Further investigation of the correlations among the WISC-R,PIAT, and DAM

The authors replicated a study (White, 1979) in which high correlations were obtained among the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R), the Peabody Individual Achievement Test (PIAT), and the Goodenough-Harris Draw-A-Man (DAM), and conclusions were drawn that all these instruments might not be necessary in the same test battery. The present study involved a larger sample (360 children). Much lower correlations among the instruments were obtained, although the pattern of correlation was similar. It was concluded that results of the White study may have overestimated the relationships between the variables because of factors unique to the sample. Test specificity appeared using the larger, normally distributed sample, suggesting a legitimate use of all three tests in a single battery.     

A longitudinal study of the Stanford-Binet and WISC-R with special education students

A group of 95 black and 52 white low socioeconimic children assigned to special education calsses were initially given the Stanford-Binet (1972 norms) and three years later the WISC-R. Correlations between the Stanford-Binet and WISC-R Full Scale IQs were significant in both ethnic groups, with r=.60 for the total group. Correlations between the Stanford-Binet and WISC-R subtests also were generally signiificant (rs between .29 and .52 for the total group). Stanford-Binet and WISC-R Full Scale IQs did not differ significantly. For this sample of special education children, the Stanford-Binet was found to have satisfactory predictive validity.     

Attitudes toward mainstreaming: A status report and comparison of regular and special educators in New York and Massachusetts

Four hundred regular and special educators from New York (a categorical labeling state) and Massachusetts (a noncategorical labeling state) were surveyed on their mainstreaming attitudes and perceptions of handicapped exceptional children. Among the topics investigated were educators' attitudes toward the effects on these children of different educational placements, their reactions to integrating these children into regular classrooms, their knowledge of their special education responsibilities, and their inclusions in their building-level special education processes. Results, implications, and future research directions are discussed, so that services to handicapped exceptional children can be improved and implemented.