Research into practice: Cattell-Horn-Carroll cognitive assessment in practice: Eligibility and program development issues

Psychology in the Schools

Volumn 42, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 525-536

  Fiorello, Catherine A ^a   Primerano, Diane ^a  

^a TEMPLE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 18844416155     PISSN: 00333085     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pits.20089     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Aaron, P.G. (1997). The impending demise of the discrepancy formula. Review of Educational Research, 67, 461-502.
2. Adams, M.J. (1990). Beginning to read. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. American Association on Mental Retardation. (2002). Mental retardation: Definition, classification, and systems of support (10th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
4. Andersen, R. (n.d.). Measurement of intelligence [Online]. Retrieved December 2, 2003, from http://home.earthlink.net/~psychron/IQ.htm
5. Ayres, R.R., & Cooley, E.J. (1986). Sequential versus simultaneous processing on the K-ABC: Validity in predicting learning success. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 4, 211-220.
6. Berninger, V.W. (1998). Process assessment of the learner: Guides for intervention: Reading, writing. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
7. Brader, J.P., & Kratochwill, T.R. (1997). Treatment utility of assessment: Myths and realities. School Psychology Review, 26(3), 475-485.
8. Cole, K.N., Dale, P.S., Mills, P.E., & Jenkins, J.R. (1993). Interaction between early intervention curricula and student characteristics. Exceptional Children, 60(1), 17-28.
9. Das, J.P., Naglieri, J.A., & Kirby, J.R. (1994). Assessment of cognitive processes: The PASS theory of intelligence. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
10. Deno, S.L, (1990). Individual differences and individual difference: The essential difference of special education. The Journal of Special Education, 24(2), 160-173.
11. Evans, J., Floyd, R., McGrew, K., & Leforgee, M. (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.
12. Fisher, G.L., Jenkins, S.J., Bancroft, M.J., & Kraft, L.M. (1988). The effects of K-ABC-based remedial teaching strategies on word recognition skills. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(5), 307-312.
13. 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.
14. Flanagan, D.P., & Ortiz, S. (2001). Essentials of cross-battery assessment. New York: Wiley.
15. Flanagan, O.P., Ortiz, S.O., Alfonso, V.C., & Mascolo, J.T. (2002). The achievement test desk reference (ATDR): Comprehensive assessment and learning disabilities. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
16. Floyd, R.G., Evans, J.J., & McGrew, K.S. (2003). Relations between measures of Cattell-Hom-Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities and mathematics achievement across the school-age years. Psychology in the Schools, 40(2), 155-171.
17. Floyd, R.G., Shaver, R.B., & McGrew, K.S. (2003). Interpretation of the Woodcock-Johnson III tests of cognitive abilities: Acting on evidence. In F.A. Schrank & D.P. Flanagan (Eds.), WJ-III clinical use and interpretation: Scientistpractitioner perspectives (pp. 1-46). New York: Academic Press.
18. Glutting, J.J., McDermott, P.A., Konoid, T.R., Snelbaker, A.J., & Watkins, M.W. (1998). More ups and downs of subtest analysis: Criterion validity of the DAS with an unselected cohort. School Psychology Review, 27, 599-612.
19. Glutting, J.J., Youngstrom, E.A., Ward, T., Ward, S., & Hale, R.L. (1997). Incremental efficacy of WISC-III factor scores in predicting achievement: What do they tell us? Psychological Assessment, 9(3), 295-301.
20. Good, R.H., III, Vollmer, M., Creek, R.J., Katz, L., & Chowdhri, S. (1993). Treatment utility of the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children: Effects of matching instruction and student processing strength. School Psychology Review, 22(1), 8-26.
21. Hale, J.B., & Fiorello, C.A. (2001). Beyond the academic rhetoric of g: Intelligence testing guidelines for practitioners. The School Psychologist, pp. 113-139.
22. Hale, J.B., & Fiorello, C.A. (2004). School neuropsychology: A practitioner's handbook. New York: Guilford.
23. Hale, J.B., Fiorello, C.A., Kavanagh, J.A., Hoeppner, J.B., & Gaither, R.A. (2001). WISC-III predictors of academic achievement for children with learning disabilities: Are global and factor scores comparable? School Psychology Quarterly, 16, 31-55.
24. Hoy, C., Gregg, N., Wisenbaker, J., Bonham, S.S., King, M., & Moreland, C. (1996). Clinical model versus discrepancy model in determining eligibility for learning disabilities services at a rehabilitation setting. In N. Gregg, C. Hoy, & A.F. Gay (Eds.), Adults with learning disabilities: Theoretical and practical perspectives (pp. 55-67). New York: Guilford Press.
25. Juel, C. (1994). Learning to read and write in one elementary school. New York: Springer-Verlag.
26. Kamphaus, R.W. (2001). Clinical assessment of child and adolescent intelligence (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
27. Kaufman, A.S. (1994). Intelligent testing with the WISC-III. New York: Wiley.
28. Kavale, K.A., & Forness, S.R. (1999). Effectiveness of special education. In C.R. Reynolds & T.B. Gutkin (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology (3rd ed., pp. 984-1024). New York: Wiley.
29. Kay, M.J. (n.d.). Diagnosis and intervention strategies for disorders of written expression. Retrieved May 16, 2004, from http://www.margaretkay.com/ Dysgraphia.htm
30. Konoid, T.R., Juel, C., & McKinnon, M. (1999). Building an integrated model of early reading acquisition (CIERA Rep. No. 1-003). University of Michigan, School of Education, Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Acquisition.
31. MacMillan, D.L., Gresham, P.M., & Bocian, K.M. (1998). Discrepancy between definitions of learning disabilities and school practices: An empirical investigation. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 314-326.
32. Mather, N., & Jaffe, L.E. (2002). Woodcock-Johnson III: Reports, recommendations, and strategies. New York: Wiley.
33. McDermott, P.A., Fantuzzo, J.W., & Glutting, J.J. (1990). Just say no to subtest analysis: A critique on Wechsler theory and practice. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 8, 290-302.
34. McOrew, K.S., & Flanagan, O.P. (1998). The intelligence test desk reference (ITDR): Gf-Gc cross-battery assessment. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
35. McOrew, K.S., Flanagan, O.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.
36. 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.
37. McGrew, K.S., & Knopik, S.N. (1993). The relationship between the WJ-R Gf-Gc cognitive clusters and writing achievement across the life-span. School Psychology Review, 22, 687-695.
38. Naglieri, J.A., & Gottling, S.H. (1995). A study of planning and mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities. Psychological Reports, 76(3, Pt 2), 1343-1354.
39. Naglieri, J.A., & Gottling, S.H. (1997). Mathematics instruction and PASS cognitive processes: An intervention study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(5), 513-520.
40. Naglieri, J.A., & Johnson, D. (2000). Effectiveness of a cognitive strategy intervention in improving arithmetic computation based on the PASS theory. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(6), 591-597.
41. Naglieri, J.A., & Reardon, S.M. (1993). Traditional IQ is irrelevant to learning disabilities-Intelligence is not. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26(2), 127-133.
42. Pasternack, R.H. (2002). The demise of IQ testing for children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the annual convention of the National Association of School Psychologists, Chicago, IL.
43. Pennington, B.F., Gilger, J.W., Oison, R.K., & DeFries, J.C. (1992). The external validity of age- versus IQ-discrepancy definitions of reading disability: Lessons from a twin study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 562-573.
44. Pfeiffer, S.I., Reddy, L.A., Kletzel, J.E., Schmelzer, E.R., & Boyer, L.M. (2000). The practitioner's view of IQ testing and profile analysis. School Psychology Quarterly, 15(4), 376-385.
45. Reynolds, C.R. (1988). Putting the individual into aptitude-treatment interaction. Exceptional Children, 54(4), 324-331.
46. Sattler, J.M. (2001). Assessment of children: Cognitive applications. La Mesa, CA: Jerome M. Sattler.
47. Shaywitz, B.A., Fletcher, J.M., Holahan, J.M., & Shaywitz, S.E. (1992). Discrepancy compared to low achievement definitions of reading disability. Results from the Connecticut Longitudinal Study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 639-648.
48. Siegel, L.S. (1989). IQ is irrelevant to the definition of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 469-478, 486.
49. Siegel, L.S. (1992). Dyslexic vs. poor readers: Is there a difference? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 618-629.
50. Snow, C.E., Burns, M.S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
51. Speece, D.L. (1990). Aptitude-treatment interactions: Bad rap or bad idea? Journal of Special Education, 24(2), 139-149.
52. Stanovich, K.E. (1991). Discrepancy definitions of reading disability: Has intelligence led us astray? Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 7-29.
53. Tallal, P., Miller, S.L., Bedi, G., Wang, X., Nagarajan, S.S., Schreiner, C., Jenkins, W. M., & Merzenich, M.M. (1996). Language comprehension in language-learning impaired children improved with acoustically modified speech. Science, 271(5245) 81-84.
54. Wagner, R.K., Torgeson, J.K.,&Rashotte, C.A. (1999).Comprehensive test of phonological processing.Austin.TX: PRO-ED.
55. Watkins, M. W. (2000). Cognitive profile analysis: A shared professional myth. School Psychology Quarterly, 15(4), 465-479.
56. Wexler, MB., & Fiorello, C.A. (2002, March). Diagnostic validity of CHC theory based cross-battery assessment for reading disability. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the National Association of School Psychologists, Chicago, IL.
57. Wolf, M. (Ed.). (2001). Dyslexia, fluency, and the brain. Timonium, MD: York Press.
58. Wong, B.Y.L. (1996). The ABCs of learning disabilities. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
59. Ysseldyke, J.E., & Sabatino, D.A. (1973, Summer). Toward validation of the diagnostic-prescriptive model. Academic Therapy, 8(4), 415-422.
60. Ysseldyke. J.E., & Salvia, J. (1974). Diagnostic-prescriptive teaching: Two models. Exceptional Children, 41, 181-185.