✦ LIBER ✦

Validity of the Woodcock-Johnson tests of cognitive ability: A comparison with the WISC-R in LD and normal elementary students

✍ Scribed by Pamela L. Thompson; Marla R. Brassard

Book ID: 107817373
Publisher: Elsevier Science
Year: 1984
Tongue: English
Weight: 584 KB
Volume: 22
Category: Article
ISSN: 0022-4405
DOI: 10.1016/0022-4405(84)90040-2

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES

Comparison of the WISC-R and Woodcock-Jo

Comparison of the WISC-R and Woodcock-Johnson tests of cognitive ability

✍ Kevin S. McGrew 📂 Article 📅 1983 🏛 Elsevier Science 🌐 English ⚖ 412 KB

A comparison of the WISC-R and the Woodc

A comparison of the WISC-R and the Woodcock-Johnson tests of cognitive ability

✍ James Ysseldyke; Mark Shinn; Susan Epps 📂 Article 📅 1981 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 331 KB 👁 2 views

Concurrent validity of the Woodcock-John

Concurrent validity of the Woodcock-Johnson tests of cognitive ability with the WISC-R: EMR children

✍ Jack A. Cummings; David Sanville 📂 Article 📅 1983 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 400 KB 👁 2 views

The WISC-R and Woodcock-Johnson tests of

The WISC-R and Woodcock-Johnson tests of cognitive ability: A comparative study

✍ Margaret C. Coleman; William R. Harmer 📂 Article 📅 1985 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 367 KB 👁 2 views

Multiple regression data using the WISC-

Multiple regression data using the WISC-R and the Woodcock-Johnson tests of cognitive ability

✍ Leadelle Phelps; Martin Rosso; Sharon Lee Falasco 📂 Article 📅 1985 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 243 KB 👁 2 views

A comparison of visual and auditory proc

A comparison of visual and auditory processing tests on the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Ability, Revised and the Learning Efficiency Test-II

✍ L. M. Bolen; D. J. Kimball; C. W. Hall; R. E. Webster 📂 Article 📅 1997 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 47 KB 👁 2 views

A comparison of the visual and auditory processing factors of the WJR Tests of Cognitive Ability and the visual and auditory memory factors of the Learning Efficiency Test, II were examined for 120 undergraduate college students. Repeated measures ANOVAs revealed two significant performance differen