The correlations between the scores on the 1966, 1973, and 1979 norms on Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices for economically disadvantaged students in Grades 3 to 5 were significantly high. It seems appropriate to use any of the three sets of norms with economically disadvantaged students.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BartlettD. P.NewbroughJ. R.TulkinS. R.Raven Progressive Matrices: an item and set analysis of subjects grouped by race, sex, and social class. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1972, 38, 154.
2.
CantwellZ. M.An exploratory study of the development of more effective testing programs for students in differing cultural backgrounds. University of New York, Brooklyn College, New York City, 1966. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 010 246)
3.
Fitz-GibbonC. T.The identification of mentally gifted “disadvantaged” students at the eighth grade level. Journal of Negro Education, 1975, 43, 53–66.
4.
HartladeL. C.LucasT. L.GoodwinA.Culturally biased and culture-fair tests correlated with school performance in culturally disadvantaged children. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1976, 32, 658–660.
5.
HeinzlZ.JanouskovaN.CizekJ. L.SevcikO.[A study on the validity of the C. F. Test: rating scale 2.]Ceskoslovenska Psychologie, 1971, 15, 257–261.
6.
LongR. R.An approach to defensible nondiscriminatory identification model for the gifted. Rome, GA: Rome City School System, 1980. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 080 583)
7.
NieN. H.HullC. H.JenkinsJ. G.SteinbrennerK.BentD. H.SPSS: statistical package for the social sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.
8.
RavenJ.The 1979 Standardization of the Standard Progressive Matrices and Mill-Hill Vocabulary Scales. London: H. K. Lewis, 1981.
9.
RavenJ. C.CourtJ. H.RavenJ.Standard Progressive Matrices. London: H. K. Lewis, 1977.
10.
SkagerR.Fitz-GibbonC.Mentally gifted disadvantaged students: an investigation of methods of identification, including the use of “culture fair” tests, at the eighth level, final report. California University, Los Angeles National Center for Educational Research and Development (DHEW/OE), Washington, D.C. Regional Research Program 1972. (ERIC Document)
11.
SperazzoG.WilkinsW. L.Racial differences on Progressive Matrices. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1959, 23, 273–274.
12.
TulkinS. R.NewbroughJ. R.Social class, race, and sex differences on the Raven (1956) Standard Progressive Matrices. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1968, 32, 400–406.
13.
VincentK. R.CoxJ. A.A re-evaluation of Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices. Journal of Psychology, 1974, 88, 299–303.
14.
WrightstoneJ. W.LazarM.A study of the Raven Progressive Matrices and the IPAT Culture Free Intelligence Test with eighth grade project pupils. Brooklyn, NYBoard of Education, Bureau of Educational Research, Research Report No. 17, 1958.
