) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 12)
  65. 78. Basic Math Skills: Consistency of findings Lets put it all back together
  66. 79. Ga: PC Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS Gc: VL Gf Gf: RQ Gf: RG Glr: MA Glr: MM Glr: NA Gs Gs: AC/EF Gs: P Gsm Gsm: MW Gv: SS g 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples Note: Included CHC abilities had to have at least 2 sample results reported (number above each bar is the number of samples included).CHC abilities with “% significant samples” less than 20% excluded from figure 4-4 4 12 12 10 2-2-2 2 10 9 8 2-2-2 2-2-2 3 2 2-2-2 8 7 6 2 2 2 4-4-4 4 5-5-5 5-5-3 2 Basic Math Skills: Consistency of findings summary Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign Gv 14-19 yrs (n=10) 9-13 yrs (n=12) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 12)
  67. 80. Math Reasoning: Consistency of findings Lets break it down to better understand the results and conclusions
  68. 81. The following three MR study coding tables served as the “raw material” for the subsequent visual-graphic figures used in drawing conclusions. Original (and more readable) copies of these tables are available at the original EWOK site (see first slide)
  69. 85. BM Ga: PC Ga: US/UR Gc: K0 Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS Gf Gf: RQ Gf: RG Glr: MA Glr: MM Gs Gs: AC/EF Gs: P Gsm Gsm: MS Gsm: MW g 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples CHC Ability % significant samples in prediction of Math Reasoning by CHC abilities by three age groups 14-19 yrs (n=12) 9-13 yrs (n=14) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 13) Note: Included CHC abilities had to have at least 2 sample results reported (number above each bar is the number of samples included).CHC abilities with “% significant samples” less than 20% excluded from figure 2-3-3 6-6 5 2 13 14 10 2-2 2 2 2-2 12 11 8 2-2-2 2 4 2 8 8 2 5 6 5 5-5 3 5 5-5-5 6-7-5
  70. 86. % sign. samples 2-3-3 13 14 10 12 11 8 6-7-5 Math Reasoning: Consistency of findings ( high ) <ul><li>When g is present in the analysis (see SEM1/3 models) it always demonstrates a significant effect on MR at all ages </li></ul><ul><li>In SEM1/3 models the BM (Broad Math) latent variable always demonstrates a significant effect on the MR sub-skills at all ages </li></ul><ul><li>Broad Gc (LD/VL) is consistently related to MR across all age groups (6-19), with the consistency increasing with age </li></ul><ul><li>Broad Gf is consistently related to MR across all age groups (6-19), although the consistency may decrease slightly with age </li></ul>BM Gc: LD/VL Gf g 0 20 40 60 80 100 14-19 yrs (n=12) 9-13 yrs (n=14) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 13)
  71. 87. % sign. samples 8 8 5 6 5 Math Reasoning: Consistency of findings ( medium ) Ga: PC <ul><li>Narrow Ga ability of PC (phonetic coding) (but not broad Ga ) consistently related to MR, although it may be most consistent at the youngest ages (6-8), and decreases in consistency at older ages (9-19) </li></ul><ul><li>Broad Gs and narrow Gs ability of P (perceptual speed) consistently related to MR at young (6-8) to middle age (9-13) groups, and at all age groups for P. Consistency of P relation with MR appears to decrease with increasing age. </li></ul>Gs Gs: P 0 20 40 60 80 100 14-19 yrs (n=12) 9-13 yrs (n=14) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 13) 6-6 5
  72. 88. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples Math Reasoning: Consistency of findings ( low ) <ul><li>None in the “low” classification category </li></ul>14-19 yrs (n=10) 9-13 yrs (n=12) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 12)
  73. 89. Basic Math Skills: Abilities NOT consistently related or findings that can only be viewed tentatively or as speculative (continues on next slide) Ga Gv <ul><li>Broad Gsm not consistently related to BMS, but narrow Gsm ability of MW (working memory) was highly consistent ( high) at all ages, but these findings are based on single-test (versus composite/cluster) multiple regression manifest variable study of McGrew (2007) and are specific to the WJ III working memory tests </li></ul><ul><li>Although Gf narrow abilities of RQ (quantitative reasoning ) and RG (gen. sequential reasoning ) are based on single-test WJ III manifest variable studies (McGrew, 2007), the results are consistent with the high broad Gf classification (see prior slides). Similarly, the Gc narrow abilities of K0 (general information) and LS (listening ability ) (based on the same single-test WJ III manifest variable studies) are consistent with the broad Gc high classification at ages 9-19. </li></ul><ul><li>Broad Ga and Gv not consistently related to BMS at any ages. </li></ul>Ga: US/UR Gc: K0 Gc: LS Gf: RQ Gf: RG Glr: MA Glr: MM Gs: AC/EF Gsm Gsm: MS Gsm: MW 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=12) 9-13 yrs (n=14) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 13) 2 2-2 2 2 2-2 2-2-2 2 4 2 2 5-5 3 5 5-5-5
  74. 90. Basic Math Skills: Abilities NOT consistently related or findings that can only be viewed tentatively or as speculative (continued) Ga Gv <ul><li>Narrow Ga ability of US/UR (speech sound discrimination; resistance to auditory stimulus distortion) , narrow Gs ability of AC/EF (attention-concentration; executive function), and narrow Glr abilities of MA (associative memory) and MM (meaningful memory) are based on single-test WJ III manifest variable studies (McGrew, 2007) </li></ul>Ga: US/UR Gc: K0 Gc: LS Gf: RQ Gf: RG Glr: MA Glr: MM Gs: AC/EF Gsm Gsm: MS Gsm: MW 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=12) 9-13 yrs (n=14) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 13) 2 2-2 2 2 2-2 2-2-2 2 4 2 2 5-5 3 5 5-5-5
  75. 91. Math Reasoning: Consistency of findings Lets put it all back together
  76. 92. % sign. samples Note: Included CHC abilities had to have at least 2 sample results reported (number above each bar is the number of samples included).CHC abilities with “% significant samples” less than 20% excluded from figure 2-3-3 6-6 5 2 13 14 10 2-2 2 2 2-2 12 11 8 2-2-2 2 4 2 8 8 2 5 6 5 5-5 3 5 5-5-5 6-7-5 Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign BM Ga: PC Ga: US/UR Gc: K0 Gc: LD/VL Gc: LS Gf Gf: RQ Gf: RG Glr: MA Glr: MM Gs Gs: AC/EF Gs: P Gsm Gsm: MS Gsm: MW g 0 20 40 60 80 100 14-19 yrs (n=12) 9-13 yrs (n=14) 6 to 8 yrs (n = 13)
  77. 93. Comparison of CHC abilities by BMS and MR
  78. 94. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Gc : BMS and MR comparisons BMS MR Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign Gc: LS Gc: VL 12 10 Gc: LD/VL 2-2-2 2 12 Gc: K0 Gc: LS 14 10 2-2 2 2 2-2 Gc: LD/VL 13
  79. 95. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Ga : BMS and MR comparisons BMS MR Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign Ga: PC 4-4 4 Ga: PC Ga: US/UR 5 2 6-6
  80. 96. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Gs : BMS and MR comparisons BMS MR Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign Gs Gs: AC/EF Gs: P 8 7 6 2 2 2 4-4-4 Gs Gs: AC/EF Gs: P 8 8 2 5 6 5
  81. 97. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) BMS MR Gsm : BMS and MR comparisons Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign Gsm Gsm: MW 5-5-5 4 Gsm Gsm: MS Gsm: MW 5-5 5-5-5 3 5
  82. 98. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Glr : BMS and MR comparisons BMS MR Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign Glr: MA Glr: MM Glr: NA 2 2-2-2 3 Glr: MA Glr: MM 4 2
  83. 99. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) Gf : BMS and MR comparisons Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = Not sign. or tentative/speculative BMS MR Gf Gf: RQ Gf: RG 10 9 8 2-2-2 2-2-2 Gf Gf: RQ Gf: RG 12 11 8 2-2-2 2
  84. 100. 0 20 40 60 80 100 % sign. samples 14-19 yrs (n=8) 9-13 yrs (n=13) 6 to 8 yrs (n =11) BMS MR Gv : BMS and MR comparisons Red = high Blue = medium Green = low Light purple = tentative/speculative Gray = not cons. sign Gv Gv Gv: SS 2
  85. 101. <ul><li>CHC Domain-Specific Summaries: </li></ul><ul><li>Key to slides/figures </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Bold font = WJ III cognitive test was a significantly related to designated WJ III achievement cluster (or test within the cluster; e.g., Letter-Word ID in Basic Reading Skills cluster) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Red font = significant cognitive clusters/tests based on McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC empirical research literature integration </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Black font = significant clusters/tests based on review of non-CHC extant literature </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Dashed broad CHC domain rectangle = broad CHC domain variable was not significantly related to achievement but at 1 (or more) narrow abilities within the broad CHC domain was. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>DS = WJ III Diagnostic Supplement test or cluster requiring 1 or more DS tests </li></ul></ul>
  86. 102. Broad Domain Markers Basic Reading Skills – ages 6 to 8 Gc Crystallized Intelligence Gsm Short-Term Memory Ga Auditory Processing Gs Processing Speed Glr Long-Term Retrieval Short-term Memory Working Memory Processing Speed Perceptual Speed-DS Comp-Knowledge Listening Comp. Phonemic Awareness Phonemic Awareness 3 Most Relevant WJ III Clusters Long-term Retrieval Associative Memory-DS Cognitive Fluency Work Mem (MW) Lang. Dev. (LD) Listen. Ability (LS) Gen. Info. (K0) Lex. Know. (VL) Phonetic Coding (PC) Perc. Speed (P) Narrow Domain Markers Assoc. Mem. (MA) Naming Fac. (NA) Numbers Reversed (MW) Understanding Dir (MW/LS ) Aud. Working. Mem. (MW) Visual Matching (P) Verbal Comp. (LD/VL) Oral Comp. (LS) General Info (K0) Picture Vocab. (VL) Snd. Aware. (PC/MW) Snd. Blending (PC) Most Relevant WJ III Tests Vis.-Aud.-Lrng. (MA) Rapid. Pic. Nam. (NA) Retrieval Fluency (FI) (NA) Research foundation: From McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC COG-ACH relations research synthesis (prior slides) Bridge research – real world practice WJ III clusters/test selected based on McGrew & Wendling (2009) plus expert-knowledge and clinical experience with WJ III battery
  87. 103. Work Mem (MW) Memory Span (MS) Lang. Dev. (LD) General Info (K0) Lex. Know. (VL) Phonetic Coding (PC) Spch-Snd Discrim/ Res to ASD (US/UR) Perc. Speed (P) Narrow Domain Markers Short-term Memory Working Memory Memory Span-DS Processing Speed Perceptual Speed-DS Comp-Knowledge Phonemic Awareness Phonemic Awareness 3 Most Relevant WJ III Clusters Gc Crystallized Intelligence Gsm Short-Term Memory Ga Auditory Processing Gs Processing Speed Broad Domain Markers Num Reversed (MW) Mem. for Words (MS) Understanding Dir. (MW/LS) Visual Matching (P) Verbal Comp. (LD/VL) General Info (K0) Picture Vocab. (VL) Snd. Aware. (PC/MW) Snd. Blending (PC) Snd. Pat.-Voice (US/UR)-DS Most Relevant WJ III Tests Basic Reading Skills ages 9 to 13 Research foundation: From McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC COG-ACH relations research synthesis (prior slides) Bridge research – real world practice WJ III clusters/test selected based on McGrew & Wendling (2009) plus expert-knowledge and clinical experience with WJ III battery
  88. 104. Work Mem (MW) Memory Span (MS) Lang. Dev. (LD) General Info (K0) Lex. Know. (VL) Perc. Speed (P) Narrow Domain Markers Short-term Memory Working Memory Memory Span-DS Perceptual Speed-DS Comp-Knowledge Phonemic Awareness Phonemic Awareness 3 Most Relevant WJ III Clusters Gc Crystallized Intelligence Gsm Short-Term Memory Ga Auditory Processing Gs Processing Speed Broad Domain Markers Num. Reversed (MW) Mem. for Words (MS) Mem. for Sent. (MS)-DS Aud. Work. Mem. (MW) Visual Matching (P) Verbal Comp. (LD/VL ) General Info (K0) Picture Vocab. (VL) Snd. Aware. (PC/MW) Snd. Blending (PC) Snd. Pat-Voice (US/UR)-DS Most Relevant WJ III Tests Basic Reading Skills ages 14 to 19 Phonetic Coding (PC) Spch-Snd Discrim/ Res to ASD (US/UR) Research foundation: From McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC COG-ACH relations research synthesis (prior slides) Bridge research – real world practice WJ III clusters/test selected based on McGrew & Wendling (2009) plus expert-knowledge and clinical experience with WJ III battery
  89. 105. Work Mem (MW) Narrow Domain Markers Working Memory Most Relevant WJ III Clusters Broad Domain Markers Numbers Rev. (MW) Under. Dir. (MW/LS) Mem. for Sent (MS/LS)-DS Aud. Work. Memory (MW) Most Relevant WJ III Tests Reading Comp. ages 6 to 8 Gc Crystallized Intelligence Gsm Short-Term Memory Ga Auditory Processing Gs Processing Speed Perc. Speed (P) Perceptual Speed-DS Visual Matching (P) Lang. Dev. (LD) Listen. Ability (LS) General Info (K0) Lex. Know. (VL) Comp-Knowledge Listening Comp. Verbal Comp. (LD/VL) General Info (K0) Oral Comprehension (LS) Picture Vocab. (VL) Phonetic Coding (PC) Auditory Processing Phonemic Awareness Phonemic Awareness 3 Snd. Aware. (PC/MW) Snd. Blending (PC) Incomplete Words (PC) Glr Long-Term Retrieval Assoc. Memory (MA ) Naming Facility (NA) Associative Memory-DS Cognitive Fluency Vis.-Aud.-Lrng (MA) Rapid. Pic. Nam. (NA ) Retrieval Fluency (FI) (NA) Research foundation: From McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC COG-ACH relations research synthesis (prior slides) Bridge research – real world practice WJ III clusters/test selected based on McGrew & Wendling (2009) plus expert-knowledge and clinical experience with WJ III battery
  90. 106. Narrow Domain Markers Most Relevant WJ III Clusters Broad Domain Markers Most Relevant WJ III Tests Reading Comp. ages 9 to 13 Gc Crystallized Intelligence Gsm Short-Term Memory Ga Auditory Processing Glr Long-Term Retrieval Gs Processing Speed Perc. Speed (P) Perceptual Speed-DS Visual Matching (P) Lang. Dev. (LD) General Info (K0) Listen. Ability (LS) Lex. Know. (VL) Comp-Knowledge Listening Comp. Verbal Comp. (LD/VL) General Info (K0) Picture Vocab. (VL) Oral Comp. (LS) Phonetic Coding (PC) Phonemic Awareness Phonemic Awareness 3 Snd. Aware. (PC/MW) Sound Blending (PC) Naming Fac. (NA) Meaningful Mem. (MM) Long-term Retrieval Cognitive Fluency Story Recall (MM/LS) Vis.-Aud.-Lrng (MA) Rapid. Pic. Nam. (NA) Retrieval Fluency (FI) (NA) Work. Mem. (MW) Working Memory Under. Dir (MW/LS) Mem. for Sent. (MS/LS) Aud. Wrk. Memory (MW) Numbers Reversed (MW) Research foundation: From McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC COG-ACH relations research synthesis (prior slides) Bridge research – real world practice WJ III clusters/test selected based on McGrew & Wendling (2009) plus expert-knowledge and clinical experience with WJ III battery
  91. 107. Work Mem (MW) Memory Span (MS) Lang. Dev. (LD) General Info (K0) Lex. Know. (VL) Listen. Ability (LS) Phonetic Coding (PC) Narrow Domain Markers Working Memory Memory Span Comp-Knowledge Listening Comp. Phonemic Awareness Phonemic Awareness 3 Most Relevant WJ III Clusters Broad Domain Markers Verbal Comp. (LD/VL) General Info (K0) Oral Comp. (LS) Picture Vocab. (VL) Snd. Aware. (PC/MW) Sound Blending (PC) Most Relevant WJ III Tests Understanding Dir (MW/LS) Mem. for Sent. (MS/LS) Numbers Reversed (MW) Aud. Work. Mem. (MW ) Reading Comp. ages 14 to 19 Gc Crystallized Intelligence Gsm Short-Term Memory Ga Auditory Processing Glr Long-Term Retrieval Gs Processing Speed Perc. Speed (P) Perceptual Speed-DS Visual Matching (P) Meaningful Mem. (MM) Naming Facility (NA) Story Recall (MM/LS) Rapid. Pic. Nam. (NA) Retrieval Fluency (FI) (NA) Cognitive Fluency Research foundation: From McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC COG-ACH relations research synthesis (prior slides) Bridge research – real world practice WJ III clusters/test selected based on McGrew & Wendling (2009) plus expert-knowledge and clinical experience with WJ III battery
  92. 108. Work Mem (MW) Associative Mem. (MA) Naming Fac. (NA) Gen. Seq. Reas. (RG) Quant. Reas. (RQ) <ul><li>Perc. Speed (P) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(Number Facility-N) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>AtnCon/ExFun (AC/EF) </li></ul>Narrow Domain Markers Working Memory Processing Speed Perceptual Speed-DS Fluid Reasoning Numerical Reas.-DS Most Relevant WJ III Clusters Broad Domain Markers Visual Matching (P/ N? ) Cross Out (P) Pair Cancellation (AC/EF?) Most Relevant WJ III Tests Numbers Rev. (MW) Aud. Wrk. Mem. (MW) Under. Dir (MW/LS) Cognitive Fluency Associative Memory-DS Number Series (RQ)-DS Number Matrices (RQ)-DS Analysis-Synthesis (RG ) Basic Math Skills ages 6 to 8 Phonetic Coding (PC) Phonemic Aware. 3 Sound Aware. (PC/MW) Gsm Short-Term Memory Gf Fluid Intelligence Glr Long-Term Retrieval Gs Processing Speed Retrieval Fluency (FI) Rapid. Pic. Nam. (NA) Vis.-Aud.-Lrng (MA) (NA) Ga Auditory Processing Research foundation: From McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC COG-ACH relations research synthesis (prior slides) Bridge research – real world practice WJ III clusters/test selected based on McGrew & Wendling (2009) plus expert-knowledge and clinical experience with WJ III battery
  93. 109. Ga-PC findings in math are specific to the WJ III Sound Awareness (Ga-PC; Gsm-MW) test <ul><li>These Math-Ga findings are more specific than those reported in the BRS and RC research where purer and a wider array of measures of Ga-PC are consistently implicated (e.g., WJ III Sound Blending) </li></ul><ul><li>Some math research implicates the the phonological-articulatory loop in math (e.g., use of private speech in maintaing numerals & operands; “subitizing”; etc.) </li></ul><ul><li>The current findings appear to reflect the role of phonological processes (Ga-PC) in the context of working memory (Gsm-MW) during math performance </li></ul>
  94. 110. Work Mem (MW) Associative Mem. (MA) Naming Fac. (NA) Gen. Seq. Reas. (RG) Quant. Reas. (RQ) <ul><li>Perc. Speed (P) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(Number Facility-N) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>AtnCon/ExFun (AC/EF) </li></ul>Narrow Domain Markers Working Memory Processing Speed Perceptual Speed-DS Fluid Reasoning Numerical Reas.-DS Most Relevant WJ III Clusters Broad Domain Markers Visual Matching (P/ N? ) Cross Out (P) Pair Cancellation (AC/EF?) Most Relevant WJ III Tests Numbers Rev. (MW) Aud. Wrk. Mem. (MW) Under. Dir (MW/LS) Cognitive Fluency Associative Memory-DS Number Series (RQ)-DS Number Matrices (RQ)-DS Analysis-Synthesis (RG ) Basic Math Skills ages 6 to 8 Phonetic Coding (PC) Phonemic Aware. 3 Sound Aware. (PC/MW) Gsm Short-Term Memory Gf Fluid Intelligence Glr Long-Term Retrieval Gs Processing Speed Retrieval Fluency (FI) Rapid. Pic. Nam. (NA) Vis.-Aud.-Lrng (MA) (NA) Ga Auditory Processing Research foundation: From McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC COG-ACH relations research synthesis (prior slides) Bridge research – real world practice WJ III clusters/test selected based on McGrew & Wendling (2009) plus expert-knowledge and clinical experience with WJ III battery
  95. 111. Work Mem (MW) Naming Fac. (NA) Gen. Seq. Reas. (RG) Quant. Reas. (RQ) Narrow Domain Markers Working Memory Fluid Reasoning Numerical Reas.-DS Most Relevant WJ III Clusters Broad Domain Markers Visual Matching (P/ N? ) Cross Out (P) Pair Cancel. (AC/EF?) Number Series (RQ)-DS Number Matrices (RQ)-DS Analysis-Synthesis (RG) Most Relevant WJ III Tests Numbers Rev. (MW) Aud. Wrk. Mem. (MW) Under. Dir. (MW/LS) Lang. Dev. (LD) Listening Ability (LS) Comp-Knowledge Verbal Comp. (LD/VL) <ul><li>Perc. Speed (P) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(Number Facility-N) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>AtnCon/ExFun (AC/EF) </li></ul>Processing Speed Perceptual Speed-DS Basic Math Skills ages 9 to 13 Gsm Short-Term Memory Gf Fluid Intelligence Glr Long-Term Retrieval Gc Crystallized Intelligence Ga Auditory Processing Phonetic Coding (PC) Phonemic Aware. 3 Sound Aware. (PC/MW) Gs Processing Speed Retrieval Fluency (FI) Rapid. Pic. Nam. (NA) (NA) Research foundation: From McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC COG-ACH relations research synthesis (prior slides) Bridge research – real world practice WJ III clusters/test selected based on McGrew & Wendling (2009) plus expert-knowledge and clinical experience with WJ III battery
  96. 112. Work Mem (MW) Gen. Seq. Reas. (RG) Quant. Reas. (RQ) Narrow Domain Markers Working Memory Fluid Reasoning Numerical Reas.-DS Most Relevant WJ III Clusters Broad Domain Markers Visual Matching (P/N?) Pair Cancellation (AC/EF?) Rapid. Pic. Nam. (NA) Retrieval Fluency (NA) Number Series (RQ)-DS Number Matrices (RQ)-DS Analysis-Synthesis (RG) Most Relevant WJ III Tests Numbers Rev. (MW) Aud. Wrk. Mem. (MW) Sound Aware. (MW/PC) Under. Dir. (MW/LS) Verbal Comp (LD/VL) Lang. Dev. (LD) Listen. Ability (LS) Comp-Knowledge Basic Math Skills ages 14 to 19 <ul><li>Perc. Speed (P) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(Number Facility-N) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>AtnCon/ExFun (AC/EF) </li></ul>Processing Speed Perceptual Speed-DS Naming Fac. (NA) Gsm Short-Term Memory Gf Fluid Intelligence Glr Long-Term Retrieval Gs Processing Speed Gc Crystallized Intelligence Research foundation: From McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC COG-ACH relations research synthesis (prior slides) Bridge research – real world practice WJ III clusters/test selected based on McGrew & Wendling (2009) plus expert-knowledge and clinical experience with WJ III battery
  97. 113. Work Mem (MW) Quant. Reas. (RQ) Gen. Seq. Reas. (RG) Narrow Domain Markers Working Memory Fluid Reasoning Numerical Reas.-DS Most Relevant WJ III Clusters Broad Domain Markers Visual Matching (P/ N? ) Cross Out (P) Pair Cancellation (AC/EF?) Most Relevant WJ III Tests Numbers Rev. (MW) Aud. Wrk. Mem. (MW) Under. Dir (MW/LS) Number Matrices (RQ)-DS Number Series (RQ)-DS Analysis-Synthesis (RG) Lang. Dev. (LD) General Info (K0) Listen. Ability (LS) Comp-Knowledge Verbal Comp. (LD/VL) General Info (K0 ) Math Reasoning ages 6 to 8 <ul><li>Perc. Speed (P) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(Number Facility-N) </li></ul></ul>Processing Speed Perceptual Speed-DS Gsm Short-Term Memory Gf Fluid Intelligence Gs Processing Speed Gc Crystallized Intelligence Ga Auditory Processing Phonetic Coding (PC) Phonemic Aware. 3 Sound Aware. (PC/MW) Research foundation: From McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC COG-ACH relations research synthesis (prior slides) Bridge research – real world practice WJ III clusters/test selected based on McGrew & Wendling (2009) plus expert-knowledge and clinical experience with WJ III battery
  98. 114. Work Mem (MW) Gen. Seq. Reas. (RG) Quant. Reas. (RQ) Narrow Domain Markers Working Memory Perceptual Speed-DS Fluid Reasoning Numerical Reas.-DS Most Relevant WJ III Clusters Broad Domain Markers Visual Matching (P/N?) Cross Out (P) Pair Cancellation (AC/EF?) Most Relevant WJ III Tests Numbers Rev. (MW) Under. Dir. (MW/LS) Aud. Wrk. Mem. (MW) Number Matrices (RQ)-DS Number Series (RQ)-DS Analysis-Synthesis (RG) Lang. Dev. (LD) General Info (K0) Listen. Ability (LS) Comp-Knowledge Verbal Comp. (LD/VL) General Info (K0) Oral Comp. (LS) Math Reasoning ages 9 to 13 <ul><li>Perc. Speed (P) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(Number Facility-N) </li></ul></ul>Gsm Short-Term Memory Gf Fluid Intelligence Gs Processing Speed Gc Crystallized Intelligence Ga Auditory Processing Phonetic Coding (PC) Phonemic Aware. 3 Sound Aware. (PC/MW) Research foundation: From McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC COG-ACH relations research synthesis (prior slides) Bridge research – real world practice WJ III clusters/test selected based on McGrew & Wendling (2009) plus expert-knowledge and clinical experience with WJ III battery
  99. 115. Work Mem (MW) Gen. Seq. Reas. (RG) Quant. Reas. (RQ) Narrow Domain Markers Working Memory Perceptual Speed-DS Fluid Reasoning Numerical Reas.-DS Most Relevant WJ III Clusters Broad Domain Markers Visual Matching (P/ N? ) Most Relevant WJ III Tests Numbers Rev. (MW) Under. Dir (MW/LS) Number Matrices (RQ)-DS Number Series (RQ)-DS Analysis-Synthesis (RG) Lang. Dev. (LD) General Info (K0) Listen. Ability (LS) Comp-Knowledge Verbal Comp. (LD/VL) General Info (K0) Oral Comprehension (LS) Story Recall (LS/MM) Math Reasoning ages 14 to 19 Phonetic Coding (PC) Phonemic Aware. 3 Sound Aware. (PC/MW) <ul><li>Perc. Speed (P) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(Number Facility-N) </li></ul></ul>Gsm Short-Term Memory Gf Fluid Intelligence Gs Processing Speed Gc Crystallized Intelligence Ga Auditory Processing Research foundation: From McGrew @ Wendling (2009) CHC COG-ACH relations research synthesis (prior slides) Bridge research – real world practice WJ III clusters/test selected based on McGrew & Wendling (2009) plus expert-knowledge and clinical experience with WJ III battery
  100. 116. CHC COG  ACH Important Broad & Narrow Abilities Cognitive Efficiency Achievement Domains BRS BRS BRS RC RC RC MCS MCS MCS MR MR MR <ul><ul><li>Age Range </li></ul></ul>6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 Broad/Narrow CHC Abilities Gsm Short-term memory X X X Working Memory (MW) X X X X X X X X X X X X Memory Span (MS) X X X Gs Processing speed X X X X X Perceptual Speed (P) [# fluency N ?] X X X X X X X X X X X X Attention-conc/Exec-funct (AC/EF?) X X X Glr Long-term storage and retrieval X Associative Memory (MA) X X X Naming Facility (NA) X X X X X X X Meaningful Memory (MM) X X Gc Comprehension-Knowledge X X X X X X X X X X X Language Development (LD) X X X X X X X X X X X General Information (K0) X X X X X X X X X Listening Ability (LS) X X X X X X X X X Lexical Knowledge (VL) X X X X X X Ga Auditory Processing X Phonetic Coding (PC) X X X X X X ? ? ? ? ? ? Spc-Snd Disc/Res to ASD (US/UR) X X Gf Fluid Reasoning X X X X X X Gen. Seq. Reasoning (RG) X X X X X X Quantitative Reasoning (RQ) X X X X X X
  101. 117. Most of the “action” appears to be at the narrow (vs broad) CHC ability level Important conclusion
  102. 118. CHC COG  ACH Important Narrow Abilities Cognitive Efficiency Achievement Domains BRS BRS BRS RC RC RC MCS MCS MCS MR MR MR <ul><ul><li>Age Range </li></ul></ul>6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 Broad/Narrow CHC Abilities Gsm Working Memory (MW) X X X X X X X X X X X X Memory Span (MS) X X X Gs Perceptual Speed (P) [# fluency N ?] X X X X X X X X X X X X Attention-conc/Exec-funct (AC/EF?) X X X Glr Associative Memory (MA) X X X Naming Facility (NA) X X X X X X X Meaningful Memory (MM) X X Gc Language Development (LD) X X X X X X X X X X X General Information (K0) X X X X X X X X X Listening Ability (LS) X X X X X X X X X Lexical Knowledge (VL) X X X X X X Ga Phonetic Coding (PC) X X X X X X ? ? ? ? ? ? Spc-Snd Disc/Res to ASD (US/UR) X X Gf Gen. Seq. Reasoning (RG) X X X X X X Quantitative Reasoning (RQ) X X X X X X
  103. 119. Some CHC abilities appear to be important across reading AND math – domain general Important conclusion
  104. 120. CHC COG  ACH Important Narrow Abilities: Domain general abilities Cognitive Efficiency Achievement Domains BRS BRS BRS RC RC RC MCS MCS MCS MR MR MR <ul><ul><li>Age Range </li></ul></ul>6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 Broad/Narrow CHC Abilities Gsm Short-term memory Working Memory (MW) X X X X X X X X X X X X Memory Span (MS) X X X Gs Processing speed Perceptual Speed (P) [# fluency N ?] X X X X X X X X X X X X Attention-conc/Exec-funct (AC/EF?) X X X Glr Long-term storage and retrieval Associative Memory (MA) X X X Naming Facility (NA) X X X X X X X Meaningful Memory (MM) X X Gc Comprehension-Knowledge Language Development (LD) X X X X X X X X X X X General Information (K0) X X X X X X X X X Listening Ability (LS) X X X X X X X X X Lexical Knowledge (VL) X X X X X X Ga Auditory Processing Phonetic Coding (PC) X X X X X X ? ? ? ? ? ? Spc-Snd Disc/Res to ASD (US/UR) X X Gf Fluid Reasoning Gen. Seq. Reasoning (RG) X X X X X X Quantitative Reasoning (RQ) X X X X X X
  105. 121. Some CHC abilities appear to be differentially important for reading vs math– domain specific Important conclusion
  106. 122. CHC COG  ACH Important Narrow Abilities : Domain-specific abilities Cognitive Efficiency Achievement Domains BRS BRS BRS RC RC RC MCS MCS MCS MR MR MR <ul><ul><li>Age Range </li></ul></ul>6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 Broad/Narrow CHC Abilities Gsm Short-term memory Working Memory (MW) X X X X X X X X X X X X Memory Span (MS) X X X Gs Processing speed Perceptual Speed (P) [# fluency N ?] X X X X X X X X X X X X Attention-conc/Exec-funct (AC/EF?) X X X Glr Long-term storage and retrieval Associative Memory (MA) X X X Naming Facility (NA) X X X X X X X Meaningful Memory (MM) X X Gc Comprehension-Knowledge Language Development (LD) X X X X X X X X X X X General Information (K0) X X X X X X X X X Listening Ability (LS) X X X X X X X X X Lexical Knowledge (VL) X X X X X X Ga Auditory Processing Phonetic Coding (PC) X X X X X X ? ? ? ? ? ? Spc-Snd Disc/Res to ASD (US/UR) X X Gf Fluid Reasoning Gen. Seq. Reasoning (RG) X X X X X X Quantitative Reasoning (RQ) X X X X X X
  107. 123. CHC COG  ACH Important Narrow Abilities Cognitive Efficiency Possible important BRS vs RC CHC ability differences? Achievement Domains BRS BRS BRS RC RC RC <ul><ul><li>Age Range </li></ul></ul>6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 Broad/Narrow CHC Abilities Gsm Short-term memory Working Memory (MW) X X X X X X Memory Span (MS) X X X Gs Processing speed Perceptual Speed (P) [# fluency N ?] X X X X X X Attention-conc/Exec-funct (AC/EF?) Glr Long-term storage and retrieval Associative Memory (MA) X X Naming Facility (NA) X X X X Meaningful Memory (MM) X X Gc Comprehension-Knowledge Language Development (LD) X X X X X X General Information (K0) X X X X X X Listening Ability (LS) X X X X Lexical Knowledge (VL) X X X X X X Ga Auditory Processing Phonetic Coding (PC) X X X X X X Spc-Snd Disc/Res to ASD (US/UR) X X Gf Fluid Reasoning Gen. Seq. Reasoning (RG) Quantitative Reasoning (RQ)
  108. 124. CHC COG  ACH Important Broad & Narrow Abilities Cognitive Efficiency Possible important BMS vs MR CHC ability differences? Achievement Domains MCS MCS MCS MR MR MR <ul><ul><li>Age Range </li></ul></ul>6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 Broad/Narrow CHC Abilities Gsm Short-term memory Working Memory (MW) X X X X X X Memory Span (MS) Gs Processing speed Perceptual Speed (P) [# fluency N ?] X X X X X X Attention-conc/Exec-funct (AC/EF?) X X X Glr Long-term storage and retrieval Associative Memory (MA) X Naming Facility (NA) X X X Meaningful Memory (MM) Gc Comprehension-Knowledge Language Development (LD) X X X X X General Information (K0) X X X Listening Ability (LS) X X X X X Lexical Knowledge (VL) Ga Auditory Processing Phonetic Coding (PC) ? ? ? ? ? ? Spc-Snd Disc/Res to ASD (US/UR) Gf Fluid Reasoning Gen. Seq. Reasoning (RG) X X X X X X Quantitative Reasoning (RQ) X X X X X X
  109. 125. Are some CHC abilities more important at certain ages – developmentally specific ? Important conclusion
  110. 126. WJ-R/III has allowed investigation of “developmental” aspects of CHC COG-ACH relations
  111. 127. CHC COG  ACH Important Narrow Abilities: Developmental specific possibilities? Cognitive Efficiency Achievement Domains BRS BRS BRS RC RC RC MCS MCS MCS MR MR MR <ul><ul><li>Age Range </li></ul></ul>6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 6-8 9-13 14-19 Broad/Narrow CHC Abilities Gsm Short-term memory Working Memory (MW) X X X X X X X X X X X X Memory Span (MS) X X X Gs Processing speed Perceptual Speed (P) [# fluency N ?] X X X X X X X X X X X X Attention-conc/Exec-funct (AC/EF?) X X X Glr Long-term storage and retrieval Associative Memory (MA) X X X Naming Facility (NA) X X X X X X X Meaningful Memory (MM) X X Gc Comprehension-Knowledge Language Development (LD) X X X X X X X X X X X General Information (K0) X X X X X X X X X Listening Ability (LS) X X X X X X X X X Lexical Knowledge (VL) X X X X X X Ga Auditory Processing Phonetic Coding (PC) X X X X X X ? ? ? ? ? ? Spc-Snd Disc/Res to ASD (US/UR) X X Gf Fluid Reasoning Gen. Seq. Reasoning (RG) X X X X X X Quantitative Reasoning (RQ) X X X X X X
  112. 128. CHC Selective Referral-Focused Assessment Worksheet (McGrew, 2009) Age/grade: _____ Academic referral concern ___________________________________________ CHC res. syn. based Non-CHC res. based Broad/Narrow CHC Abilities Referral Relevant domain? Selective/focused set of starting tests Selective/focused possible additional tests Gsm Memory Span (MS) Y N Working Memory (MW) Y N Gs Perceptual Speed (P) Y N Number Facility (N) Y N Glr Associative Memory (MA) Y N Naming Facility (NA) Y N Meaningful Memory (MM) Y N Gc Language Development (LD) Y N General Information (K0) Y N Listening Ability (LS) Y N Lexical Knowledge (VL) Y N Ga Phonetic Coding (PC) Y N Spch-Snd Disc/Res to ASD (US/UR) Gf Gen. Seq. Reasoning (RG) Y N Quantitative Reasoning (RQ) Y N EF Vigilance/inhibition/planning/ concentration, self-regulation, etc Y N Gkn Domain-specific knowledge (__) Y N Gv Visualization (Vz)/Spat Rel (SR)/ Visual Memory (MV)/Imagery (IM) Y N ??? Orthographic processing (???) Y N
  113. 129. “ Tests do not think for themselves, nor do they directly communicate with patients. Like a stethoscope, a blood pressure gauge, or an MRI scan, a psychological test is a dumb tool , and the worth of the tool cannot be separated from the sophistication of the clinician who draws inferences from it and then communicates with patients and professionals” Meyer et al. (2001). Psychological testing and psychological assessment. American Psychologist,
  114. 130. WJ III branching test scenarios PSYCHOLOGIST GENERAL’S WARNING: These are NOT to be used in a cookbook manner. The examples are intended to demonstrate modeled logical and decision-making. All cases are unique. Referral-based focused testing is a non-linear iterative cognitive testing hypothesis method based on the skills and expertise of the clinician. (“We are the instrument”; K. McGrew; date unknown) Stay tuned……..research-based selective testing tree examples are under development and will be shared at NASP 2009 (Feb 23-March 1; Boston) and posted for viewing after the conference

×