Wrat 4
Wrat 4
Wrat 4
Achievement Test
WRAT4
Academic
Academic
Screening/
Evaluation
Re-evaluation
Academic
Progress
Monitoring
History
The first WRAT was developed as an
unpublished assessment instrument by Joseph
F. Jastak, a psychologist
Created to augment David Wechslers Wechsler-
Bellevue Scales
Dr. Jastak recognized the need to study and
assess the basic academic codes in addition to
cognitive processes
Believed that it was necessary to assess both
functions in any assessment to provide a more
complete view of individual abilities
History
WRAT4 test series originated in the 1930s
First published for use in 1946
Most recent edition, WRAT3, was published in
1993
Widespread use in a variety of settings as
measures of the basic academic skills
necessary for effective learning, communication,
and thinking:
Reading
Spelling words
Mathematical calculations
Need for Revision
Updated national norms
Standardized academic performance shift from
simple and direct tests to comprehensive
batteries
Continued need for a quick, simple, and
accurate assessment of the basic academic
codes
Increased focus on reading skills
Practitioner feedback
Changes from the WRAT3
The WRAT4 contains an entirely new measure
of reading achievement:
Sentence Comprehension
Interpretation of WRAT4 scores enhanced by the
addition of grade-based norms (fall & spring)
Age-based norms extended from 75 to age 94
so that the basic literacy skills of older adults
could be assessed
Special care was taken to preserve in
the WRAT4 those features that made
earlier editions so popular with users
ease of administration and scoring,
as well as the significant amount of
information gained from a relatively
brief investment of testing time.
Structure
Two alternate forms (Blue Form and Green
Form)
Can be used interchangeably with comparable
results
Allows for retesting within short periods of time
without practice effects
Can also be administered together (Combined
Form) for those interested in a more qualitative
assessment and additional opportunity for
performance observation
Structure
Four Subtests
Word Reading
Sentence Comprehension
Math Computation
Spelling
Reading
Composite
Word Reading
Measures letter and word decoding through
letter identification and word recognition
Extended from 42 to 55 items
New words were selected from the EDL Core
Vocabularies in Reading, Mathematics, Science,
and Social Science (Taylor et al., 1989) to
ensure that a sampling of new words was
obtained from various grade levels of the EDL
list
Sentence Comprehension
Measures an individuals ability to gain
meaning from words and to comprehend
ideas and information contained in
sentences through the use of a modified
cloze technique
Sentence Comprehension
(a) The WRAT has, since its inception, measured
knowledge of letters and words, so the
comprehension of sentences seemed the next
logical step for assessment in the reading
domain
(b) Sentence reading requires much shorter testing
time than paragraph and passage
comprehension, an important consideration
(c) Sentence comprehension can be assessed with
a wide range of discrete items of varying
difficulty
(d) Sentences can be easily adapted to the tailored
testing format needed for the WRAT4
Sentence Completion Guidelines
Avoidance of specialized content that would give
undue advantage to individuals having such
specialized knowledge of the topics selected
Content drawn from a variety of subjects
Appropriate for both female and male
participants and all racial/ethnic groups
Contain material that is timeless
Sentence Completion Guidelines
Avoidance of topics that might evoke negative
affect in examinees
Written for the assigned target grade levels, with
difficulty controlled, in part by the use of the EDL
Series to estimate the difficulty of words
contained in an item
Part of speech required for correct responses
are varied
As few correct responses (both synonyms and
non-synonyms) as possible
Sentence Completion Item Tryout
1,989 students in select schools in Florida,
Illinois, and Pennsylvania
Item Response Theory and Rasch model
employed to determine item difficulty and
goodness-of-fit
W-Abilities calculated to facilitate assignment of
items to specific age/grade levels so entire
range of sentence comprehension ability was
adequately covered
Math Computation
Measures an individuals ability to perform basic
mathematics computations through counting,
identifying numbers, solving simple oral
problems, and calculating written mathematics
problems
24 new replacement items were prepared by
Edward Manfre, a nationally recognized
mathematics textbook author and curriculum
consultant, after completion of a content
analysis to determine the content areas in which
additional items were needed
Spelling
Measures an individuals ability to encode
sounds into written form through the use of a
dictated spelling format containing both letters
and words
After filtering dated words, added 8 words to
each form
New words were selected from the EDL Core
Vocabularies in Reading, Mathematics, Science,
and Social Science (Taylor et al., 1989)
Standardization Sample
National standardization sample n=>3000
Stratification Variables:
Age 5 through 94
Grades K - 12
Race/Ethnicity
Parent/Self Education Level
Gender
Region: Northeast, South, North Central, West
Sample included students with disabilities (5%)
Reliability
Internal Consistency
Grade
.87 to .96 Median Reliabilities for Subtests and
Composites by Form
Age
.87 to .96 Median Reliabilities for Subtests and
Composites by Form
Reliability
Test-Retest Reliability
Word Reading .86
Sentence Comprehension .78
Spelling .89
Math Computation .88
Time interval between testing:
Within one month
Validity
Internal Evidence of Validity
Content review
Evidence based on developmental changes
Intercorrelations between subtests
Range from r=.60 (grade) to .63 (age)
Item bias analysis
Differential Item Functioning
Expert review
Validity
External Evidence of Validity
Correlations with individual achievement tests:
WRAT Expanded
Reading Mathematics
Word Reading .77 .49
Sentence Comprehension .75 .53
Reading Composite .80 .53
Spelling .63 .57
Math Computation .61 .70
WIAT II
Reading Comp Math Comp
Word Reading .80 .45
Sentence Comprehension .54 .31
Reading Composite .78 .50
Spelling .57 .44
Math Computation .64 .92
(n=33)
Validity
External Evidence of Validity
Correlations with individual achievement tests:
WJ 3 Achievement
Broad Reading Broad Math
Word Reading .70 .78
Sentence Comprehension .54 .50
Reading Composite .73 .76
Spelling .49 .59
Math Computation .44 .67
(n=31)
Validity
External Evidence of Validity
Correlations with individual intelligence tests:
(n=35) (n=70)
General Administration Guidelines
Those who use psychological tests should confine their
testing and related assessment activities to their areas of
competence, as demonstrated through education,
supervised training, experience, and appropriate
credentialing
Administration instructions
Test items
Spaces for recording responses
Examples of correct and incorrect responses
Sentence Comprehension Sample Card
Administration instructions
Spaces to record and summarize scores
Response Form