UBC Theses and Dissertations
An investigation of the Wisc-R coding subtest as a measure of learning potential Kuppers, Reiner
The purpose of this study was to compare the practice effects of "normal" students on the WISC-R Coding subtest to those of "learning disabled" students, to see if Coding can be used as a measure of "learning potential." In addition, data from the WISC-R Coding subtest were compared to subjects' scores from the four subtests of the British Columbia Quick Individual Educational Test (B.C.Q.U.I.E.T.). The WISC-R Coding subtest was administered to 38 students from two school districts, one urban and one rural; it was readministered approximately 24 hours later. Seventeen of the students were classified as "learning disabled" and came from regional learning centers in each district. Twenty one students selected from elementary schools in the two districts were classified as "normal." Analysis of the data showed that the students could be pooled into two groups, one labeled "normal" and one "learning disabled." Further analysis found significant differences between the pre-and posttest Coding scores for the normal group but not for the learning disabled group. There was also a significant difference between the two groups on both their pre-and posttest Coding scores. Significant correlations were found between all four of the B.C.Q.U.I.E.T. subtest and posttest Coding scores for normal subjects. The learning disabled group's scores correlated significantly with the Coding subtest. For the normal group no significant correlations were found between pre-and posttest Coding scores; however these scores were correlated significantly for the learning disabled group. A multivariate discriminant analysis found the two groups could be clearly separated by using a combination of all four B.C.Q.U.I.E.T. subtests and the pre-and posttest Coding scores. Results indicated that students classified as "normal" showed significantly greater practice effects on the WISC-R Coding subtest than students classified as "learning disabled". Furthermore these two groups could be identified clearly using a discriminant analysis with a combination of all four subtests of the B.C.Q.U.I.E.T. and pre-and posttest Coding scores. It would seem that there is merit in pursuing the use of the WISC-R Coding test-retest scores to screen for learning disabilities, especially in combination with B.C.Q.U.I.E.T. subtest scores. Implications were discussed.