What is the Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT)?

Introduction

The first version of the Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT) was published in 1954 by Irving Lorge and Robert L. Thorndike. Then called the Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Tests, its purpose was to measure general abstract reasoning skills that were important for students in educational settings (grades three through twelve). This first version yielded verbal and nonverbal scores, as well as an overall intelligence score. In subsequent revisions, the far-reaching term “intelligence” was removed, and the title was changed to the Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT) to emphasize cognitive theory. The 2001 edition, Form 6, was said to measure developed abilities, as opposed to innate ones. In terms of its theory base, early versions of the test relied on Philip E. Vernon’s notion of hierarchical abilities and Raymond B. Cattell’s theory of crystallized and fluid intelligence. In addition, John B. Carroll’s hierarchical model also contributed to the CogAT, Form 6. CogAT Form 7, featuring several major revisions intended to make the test fairer for English language learners while retaining much of the successful components of Form 6—was released in 2011.

Description

Form 7 is divided into the primary edition (ages five and six through eight) and the multilevel edition (ages nine through seventeen and eighteen). The primary edition consists of three test batteries—verbal, quantitative, and nonverbal (each of these consisting of three tests)—provided in three levels, kindergarten through second grade. In the primary edition, the test directions and items are read to students. In Form 7, the primary edition uses the same nine subtests as the multilevel edition, with the exception of two verbal subtests which use picture-based items in place of a teacher reading questions aloud. Untimed, this edition reportedly takes 140 to 170 minutes to administer.

The multilevel edition is made up of three batteries—verbal, quantitative, and nonverbal—each battery consisting of three tests. Although teachers read the directions for these tests, students are required to read the test items themselves. The nine subtests of the multilevel edition are verbal classification, sentence completion (optional in the primary edition), verbal analogies, number series, number analogies, number puzzles, figure classification, figure analogies, and paper folding. A composite score is also provided. The multilevel edition takes about 145 minutes to administer.

Scoring can be done either by hand, by computer software, or via submission to the publisher. Three primary uses of the test are recommended by the test authors: to guide instruction to ensure that it matches the abilities of each student; to serve as an alternative measure of cognitive development, versus the familiar measures represented by grades and standardized achievement test scores; and to identify students who have achievement or ability discrepancies. It has also been found to be helpful in identifying giftedness.

Norms, Scores Provided, Reliability, and Validity

The CogAT was standardized on a very large, stratified national norm group. In the process, the test was also standardized with the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (grades kindergarten through eight) and the Iowa Test of Educational Development (grades nine through twelve). Age norms (ages five to eighteen) and grade norms (kindergarten through twelve, or K–12) are reported, and the publisher can also produce local norms if desired.

The test yields several scores for each of the three batteries (verbal, quantitative, and nonverbal) and an overall composite score. Stanines, percentile ranks, and standard age scores (SAS) are reported. Stanines represent a “standard nine” scale, wherein students receive a score from 1 to 9. Percentile rank gives the number of students who scored below a certain score. The standard age score is a standard score with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 16. Finally, the composite universal scale score (USS) places the student on a continuous growth scale across all levels (K–12). Also, profiles (graphs) of student performance (including confidence intervals based on standard errors of measurement) are provided. The profile narrative report interprets the graphed profile.

Generally, Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR-20) reliabilities, which measure internal consistency, run in the high 0.90s for the verbal and nonverbal scores, and low 0.90s for the quantitative score. Validity is supported through confirmatory factor analysis and convergent validity evidence—specifically, correlations with the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (third edition) and the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities (third edition). The test correlates well with the Iowa Test of Basic Skills and Iowa Test of Educational Development, with which it was conormed.

In conclusion, the CogAT is an excellent K–12 ability test battery. Its strengths include a very large, representative normative sample, efficient group administration, a sound theory base, good evidence for reliability and validity, and the fact that it was conormed with the Iowa Test of Basic Skills and the Iowa Test of Educational Development.

Bibliography

Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT), Form 6. http://www.riverpub.com/products/cogAt.

DiPerna, James C. “Review of the Cognitive Abilities Test, Form 6.” The Sixteenth Mental Measurements Yearbook. Ed. Robert A. Spies and Barbara S. Plake. Lincoln: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements, 2005. Print.

Fernandez-Ballesteros, Rocio, ed. Encyclopedia of Psychological Assessment. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2003. Print.

Lakin, Joni, M. "Assessing the Cognitive Abilities of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students: Predictive Validity of Verbal, Quantitative, and Nonverbal Tests." Psychology in the Schools 49.8 (2012): 756–68. Print.

Lohman, David F. "Introducing CogAT Form 7." Cognitively Speaking 7 (2011): 1–9. Print.

Lohman, David F., and J. Gambrell. "Use of Nonverbal Measures in Gifted Identification." Jour. of Psychoeducational Assessment 30 (2012): 25–44. Print.

Lohman, David F., Katrina A. Korb, and Joni M. Lakin. “Identifying Academically Gifted English Language Learners Using Nonverbal Tests: A Comparison of the Raven, NNAT, and CogAT.” Gifted Child Quarterly 52 (2008): 275–96. Print.

Naglieri, Jack A., and Sam Goldstein, eds. Practitioner’s Guide to Assessing Intelligence and Achievement. Hoboken: Wiley, 2009. Print.

Rogers, Bruce G. “Review of the Cognitive Abilities Test, Form 6.” The Sixteenth Mental Measurements Yearbook. Ed. Robert A. Spies and Barbara S. Plake. Lincoln: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements, 2005. Print.