Normative data reported for the Wold Sentence Copying Test (WSCT) have questionable validity, according to Kurt Oland and Kyle Kenison.1 This project was designed to expand upon the data reported by Oland and Kenison, as well as explore new areas. The new areas explored included correlating copying performance with academic performance as measured by the California Test of Basic Skills (CTBS); determining test-retest reliability; and generating ratios of copying speed of letters vs. numbers and ratios of number of head movements needed to copy letters vs. numbers.
The test was normed for both copying speed and number of head and/or eye movements made during the copying task for grades two through six. Results were compared to those reported by Wold, and Kenison and Oland. Similar to Oland and Kenison, a parallel test was administered which substituted numbers for letters and generated normative data for copying speed and head/eye movements. Ratios were calculated comparing letter to number copying speed, as well as head/eye movements made to copy letters vs. numbers. This was done to take into account difficulties with fine motor and ocular motor skills and tease out short-term memory or visual memory factors.
Normative data in this study were roughly comparable to those published by Oland and Kenison, but differed significantly from those published by Wold. CTBS national percentile scores in reading and math showed a low to moderate correlation to copying performance for grade six, but for grade three, a slightly higher correlation. Test reliability as shown by retest gave correlation coefficients of 0.91 and 0.94 for letter and number copying speed respectively, and 0.90 and 0.93 for the number of head/eye movements for the letter and number copying sentence respectively. The generated ratios, however, did not have high test-retest reliability, nor did they correlate well with academic performance.
Files are restricted to Pacific University. Sign in to view.