|
| |
ORAL AND
WRITTEN LANGUAGE SCALES
John O. Willis
The Oral and Written Language Scales (OWLS;
Carrow-Woolfolk, 1996) includes a Written Language Scale designed to assess
writing skills. It is has norms for ages 5-0 through 21-11 and fall and spring
norms from the spring of kindergarten through the spring of grade 12 and takes
about 20 minutes (10 to 30) to administer. In addition to the total score, the
OWLS Written Expression provides percentile ranks for nine special Skills Areas
categories in the domains of Conventions, Linguistics, and Content. The child is
administered one of four overlapping blocks of items (1-20, 12-24, 21-32, or
25-39) depending on age. However, the use of Rasch-type Ability Scores for the
blocks allows out-of-level testing for children with unusually weak or strong
writing skills. A maximum of 70 to 82 raw score points is available for each
block, permitting considerable bottom and top for each examinee. There is a
variety of item types, including copying printed words and sentences; writing
letters, words, and sentences from dictation; and writing sentences and
paragraphs according to specific, oral instructions. The OWLS Written Expression
scale may be administered in small groups "with examinees 8 years and older
who are being assessed for reasons other than placement decisions" (Carrow-Woolfolk,
1996, p. 33), as was done in some cases during the standardization.
Scoring Categories
The OWLS Written Expression Scale does not have subtests,
but does provide reproducible Descriptive Analysis Worksheets permitting
calculation of percentile ranks and determination of strengths and weaknesses
for nine of the 15 Skills Areas at each year of age.
Conventions
- Letter Formation (Item set 1-20): writing legible,
recognizable letters
- Spelling (Item sets 1-20, 12-24, 21-32, 25-39):
spelling and correct use of words and avoiding omissions
- Capitalization/Punctuation (Item sets 1-20, 12-24,
21-32, 25-39): capitals and terminal punctuation, but only essential
internal punctuation
- Conventional Structures (Item sets 12-24, 21-32,
25-39): three items assessing formatting of a letter or paragraph
- Linguistics
- Modifiers (Item sets 1-20, 12-24, 21-32): correct use
of adjectives and adverbs
- Phrases (Item sets 1-20, 12-24, 21-32): use of
prepositional, infinitive, gerund, and participial phrases
- Question Form (Item sets 1-20, 12-24): correct phrasing
(not punctuation) of direct and indirect questions
- Verb Forms/Sentences (Item sets 1-20, 12-24, 21-32,
25-39): construction of sentences and use of correct verb forms
- Complex Sentences (Item sets 1-20, 12-24, 21-32,
25-39): correct construction of complex sentences
Content
- Meaningful Content (Item sets 1-20, 12-24, 21-32,
25-39): writing responses that make sense and meet the requirements of the
instructions
- Details (Item sets 1-20, 12-24, 21-32, 25-39): two
items counting the number of correct details recalled when writing a story
that was read to the student
- Coherence (Item sets 12-24, 21-32, 25-39): logical,
continuous connection of sentences in a response
- Supporting Ideas (Item sets 12-24, 21-32, 25-39):
formulating and expressing ideas in support of an argument
- Word Choice (Item sets 12-24, 21-32, 25-39): precision,
vividness, and appropriateness of vocabulary expressing ideas or information
- Unity (Item set 25-39): coherence of the response;
focus of all sentences on one idea.
Scores
Each item is scored on the basis of one to nine very
explicit, completely independent scoring rules in the various Skills Areas so a
particular response might, for example, receive points for meaningful content,
details, and supporting ideas, but not for spelling and capitalization/
punctuation. Not all scoring criteria require perfection (e.g., "No more
than one incorrect word."). Each of the several criteria for each item has
a maximum possible score of one to four points. Scoring criteria for each item
are listed on the record form and explained, with many examples, in the Manual.
Further helpful information is given in the Glossary. The raw score for an item
set is converted to a Rasch-type Ability Score with 68%, 90%, or 95% confidence
limits, which can be converted to standard scores (M = 100, SD =15),
percentile ranks, normal curve equivalents, stanines, and grade- and
age-equivalent scores. Age-based norms are provided at three-month intervals for
ages 5-0 through 8-11, at four-month intervals for ages 9-0 through 13-11,
six-month intervals for ages 14-0 through 18-11, and 12-month intervals for ages
19-0 through 21-11. Grade-based norms are provided at half-year intervals from
the spring of kindergarten through the spring of twelfth grade.
Standardization
The standardization group contained a representative
national sample of 1,373 students stratified to match the U.S. census data for
1991 on the basis of age, sex, and four categories each of mother's education,
race/ethnicity, and geographic region. An additional 185 students with language
impairments, mental handicaps, learning disabilities, hearing losses, and
reading delays were tested for clinical validity studies. There were 115 to 124
children at each year of age from 5 through 11, and average of 65 per year from
12 to 15, and an average of 42 per year from 16 through 21. There were 111 to
159 children per grade from kindergarten through grade 6 and an average of 51
children per grade for grades 7 through 12.
Reliability
Internal consistency reliabilities range from .77 to .94 (Mdn
rxx = .87). Test-retest reliabilities over 18- to 165-day
intervals for a sample of 84 examinees were .66 with a mean gain of 0.0 standard
score points for ages 8 through 10 and .83 with a mean loss of 1.3 points for
ages 16 to 18. [Corrected for the variability of the norm group (SD =
15), the reliabilities were .88 and .87, respectively.] Interrater reliability
for four raters scoring 60 protocols ranged from .91 to .98 at various ages (Mdn
rxx = .94).
Validity
Construct validity of the OWLS Written Expression Scale is
based on extensive development efforts to match the content and format of the
test to language theory (e.g., Carrow-Woolfolk, 1988, 1996; Carrow-Woolfolk and
Lynch, 1981). The correlations with other writing tests reported in the
Manual were .67 with the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (K-TEA)
Comprehensive Form Spelling (n = 31), .78 with the Peabody Individual
Achievement Test-Revised (PIAT-R) Spelling (n = 31), and .77 with the PIAT-R
Written Language Composite (n = 31). [Corrected for the variability of the norm
group, these were .82, .73, and .71, respectively.] Correlations with total
reading scores were .75 with the K-TEA, .84 with the PIAT-R, and .80 with the
WRMT-R (n = 29). [Corrected for the variability of the norm group, these were
.86, .80, and .87, respectively.]
Correlations with oral language tests were .57 with the
PPVT-R (n = 100), .74 with the Clinical Evaluation of Language
Fundamentals-Revised (CELF-R), [Corrected for the variability of the norm group,
these were .62 and .79, respectively.] .57 with the OWLS Listening Comprehension
Scale (n=1,364), .66 with the OWLS Oral Expression, and .67 with the OWLS Oral
Composite.
Correlations with intelligence tests included .61 with the
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, 3rd ed. (WISC-III) Verbal
IQ, .51 with the Performance (nonverbal) IQ, and .59 with the Full Scale IQ (n =
34). [Corrected for the variability of the norm group, these were .72, .64 and
.70, respectively.]. Correlations with the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test
(K-BIT) were .62 with Vocabulary, .32 with Matrices, and .52 with the Composite
(n = 62). [Corrected for the variability of the norm group, these were .67, .
41, and .58, respectively.]
Students in the clinical samples with language
impairments, mental handicaps, and learning disabilities (reading) and learning
disabilities (undifferentiated) groups all scored significantly lower than
students in matched control groups. Students in a Chapter One Reading Program
scored lower (M = 90.7, SD = 11.7) than the norming sample.
Comment on the OWLS Written Expression Scale
The OWLS Written Expression Scale offers a brief, but
comprehensive assessment of writing skills. The use of multiple, direct and
indirect items rather than a single writing sample does not penalize students
who write only a few words when given fifteen or twenty minutes to write a story
or a letter to a friend. For students who are willing and able to write a longer
sample, you can supplement the OWLS with one of the various story- or
letter-writing subtests or with an informal writing sample, e.g., "You have
been asked to give a graduation speech at a teachers' college. Your speech will
be the last advice these college graduates will hear before they go out to teach
students like you for the next 40 years. Please give them the most important
advice you think they need. You may use this paper to write an outline, web, or
notes before you begin."
The 241-page Manual is clear, explicit, and helpful. After
a little practice, scoring and interpretation quickly become efficient.
The OWLS Written Expression Scale can be purchased and
used alone, but it can also be used with the OWLS Listening Comprehension and
Oral Expression Scales, which are brief, but very useful instruments a
psychologist can use to assess the impact of oral language difficulties on the
student's functioning and to decide whether to make a referral for an in-depth
language assessment. The OWLS Manuals include data on statistical significance
and base rates of differences among the three scales.
-
Carrow-Woolfolk, E. (1988). Theory, assessment and
intervention in language disorders: An integrative approach. Philadelphia:
Grune & Stratton.
-
Carrow-Woolfolk, E. (1996). Oral and Written Language
Scales: Written Expression Scale Manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance
Service.
-
Carrow-Woolfolk, E., & Lynch, J. I. (1981). An
integrative approach to language disorders in children. San Antonio, TX: The
Psychological Corporation.
|