Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T02:03:32.380Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Test Note: Interpretation of Reading Comprehension Scores on the Neale Analysis of Reading Ability - Revised

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2015

Stephen Matthey
Stephen Matthey*
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Psychology, Westmead Hospital
*
Department of Clincial Psychology, Westmead Hospital, Davey Road, Westmead, NSW 2145
Get access

Abstract

Interpretation of a child's comprehension score on the Neale-R is usually done independently from the reading accuracy score. Such a procedure can result in erroneous conclusions about the comprehension skill level of a child. When the child has both accuracy and comprehension reading ages below his/her chronological age, the comprehension data needs to be analysed only for those passages successfully read, rather than being compared directly with the recommended normative data.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Educational and Developmental Psychologist , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , May 1992 , pp. 37 - 39
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Psychological Society 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Adelman, H.S., & Taylor, L. (1985). Fundamental concerns facing the learning disabilities field: A survey looking to the future. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 18, 423–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, P.L., Cronin, M.E., & Miller, J.H. (1986). Referral reasons for learning disabled students. Psychology in Schools, 23 388–395.3.0.CO;2-L>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Lemos, M.M. (1989). Effects of relative age within grade: Implications for the use of age-based norms for group tests of general ability. Bulletin of the International Test Commission, 28, 21–44.Google Scholar
Heubner, E.S. (1987). Teachers’ special education decisions: Does test information make a difference? Journal of Educational Research, 80, 202–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthey, S. (1990). Errors inherent in the use of age normative data in assessing reading ability. Psychological Test Bulletin, 3, 13–17.Google Scholar
McDonald, G. (1991). Henry and Iain encounter the PAT age percentiles. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 7, 65–73.Google Scholar
Neale, M.D. (1988). Neale analysis of readingability-revised. Hawthorn, Victoria; Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
Shepard, L.A., Smith, M.L., & Vojir, CP. (1983) Characteristics of pupils identified as learning disabled. American Educational Research Journal, 20, 309–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar