The differential abilities scales : validation using a gifted sample

• Main Author: Kamphaus, Mary Ann
• Other Authors: Gridley, Betty E.
• Format: Others
• Published: 2011
• Subjects: Gifted children > Identification.; Ability > Testing.; Differential Ability Scales > Validity.
• Online Access: http://cardinalscholar.bsu.edu/handle/handle/177209; http://liblink.bsu.edu/uhtbin/catkey/862275

The pupose of this study was to examine the validity of the Differential Abilities Scale with a gifted sample. Subjects consisted of 111 students identified as gifted by Indiana S-4. They were in grades 1 thru 6 and ranged in age from 6-8 to 12-11 with a mean age of 9-8. There were 60 females and 51 males who participated. Approximately, 1% of the population was minority which closely resembled the school population. Data from previously administered WISC-III and WIAT (The Psychological Corporation, 1992) were available for 21 of the 111 students.The first aspect of this study was to assess the construct validity of the DAS through investigation of the internal structure. Several different models were proposed. These analyses revealed that the proposed models were not good explanations of the relationships among obtained scores because convergence could not be obtained. A respecified two factor model was obtained where loadings on a Verbal Factor were constrained as recommended by Maxwell (1977). For this sample of gifted students a two-factor model with the first factor being primarily composed of Word Definitions was found to be a tenable one for the DAS.The second aspect of this study was to examine the convergent and predictive validity of the DAS by comparing these scores with the WISC-III and WIAT scores. Verbal factors for the two intelligence tests were the most highly correlated. Although there is overlap between the two intelligence measures, each test measures something unique. While one might expect these two instruments would not correlate perfectly, this correlation is lower than predicted.The DAS cognitive portion was more highly related to the other ability measure, the WISC-III, than it was to achievement as measured by the WIAT. In addition, achievement portions of both instruments were more highly related than they were to the ability measures. === Department of Educational Psychology