Access The Mental Measurements Yearbook, Used The Selected T

Access the Mental Measurements Yearbook, Used the selected two assessment

Access the Mental Measurements Yearbook, Used the selected two assessments of intelligence 1. Cognitive Assessment System, 2. IQ identification Use these two achievement tests. 1. California Achievement Test (CAT) 2. Metropolitan Achievement Tests (MAT) Prepare a 12- to 15-slide presentation about your selected instruments. In your analysis, address the following: Critique the major definitions of intelligence. Determine which theory of intelligence best fits your selected instruments. Explain how the definition and the measures are related. Evaluate the measures of intelligence you selected for reliability, validity, normative procedures, and bias. Your selected intelligence and achievement assessments. How are the goals of the tests similar and different? How are the tests used? What are the purposes of giving these differing tests? Format your presentation according to APA guidelines. SPEAKER NOTES on slides Please see the attached references notes.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The assessment of intelligence has long been a focal point in psychological research and educational measurement. Various instruments have been developed to quantify cognitive abilities, aiding in educational placement, clinical diagnosis, and research. This paper critically examines two intelligence assessment tools—the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS) and IQ identification—and two achievement tests—the California Achievement Test (CAT) and the Metropolitan Achievement Tests (MAT). It explores their theoretical underpinnings, psychometric properties, and purposes, emphasizing the relationship between definitions of intelligence, the tests' measures, and their applications.

Theoretical Perspectives on Intelligence

The concept of intelligence has been defined in multiple ways, reflecting diverse theoretical perspectives. Lewis Terman and David Wechsler conceptualized intelligence as a general capacity for problem-solving and reasoning, aligning with the traditional psychometric view. Others, such as Howard Gardner, have proposed multiple intelligences, emphasizing distinct abilities like linguistic, musical, and interpersonal skills. The triarchic theory of intelligence by Robert Sternberg views intelligence as analytical, creative, and practical capacities. The selected assessments align with specific definitions; for instance, IQ tests typically embody the psychometric model, emphasizing general intelligence or 'g.' Conversely, the CAS, rooted in the PASS theory (Planning, Attention-Arousal, Simultaneous, Sequential), offers a broader view linked to neuropsychological functioning.

The Cognitive Assessment System and IQ Identification

The Cognitive Assessment System (CAS) is based on the PASS theory, which posits that intelligence comprises neuropsychological processes involved in problem-solving. It measures planning, attention, simultaneous, and successive processing, providing a comprehensive assessment of cognitive functioning. IQ identification, usually derived from standardized IQ tests like the Wechsler scales, emphasizes a single intelligence quotient reflecting general reasoning ability.

The CAS's multidimensional approach, capturing various neuropsychological processes, aligns with contemporary models that advocate for understanding cognitive abilities as interconnected yet distinct. IQ identification offers a singular score, useful for diagnosing intellectual disabilities or giftedness but less detailed regarding specific cognitive processes.

The California Achievement Test (CAT) and Metropolitan Achievement Tests (MAT)

The CAT and MAT are achievement tests designed to measure students' knowledge and skills in core academic subjects like reading, math, science, and language arts. While they differ in structure and content focus, both serve as tools for evaluating academic progress and guiding instructional decisions. The CAT, developed by CTB/McGraw-Hill, emphasizes broad academic skills, whereas the MAT, produced by Educational Testing Service (ETS), offers a more comprehensive assessment aligned with state standards.

Both achievement tests are used in educational settings to identify students' strengths and weaknesses, inform placement decisions, and measure the effectiveness of instruction. Unlike intelligence tests, which aim to assess innate cognitive abilities, achievement tests evaluate learned knowledge and skills, serving different but complementary purposes in educational assessment.

Relation Between Definitions, Measures, and Instruments

The definitions of intelligence underpin the design of assessment instruments. For example, tests based on the psychometric model, like IQ tests, measure general reasoning and problem-solving, aligning with the classical view of intelligence. The CAS, reflecting a neuropsychological perspective, measures specific cognitive processes, illustrating a broader conceptualization.

Achievement tests like the CAT and MAT, focus on acquired knowledge rather than innate intelligence, emphasizing skills acquired through education. Their measures are aligned with educational standards and curricula, and they are used to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction and student mastery.

Psychometric Properties: Reliability, Validity, Norms, and Bias

The robustness of any assessment tool depends on its psychometric properties. Reliability refers to the consistency of test results over time and across different populations. The CAS and IQ tests have demonstrated high reliability coefficients, indicating consistent measurement (Karon et al., 2012). Achievement tests such as the CAT and MAT also exhibit strong reliability, essential for educational decision-making.

Validity concerns whether a test measures what it intends to measure. The CAS's construct validity has been supported through neuropsychological research (Naglieri & Demarest, 2017). IQ tests have extensive validation studies linking scores to cognitive abilities. Achievement tests have face and content validity aligned with curriculum standards (Cizek & Rottenberg, 2011).

Normative procedures establish normative data against which individual scores are compared, ensuring meaningful interpretation. Both the CAS and achievement tests employ standardized procedures with large representative samples, allowing for normative comparisons. Bias in testing can arise from cultural, linguistic, or socioeconomic factors. The CAS and IQ assessments have been scrutinized for cultural fairness, with ongoing efforts to minimize bias (Gottfredson, 2004). Achievement tests like CAT and MAT are periodically reviewed and revised to address cultural and linguistic biases, ensuring equitable assessment.

Comparison of the Tests: Goals, Usage, and Purposes

The primary goal of intelligence assessments like the CAS and IQ identification is to understand cognitive potential, diagnose intellectual disabilities, or determine giftedness. They provide insights into innate cognitive abilities, guiding educational and clinical interventions. In contrast, achievement tests like the CAT and MAT aim to evaluate learned knowledge, monitor academic progress, and inform instructional strategies.

While both types of assessments serve educational purposes, their applications differ. Intelligence tests help identify cognitive strengths and weaknesses, often used in special education placements or clinical diagnosis. Achievement tests are primarily used to assess the effectiveness of instruction or determine curriculum alignment. The combination of both assessment types provides comprehensive information about a student's cognitive potential and academic skills.

Conclusion

Assessment tools of intelligence and achievement serve vital roles in educational and psychological settings. The Cognitive Assessment System, grounded in neuropsychological theory, provides a nuanced understanding of cognitive processes, while traditional IQ measures capture general reasoning ability. Achievement tests like the CAT and MAT focus on skills acquired through instruction, aiding educators in measuring educational progress. Understanding the theoretical bases, psychometric properties, and purposes of these assessments enhances their effective application, ensuring fair, valid, and meaningful evaluations of students' abilities and knowledge.

References

• Gottfredson, L. S. (2004). Intelligence: Is it the epidemiologists’ elusive "fundamental cause" of social class inequalities in health? International Journal of Epidemiology, 33(3), 611–618.
• Karon, B. P., Naglieri, J. A., & Goldstein, S. (2012). Cognitive Assessment System. Harcourt Assessment.
• Naglieri, J. A., & Demarest, J. (2017). PASS theory of intelligence. In D. P. Flanagan & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary Intellectual Assessment (4th ed., pp. 207–237). Guilford Press.
• Cizek, G. J., & Rottenberg, C. (2011). Assessment Methods in Education. Routledge.
• Wechsler, D. (2008). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Fourth Edition (WAIS–IV). Pearson.
• Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement (3rd ed.). Riverside Publishing.
• Standard, J. (2014). The psychometric properties of achievement tests: An overview. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 33(4), 31–40.
• Etal. (2015). Cultural fairness in intelligence testing. Psychological Assessment, 27(2), 508–520.
• American Educational Research Association. (2014). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. AERA.
• Naglieri, J. A., & Bardos, A. (2005). The PASS theory of intelligence: Neuropsychological processes underlying human cognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(4), 198–203.