Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Learning Disabilities
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Price, P. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Price, P. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

A Comparative Study of the California Achievement Test (Forms C and D) and the KeyMath Diagnostic Arithmetic Test with Secondary LH Students

Pamela A. Price, MA

Pamela A. Price is on sabbatical leave this year from her position as resource specialist, Valhalla High School, El Cajon, California. She received her MA in special education from San Diego State University, California. Address: 1933 Ranchito Lane, Alpine, CA 92001.

Teachers are always looking for effective achievement tests for use with mildly handicapped students at the secondary level. One popular measure is the KeyMath Diagnostic Arithmetic Test, an individually administered measure which is not time efficient. This study compared the KeyMath with a group-administered test, the California Achievement Test (Forms C and D), to determine each measure's effectiveness in assessing students' math performance on the secondary level. The tests yielded similar scores which were stable across both tests and their subtests, with a mean performance at approximately the fifth-grade level. A qualitative analysis, comparing the tests in the areas of content, quality, time efficiency and relevance for instruction, found the California Achievement Test to be the superior, more efficient measure for accessing secondary LH students' achievement levels in math.

Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 17, No. 7, 392-396 (1984)
DOI: 10.1177/002221948401700702
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Remedial and Special EducationHome page
T. E. Scruggs, M. A. Mastropieri, and D. Tolfa-Veit
The Effects of Coaching on the Standardized Test Performance of Learning Disabled and Behaviorally Disordered Students
Remedial and Special Education, September 1, 1986; 7(5): 37 - 41.
[Abstract] [PDF]