Administration and Scoring Errors on the Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement: Before and During COVID-19.

IF 1.5 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment Pub Date : 2023-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-05 DOI:10.1177/07342829231166725
Adam B Lockwood, Kelsey Klatka, Brandon Parker, Nicholas Benson
{"title":"Administration and Scoring Errors on the Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement: Before and During COVID-19.","authors":"Adam B Lockwood, Kelsey Klatka, Brandon Parker, Nicholas Benson","doi":"10.1177/07342829231166725","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Eighty Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement protocols from 40 test administrators were examined to determine the types and frequencies of administration and scoring errors made. Non-critical errors (e.g., failure to record verbatim) were found on every protocol (<i>M</i> = 37.2). Critical (e.g., standard score, start point) errors were found on 98.8% of protocols (<i>M</i> = 15.3). Additionally, a series of paired samples t-test were conducted to determine differences in total, critical, and non-critical errors pre- and during-COVID-19. No statistic differences were found. Our findings add to a growing body of research that suggests that errors on norm-referenced tests of achievement are pervasive. However, the frequency of errors did not appear to be affected by COVID-19 stressors or social distancing requirements. Implications of these findings for training and practice are discussed. Suggestions for future research are also provided.</p>","PeriodicalId":51446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment","volume":"41 1","pages":"501-513"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10080173/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829231166725","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Eighty Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement protocols from 40 test administrators were examined to determine the types and frequencies of administration and scoring errors made. Non-critical errors (e.g., failure to record verbatim) were found on every protocol (M = 37.2). Critical (e.g., standard score, start point) errors were found on 98.8% of protocols (M = 15.3). Additionally, a series of paired samples t-test were conducted to determine differences in total, critical, and non-critical errors pre- and during-COVID-19. No statistic differences were found. Our findings add to a growing body of research that suggests that errors on norm-referenced tests of achievement are pervasive. However, the frequency of errors did not appear to be affected by COVID-19 stressors or social distancing requirements. Implications of these findings for training and practice are discussed. Suggestions for future research are also provided.

Woodcock-Johnson IV成绩测试的管理和评分错误:在COVID-19之前和期间
来自40名考试管理员的80个伍德科克-约翰逊成就测试协议被检查,以确定管理和评分错误的类型和频率。在每个协议中都发现了非关键错误(例如,未能逐字记录)(M = 37.2)。在98.8%的方案(M = 15.3)中发现了严重错误(如标准评分、起点)。此外,还进行了一系列配对样本t检验,以确定covid -19之前和期间的总、关键和非关键误差的差异。无统计学差异。越来越多的研究表明,在标准参照成绩测试中,错误是普遍存在的,而我们的发现进一步证明了这一点。然而,错误的频率似乎没有受到COVID-19压力因素或社交距离要求的影响。讨论了这些发现对培训和实践的影响。并对今后的研究提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
61
期刊介绍: The Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment (JPA) publishes contemporary and important information focusing on psychological and educational assessment research and evidence-based practices as well as assessment instrumentation. JPA is well known internationally for the quality of published assessment-related research, theory and practice papers, and book and test reviews. The methodologically sound and impiricially-based studies and critical test and book reviews will be of particular interest to all assessment specialists including practicing psychologists, psychoeducational consultants, educational diagnosticians and special educators.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信