The goal of this study was to provide normative scores and examine the psychometric properties of the Math Computation subtest of the Wide Range Achievement Test–IV (WRAT-IV) for Mexican adolescents after the completion of junior high school. We group-administered this subtest to 1,318 first-year Mexican high school students. We then obtained its overall internal reliability and examined its underlying factor structure. Finally, we determined its concurrent and criterion validity by evaluating a subsample of 106 students that included adolescents with mathematical difficulty, mathematical talent, and typical performance. Results showed that the subtest has a good internal reliability and appropriate psychometric characteristics, suggesting its appropriateness for the detection of adolescents with particular difficulty or ability in mathematics. The exploratory factor analysis identified three factors: arithmetic, fractions and basic algebra, and rational numbers. There were also sex differences in the number of correct responses, but the effect size was small.
American Educational Research Association, National Council on Measurement in Education, & American Psychological Association. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
2.
Beltrán-NavarroB.Abreu-MendozaR. A.MatuteE.RosselliM. (2016). Development of early numerical abilities of Spanish-speaking Mexican preschoolers: A new assessment tool. Applied Neuropsychology: Child, 7, 117-128. doi:10.1080/21622965.2016.1266940
3.
BuelowM.FrakeyL. L. (2013). Math anxiety differentially affects WAIS-IV arithmetic performance in undergraduates. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 28, 356-362. doi:10.1093/arclin/act006
4.
CatellR. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245-276.
5.
CicchetiD. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6, 284-290.
6.
DiamantopoulouS.PinaV.Valero-GarciaA. V.González-SalinasC.FuentesL. J. (2012). Validation of the Spanish version of the Woodcock-Johnson mathematics achievement tests for children aged 6 to 13. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30, 466-477. doi:10.1177/0734282912437531
7.
HoffE. (2006). How social contexts support and shape language development. Developmental Review, 26, 55-88.
8.
HornJ. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179-185.
9.
HydeJ. S.FennemaE.LamonS. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 139-155.
10.
Instituto Nacional para la Evaluación de la Educación (INEE). (2015). Panorama Educativo de México 2014. Indicadores del Sistema Educativo Nacional [Educational Panorama of Mexic 2014. Indicators of the National Educational System]. Educación Básica y Media Superior. México: Author.
11.
Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía. (2015). Panorama sociodemográfico de México 2015 [Sociodemographic Panorama of Mexico 2015]. Ciudad de Mexico, México: INEGI.
12.
JolliffeI. T. (1986). Principal component analysis. New York, NY: Springer.
McCauleyR.SwisherL. (1984). Psychometric review of language and articulation tests for preschool children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 49, 34-42.
15.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2014). PISA 2012 results: What students know and can do—Student performance in mathematics, reading and science (Vol. 1, Rev. ed.). Paris: OECD Publishing.
16.
PreacherK. J.MacCallumR. C. (2003). Repairing Tom Swift’s electric factor analysis machine. Understanding Statistics, 2, 13-32.
17.
RaschG. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago, IL: The University Chicago Press.
18.
RevelleW. (2017). psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=psych
19.
RitchieS. J.BatesT. C. (2013). Enduring links from childhood mathematics and reading achievement to adult socioeconomic status. Psychological Science, 24, 1301-1308.
RosselliM.ArdilaA.MatuteE.InozemtsevaO. (2009). Gender differences and cognitive correlates of mathematical skills in school-aged children. Child Neuropsychology, 15, 216-231.
22.
RosselliM.MatuteE.PintoN.ArdilaA. (2006). Memory abilities in children with subtypes of dyscalculia. Developmental Neuropsychology, 30, 801-818.
23.
SattlerJ. (2010). Evaluacion infantil: Fundamentos cognitivos [Assessment of children: Cognitive foundations] (Vol. I, 5th ed.). Ciudad de Mexico, Mexico: Manual Moderno.
24.
SchmittT. A. (2011). Current methodological considerations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29, 304-321.
25.
SieglerR. S.DuncanG. J.Davis-KeanP. E.DuckworthK.ClaessensA.EngelM.. . . ChenM. (2012). Early predictors of high school mathematics achievement. Psychological Science, 23, 691-697. doi:10.1177/0956797612440101
26.
SieglerR. S.Lortie-ForguesH. (2017). Hard lessons: Why rational number arithmetic is so difficult for so many people. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 346-351. doi:10.1177/0963721417700129
27.
StarrA.DeWindN.BrannonE. M. (2017). The contributions of numerical acuity and non-numerical stimulus features to the development of the number sense and symbolic math achievement. Cognition, 168, 222-233.
28.
StoetG.GearyD. C. (2015). Sex differences in academic achievement are not related to political, economic, or social equality. Intelligence, 48, 137-151.
29.
SturgesH. A. (1926). The choice of a class interval. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 21, 65-66.
30.
TianJ.SieglerR. S. (2018). Which type of rational numbers should students learn first?Educational Psychology Review, 30, 351-372.
31.
WechslerD. (2007). Escala Wechsler de Inteligencia para Niños-IV [Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-IV]. Ciudad de Mexico, Mexico: Manual Moderno.
32.
WilkinsonG. S.RobertsonG. J. (2006). WRAT 4 Wide Range Achievement Test. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
33.
WilsonM. (2005). Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34.
YarbroughJ. L.CannonL.BergmanS.Kidder-AshleyP.McCane-BowlingS. (2017). Let the data speak: Gender differences in math curriculum–based measurement. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 35, 568-580. doi:10.1177/0734282916649122
