Castro, C. J., Viezel, K., Dumont, R., & Guiney, M. (2019). Exploration of children’s test behavior during iPad-administered intelligence testing . Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment , 37 (1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282917729304
Castro, C. J., Viezel, K., Dumont, R., & Guiney, M. (2019). Exploration of children’s test behavior during iPad-administered intelligence testing. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 37(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282917729304
Test conditions included administration via electronic tablets versus traditional pencil and paper format.
A total of 93 students who were deemed at-risk for developing disabilities, who were likewise referred for special education evaluations, were sampled from three New York City elementary schools (U.S.). Participants were in grades K–5, and stratified sampling was completed to establish equivalent comparison groups. Demographic characteristics included gender, race/ethnicity, and age; English learners were excluded, to control for the factor of English language skills.
Student participants' norm-referenced cognitive skills were measured by the full-scale intelligence quotient (IQ) from the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fourth Edition (WISC-IV; Wechsler, 2003). The Test Observation Form (TOF; McConaughy & Achenbach, 2004) was employed to document participants' behaviors during testing; syndrome scales identified withdrawn/depressed responses, language/thought problems, oppositional behavior, and attention problems, and broad scales provided internalizing, externalizing, and total problem scores.
Elementary students performed similarly on average on a cognitive skills assessment (i.e., full-scale IQ scores) when responding to a paper-and-pencil version and a version administered on an electronic tablet. In fact, comparable groups of students who were identified with various difficulties during testing—including depression, anxiety, behavioral disabilities, attention problems, and 'language/thought problems'—had no significant mean score differences between the two testing conditions. Limitations of the study were reported, and future research directions were also suggested.