Evaluation of CAT/5
5
Wanda Clarke
Tom Neumann
Cece Schwennsen
Diana Weis
CAT/5
Name: California Achievement
Test, Fifth Edition (CAT/5)
4 Forms:
Complete Battery A and B
Survey A and B
Publisher:
Macmillan/McGraw-Hill, 1993
COST
Individual Booklets by grade level
$1.80-$2.82Ave $2.50
Answer Sheets
$1.20-$2.12Ave $1.60
Full Battery of ALL Tests
$78.60 / 30
Individual Tests
$18.00 / 25
Nature of Test
Purpose: this test is designed to evaluate
students knowledge and achievement in
the basic skills taught in schools in the
United States.
Population:
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
K……….K.0-K.9 (87 min.)
10………K.6-1.6 (88 min.)
11………1.6-2.2 (217 min.)
12………1.6-3.2 (292 min.)
13………2.6-4.2 (330 min.)
14 -21/22 3.6-12.9 (330 min)
Content and Appropriateness:
Areas measured:
reading
language arts
spelling
mathematics, study skills, science,
and social studies.
Content and Appropriateness:
Methods of Assessment
Selected response
Target to be assessed
Knowledge and understanding
Reasoning proficiency
Norms/standards:
Percentile Ranks
Stanine
Grade Equivalents
Norm Curve Equivalents
Anticipated Achievement Score
Standardization Sample:
Size: 261 public schools and 112 private
(Catholic or Non-Public)
Fall: 109825 students K-12
Winter: 4161 students.
Representation: enough information to
fit test to district needs
Procedures:
School ID
Secondary
Elementary
K-5, K-6, K-8, 7-8
94% of schools responded to demographic
survey
Schools identified by region
New England & Mid-East
Great Lakes & Plains
Southeast
Southwest & West
Schools identified by
community size:
Rural (farm or non-farm)
Town
Small City-Suburban
City-Urban
Large City-Inner City
Reliability
Total battery ranged from 0.94 - 0.98
Subtests had a median range of 0.88
Spring standardizations were higher.
CAT/5 uses a newer measure of the
KR-20.
Reliability is high when a large # are
involved and full battery is used.
Validity
Criterion-reference Scores
75% - students have mastery
50% - students have partial mastery
50% - is non-mastery
These % vary considerably based
Content
CTB used a broad comprehensive sample
of curriculum materials from across the
country to develop items.
Reviewer’s Comments
by Anthony J. Nitko, Professor of
Education, School of Education,
University of Pittsburgh,
Pittsburgh, PA
Reviewer’s Comments
Items & Content
Content Recency & Emphasis
Norming and Scaling
Validity and Reliability
Summary
Group Summary
Pros
95% of students complete test within time
allowed
Broad measurement of curriculum materials
Format optimal for Knowledge &
Understanding and Reasoning Proficiency
targets
Group Summary
Pros
Parallel test forms
Essay form available
Entire battery score provides accurate
measurement of student achievement
Group Summary
Cons
OUTDATED - created using 1980’s curriculum
Norming done in spring and fall of 1991
Subtest scores are not as accurate as
complete battery
Student scores in the mid-range are more
accurate than extreme scores
0
