There's a long and complicated history with them. First of all, they depend on the testee having a useable language processing system. There are nonverbal IQ tests which are frequently used with English as a second language students, but even when administering the test in the same language as the testee's primary language, there can be problems if the testee has expressive or receptive language processing issues. In those cases there are also good cross-testing instruments available in the speech-language pathologist world--the CELF (Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals) is particularly key to use to determine the degree of language processing impairment in those situations.
The single-number IQ (generally generated using the Weschler batteries) is not one I necessarily support. My preference is for a different battery that, while it can generate a single-number IQ, is more accurate looking at seven broad areas of cognition. The Woodcock Johnson Tests of Cognition utilizes the Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of intelligence, which holds that IQ is divided into nine broad areas (Comprehension-Knowledge, Long-term Retrieval, Visual-Spatial Thinking, Auditory Processing, Fluid Reasoning, Processing Speed, Short-term Memory, Quantitative Knowledge, and Reading-Writing). Generally the last two areas are addressed using the WJ Tests of Achievement while the previous seven are measured using the Tests of Cognition. There are narrow performance areas identified with each of these areas which...I find gives a better diagnosis than a single-number IQ.
Um, I'd better ease off here. It's not discombobulating but rather I don't know to what degree people want to know the details of special education identification. Let's just say that IQ is a number, and it needs to be correlated with other performance factors. Also, it's a construct that really hasn't been measured that long, and we're still finding things out.
You're welcome! I'm a special ed nerd with a specialty in diagnostic assessment so I kinda geek out about this stuff and can ramble on forever while everyone else's eyes glaze over...so thanks for the kind words!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
james_davis_nicoll) wrote2016-05-01 10:34 am
no subject
The single-number IQ (generally generated using the Weschler batteries) is not one I necessarily support. My preference is for a different battery that, while it can generate a single-number IQ, is more accurate looking at seven broad areas of cognition. The Woodcock Johnson Tests of Cognition utilizes the Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of intelligence, which holds that IQ is divided into nine broad areas (Comprehension-Knowledge, Long-term Retrieval, Visual-Spatial Thinking, Auditory Processing, Fluid Reasoning, Processing Speed, Short-term Memory, Quantitative Knowledge, and Reading-Writing). Generally the last two areas are addressed using the WJ Tests of Achievement while the previous seven are measured using the Tests of Cognition. There are narrow performance areas identified with each of these areas which...I find gives a better diagnosis than a single-number IQ.
Um, I'd better ease off here. It's not discombobulating but rather I don't know to what degree people want to know the details of special education identification. Let's just say that IQ is a number, and it needs to be correlated with other performance factors. Also, it's a construct that really hasn't been measured that long, and we're still finding things out.
Go to this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodcock%E2%80%93Johnson_Tests_of_Cognitive_Abilities for more details on the WJ Cog, and
this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattell%E2%80%93Horn%E2%80%93Carroll_theory for details on CHC theory, which is now the theory of art for measuring cognition.
no subject
no subject
no subject