Response: Review several of your colleagues’ posts and respond to at least two of your peers, at least of one whom was assigned a different age group than you. You are encouraged to post your required replies earlier in the week to promote more meaningful interactive discourse in this discussion. Be sure to review the assigned articles before constructing your reply.
Which of the assessment instruments presented by your classmate demonstrates the strongest validity, and which (if any) do not show strong validity for the age group being discussed? Were there appropriate age, socioeconomic, language, and/or cultural considerations your classmate did not mention but should have been included in her or his initial post? What ethical consideration(s), in addition to those mentioned by your classmate, might you recommend be included? Provide a rationale for the inclusion of these considerations. Use information from the required resources as well as any other appropriate peer-reviewed articles to support your statements.
1st Response Hodges
F through J: Children ages 8 through 16
For your initial post, you will present at least two viewpoints debating professional approaches to assessment used in psychology for your assigned age group. Please see the list below for your assigned age group. In addition to the required reading, research a minimum of one peer-reviewed article from the Ashford University Library on ability testing research at is pertains to your assigned age group.
In your initial post, you must
Robert Sternberg Triarchic theory and Gardner Multiple Intelligence theory are my choices for comparison. Sternberg theorized intelligence as mental activity, i.e. problem solving; situational competence; and adaptation. Contemporarily, Sternberg’s theory would be utilized in the realm of creativity. Assessments may be conducted within the setting of an educational venue. For instance, analytical, creative, and thinking skills assessments would be administered to students. Gardner theorized intelligence by visuals, verbal, logic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalistic, and musical. Gardner did not standardize the assessments. MI assessment show strengths in particular topic. Gardner theorizes everyone has all of the intelligence factors for different areas, but, are stronger in some.
Possible challenges associated with assessing at the age of 7-16 could be the differences in outcome. Of course the assessments would be geared towards age related material. There should be no ethical considerations with either of these types of assessments, other than school official guidelines. So often there are standards for school districts in different states. For these types of assessments, the ethics portion would fall upon the school districts. “Reports from the US Census Bureau indicate one fourth of children presently in kindergarten public schools are Hispanic, and by the year 2023, ethnic minority will become majority.†(Harrison, 2012, p. 526) Sociocultural, is a different case. There are many school districts which have eliminated musical and artistic classes. Others have capitalized upon it. There is a world renowned art college in the city I live. The creative and artistic flourish.
KABC-II measures processing of abilities. It was created for children ages 3-18. It is broken down into 5 categories including, learning, memory, simultaneous, planning, and knowledge.
NEPSY-II is intended to give clinicians assistance with proficiency levels in children ages 3-16. It helps with identifying cognitive functioning currently, and future functioning.
Both of these instruments are used worldwide, and are revisions from originals.
“Whatever their application, group tests differ from individual tests in five ways:
Multiple-choice versus open-ended format; Objective machine scoring versus examiner scoring; Group versus individualized administration; Applications in screening versus remedial planning; Huge versus merely large standardization samples.â€(Gregory, 2014.ch.6.1)
Depending on what is being assessed would determine the pros and cons. Seeing as the topic here is assessment of ability, which I would categorize as intelligence, the following would be the major components of the pros and cons.
Pro- Group assessments can save time, whereas, individual assessments require, for instance, 20 minutes with one child vs. 20 minutes with 15 children. Group testing is more economical.
Con- Grouping children and giving one standard assessment could cause a “loss of interest†for the child. Not all children have the same interests, and therefore, group assessments are not individualized. Individualized testing allows for the administer of the test to be aware of whether or not the child truly understands what they are supposed to do.
If a child is labeled as not having high enough scores on assessments, or the alternative, having too low of scores, the child or the adolescent can be misplaced. For instance, a child who may not score in the percentile (normal, average, etc.) of a standardized group assessment range, may be placed in a learning disability forum. Or, if a child scores on the opposite range, they may be placed in another format of learning above their comprehension, or even outside of their social skill set. If the cultural norm is different, there could be mislabeling as well. Our text quotes cultural penalization. “Persons from backgrounds other than the culture in which the test was developed will always be penalized.â€(Gregory, 2014.ch.6.7) The section goes on to discuss, female v. male, social class, and African American.
Gregory, R. J. (2014). Psychological testing: History, principles, and applications (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Harrison, D. P. (2012). Contemporary Intellectual Assessment, Third Edition: Theories, Tests, and Issues. New York, NY: Guilford Publications, Inc.
2nd Response Shabanah
Discussion Week Two:
The age group I have been assigned is adults ages 61 and older. There are at least two theories of intelligence that we can view that do relate with this age group of humans. Two terms we can use to define this group is the elderly or “older adultsâ€. We can view two of these relatable theories in sections 5.7 as well as 5.20 in our text (Gregory, 2014).
The structure of intellect model can be used for a number of various age groups and older adults is one of these groups. This model is found in section 5.7 of our text. There are three dimensions in this test. This test was first conceived by a psychologist named J. P. Guilford. This was around the time of World War II. One unique fact about this test is that this test was designed to even try to reach beyond old methods and try to also incorporate testing the creative areas of the brain and psyche. His model for this test is called the structure of intellect model, or SOI model. Guilford’s test is broken up in to three dimensions, or parts. These are labeled: operations, contents, and products (Gregory, 2014).
There are both pros and cons to group testing. The other option is individual testing. One pro of group testing is that we can take a rather large sample size, test on this, and acquire data on this. This kind of data can be useful to a number of groups and organizations, and even applied to further testing (Gregory, 2014). One group whom uses this type of data is the government.
One con of group testing is actually the same as one pro of individual testing, which is: in some regards, individual testing can be more accurate to a specific individual. This kind of testing is best used in a setting where gathering data on an individual is more necessary than getting data in a mass sense. One example of where this should be used in doing testing in relation to trying to a psychologist testing in order to eventually diagnose a patient (Gregory, 2014).
There is absolutely an implication that occurs when a tester has mislabeled any individual in an assigned age group. The implication is that a sample population is used for a reason. This is not only relative to the current test that is being done. It is also relevant to the next tests that will be done in relation to this topic, that will also use some of the data you have come up with, in order to add to their own test. When you mislabel in the first place, this will surely yield that some of your data is faulty and incorrect. It has also been shown that labeling when labeling should not be used, will have a negative consequence. One of these is over-diagnosis of disabling conditions (Gregory, 2014).
References:
Gregory, R. J. (2014). Psychological testing: History, principles, and applications (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Harrison, D. P. (2012). Contemporary Intellectual Assessment, Third Edition: Theories, Tests, and Issues.New York, NY: Guilford Publications, Inc.
Merrill, Edward C.; Conners, Frances A.; Roskos, Beverly; Klinger, Mark R.; Klinger, Laura Grofer. (2013, July/ August). Journal of Genetic Psychology. Contextual Cueing Effects Across the Lifespan. Volume 174. Issue 4. Pp 387- 402. Ashford University On Line Library. Ashford University On Line Library.
Nguyen, Ann; Chatters, Linda; Taylor, Robert; Mouzon, Dawne. (2016, June). Happiness Studies. Social Support from Family and Friends and Subjective Well- Being of Older African Americans. Volume 17. Issue 3. Pp 959- 979. Ashford University On Line Library.
Perreault, Michel; Julien, Dominic; White, Noe Djawn; Rabouin, Daniel; Lauzon, Pierre; Milton, Diana. (2015, January). Substance Use & Misuse. Psychological Predictors of Retention in a Low Threshold Methadone Maintenance Treatment for Opioid Addicts: A 1 Year Follow Up Study. Volume 50. Issue 1. Pp 24- 31. Ashford University On Line Library.
Tadic, Dusanka; Wuthrich, Viviana; Rapee, Ronald. (2015, August). Cognitive Therapy & Research. Age Differences in Interpretation Bias in Community and Comorbid Depressed and Anxious Samples. Volume 39. Issue 4. Pp 459- 472. Ashford University On Line Library.

WhatsApp us