This article reviews the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, particularly as it relates to its use with the gifted. The article provides an overview of the test, followed by a discussion of its technical characteristics, the theoretical and research model on which it is based, the issue of cultural bias, its procedure for comparing cognitive performance and academic achievement, and the predictive validity of the test for academic achievement. The paper concludes by summarizing the test's characteristics that should be considered when using it to assess gifted students.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CattellR. B. (1968). Are I.Q. tests intelligent?Psychology Today, 2, 56–62.
2.
ConeT. E., & WilsonL. R. (1981). Quantifying a severe discrepancy: A critical analysis.Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 359–371.
3.
DasJ. P. (1984). Test review.Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 2, 83–88.
4.
DasJ. P., KirbyJ. R., & JarmanR. F. (1979). Simultaneous and successive cognitive processes.New York: Academic Press.
5.
HesslerG. L.Use and interpretation of the Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery.Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources, 1982.
6.
KaufmanA. S. (1983). Some questions and answers about the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children.Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 1, 205–218.
7.
KaufmanA. S., & KaufmanN. L. (1983). Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children: Administration and scoring manual.Circle Pines MN: American Guidance Service. (a)
8.
KaufmanA. S. & KaufmanN. L. (1983). Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children: Interpretive manual.Circle Pines MN: American Guidance Service. (b)
9.
LuriaA. R. (1966). Higher cortical functions in man.New York: Basic Books.
10.
LuriaA. R. (1973). The working brain: An introduction to neuropsychology.New York: Basic Books.
11.
McCallumR. S., KarnesF. A., & EdwardsR. P. (1984). The test of choice for assessment of gifted children: A comparison of the K-ABC, WISC-R, and Stanford-Binet.Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 2, 57–63.
12.
McLeodJ. (1979). Educational underachievement. Toward a defensible psychometric definition.Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12, 322–330.
13.
McLeodJ. (1981). Psychometric identification of children with learning disabilities (2nd ed. rev.). Saskatoon, Canada: University of Saskatchewan, Institute of Child Guidance and Development.
14.
NewlandT. E. (1980). Psychological assessment of exceptional children and youth. In CruickshankW. M. (ed.) Psychology of exceptional children and youth (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
15.
SalviaJ., & YsseldykeJ. E. (1981). Assessment in special and remedial education (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
16.
SattlerJ. M. (1982). Assessment of children's intelligence and special abilities (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
17.
ThorndikeR. L. (1963). The concepts of over- and underachievement.New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
18.
TermanL. M., & MerrillM. A. (1972). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, Form L-M (rev.) Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
19.
WechslerD. (1974). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised.New York: The Psychological Corporation.
20.
WilsonL. R., & ConeT. (1984). The regression equation method of determining academic discrepancy.Journal of School Psychology, 22, 95–110.
21.
WoodcockR. W. (1978). Development and standardization of the Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery.Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.
22.
WoodcockR. W. (in press). A response to some questions raised about the Woodcock-Johnson: II. Efficacy of the aptitude clusters.School Psychology Review.
