Premium
Examiner errors on the WRAT‐R
Author(s) -
Peterson Daniel,
Steger Helen S.,
Slate John R.,
Jones Craig H.,
Coulter Cora
Publication year - 1991
Publication title -
psychology in the schools
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.738
H-Index - 75
eISSN - 1520-6807
pISSN - 0033-3085
DOI - 10.1002/1520-6807(199107)28:3<205::aid-pits2310280304>3.0.co;2-d
Subject(s) - psychology , test (biology) , protocol (science) , clinical psychology , statistics , medicine , mathematics , paleontology , biology , alternative medicine , pathology
A random sample of 55 WRAT‐R protocols, completed by nine practitioners for a metropolitan school district in the South, was analyzed for examiner errors. All nine practitioners made errors, which occurred on 95% of the protocols and averaged 3.0 errors per protocol. The most frequent errors included failures to obtain a correct ceiling or basal, and failures to record examinees' responses. Correction of the examiner errors resulted in changes in 11 standard scores, and 3 additional changes in grade equivalent scores. These results indicate that WRAT‐R administration and scoring are not as objective as assumed by the test developers, and that examiner errors on this test can adversely affect diagnostic decisions.