Two tests of intellectual ability were compared in terms of quantitative measures and professional utility in the context of 41 students who were referred for psychoeducational investigation of their learning. Full-scale, Composite, and Factor scores from The Stanford Binet Intelligence Scales — Fifth Edition (SB5) and the Das Naglieri Cognitive Assessment System (CAS) were compared and individual profiles were examined. The SB5 is the latest version of a traditional test referenced to the Cattell-Horn-Carroll factor model of intelligence, while the CAS was developed from an information processing theory of intelligence. Full-scale measures of intellectual ability were found to differ significantly, with the SB5 approximately 8 points higher than the CAS. Analysis of the profiles assisted in understanding specific learning abilities and guided interventions. The implications of this for the relative utility of the two instruments, their interchangeablity, the meaningful interpretation of results, and their complementary contribution to practice are discussed.
Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). (2005–2011). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales - SB5. Retrieved from https://shop.acer.edu.au/acer-shop/group/XS/31
2.
DasJ., ParrilaR., & PapadopoulosT. (2000). Cognitive education and reading disability. In A.Kozulin & B.Rand (Eds.), Experience of mediated learning: An impact of Feuerstein's theory in education and psychology (pp. 274–291). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
3.
DavisC., TomporowskiP., McDowellJ., AustinB., MillerP., YanasakN., . . . NaglieriJ. (2011). Exercise improves executive function and achievement and alters brain activation in overweight children: A randomised, controlled trial. Health Psychology, 30, 91–98. DOI: 10.1037/a0021766
HaywoodC. (2010). Cognitive education: A transactional metacognitive perspective. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 9, 21–35. DOI: 10.1891/1945–8959.9.1.21
6.
KaufmanA. S. & KaufmanN. L. (1983). Kaufman assessment battery for children: Interpretive manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
7.
KeithT., KranzlerJ., & FlanaganD. (2001). What does the Cogntive Assessment System (CAS) measure? Joint confirmatory factor analysis of the CAS and the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitve Ability (3rd Edition). School Psychology Review, 30, 89–119.
8.
KranzlerJ. H., & KeithT. Z. (1999). Independent confirmatory factor analysis of the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS): What does the CAS measure?School Psychology Review, 28, 117–144.
9.
KroesbergenE. H., Van LuittJ. E. H., & NaglieriJ. A. (2003). Mathematical learning difficulties and PASS cognitive processes. Journal of Learning Difficulties, 36, 574–582. DOI: 10.1177/00222194030360060801
10.
McCreaS. (2007). Measurement of recovery after traumatic brain injury: A cognitive-neuropsychological comparison of the WAIS-R with the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS) in a single case of atypical language lateralisationApplied Neuropsychology, 14, 296–304. DOI: 10.1080/09084280701719419
11.
NaglieriJ. (1999). Essentials of CAS Assessment. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
12.
NaglieriJ., & BornsteinB. (2003). Intelligence and achievement: Just how correlated are they?Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 21, 244–260. DOI: 10.1177/073428290302100302
NaglieriJ., & DasJ. (1997c). Das Naglieri Cognitive Assessment System: Administration and scoring manual. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing
16.
NaglieriJ., De LauderB. Y., GoldsteinS., & SchwebechA. (2006). WISC-III and CAS: Which correlates higher with achievement for a clinical sample?School Psychology Quarterly, 21, 62–76.
17.
NaglieriJ. A., GoldsteinS., IsemanJ. S., & Schwebach, (2003). Performance of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and anxiety/depression on the WISC-III and Cognitive Assessment System (CAS). Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 21, 32–42. DOI: 10.1177/073428290302100103
18.
NaglieriJ., SalterC., & EdwardsG. (2004). Assessment of children with attention and reading difficulties using the PASS Theory and Cognitve Assessment System. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 22, 93–105. DOI: 10.1177/073428290402200201
19.
NealeM. (1999). Neale analysis of reading ability (3rd Ed.). Melbourne, Australia: Australian Council of Educational research (ACER).
20.
Ooi BoonK., & IsmailK. B. H. (2011). The relationship between cognitive processing and reading. Asian Social Studies, 7, 44–52. DOI: 10.5539/ass.v7n10p44
RoidG. H., & BarramR. (2004). Essentials of Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (SB5) Assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
25.
SattlerJ. (2001). Assessment of Children: Cognitive applications (4th ed.). San Diego, CA: Jerome M Sattler.
26.
SattlerJ. (2008). Assessment of children: Cogntive foundations (5th ed.). La Mesa, CA: Jerome M Sattler.
27.
SparrowS., & DavisS. (2000). Recent advances in the assessment of intelligence and cognition. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41, 117–131.
28.
ThomsonD. (2001). Review of the Das-Naglieri Cognitive Assessment System. In B.Plake & J.Impara (Eds.), The fourteenth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 368–370). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.
29.
WoodcockR. W., McGrewK. S., & MatherN. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III tests of achievement (3rd ed.). Itasca, IL: Riverside
