Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery–Revised

By F. Schrank. 2008

192 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bcc8a40c7468bb82d6b540c516194420d387e151

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

1. Michael J. Kieffer
2. Nonie K. Lesaux
3. S. Vaughn
4. C. Barr
5. S. Baker
6. R. Gersten
7. Sylvia Linan-Thompson
8. Catherine Richards-Tutor

Citations in the corpus

• The Effectiveness of Reading Interventions for English Learners (2016, methodology): “In three Vaughn et al. studies (Vaughn, Cirino, et al., 2006; Vaughn, Linan-Thompson, et al., 2006; and Vaughn, Mathes, et al., 2006), vocabulary and oral language were measured using the Picture Vocabulary and Verbal Analogies subtests of the Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery (Woodcock, 1991).”
• Is Scientifically Based Reading Instruction Effective for Students With Below-Average IQs? (2014, methodology): “• The Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery – Revised (WLPB-R; Woodcock, 1991).”
• Teaching Students with Moderate Intellectual Disabilities to Read: An Experimental Examination of a Comprehensive Reading Intervention (2010, unknown): “(WLPB-R; Woodcock, 1991).”
• The Importance of SES, Home and School Language and Literacy Practices, and Oral Vocabulary in Bilingual Children’s English Reading Development (2014, methodology): “The reliability and validity characteristics of both forms of the WLPB-R meet basic technical requirements (see Woodcock, 1991b, p. 124).”
• Effectiveness of a Spanish Intervention and an English Intervention for English-Language Learners at Risk for Reading Problems (2006, methodology): “The Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery–Revised (WLPB-R; Woodcock, 1991; Woodcock & Munoz-Sandoval, 1995) is a well-standardized instrument with a normative sample of 6,359, including 3,245 K–12 students consistent with 1980 census distributions on a number of relevant variables.”
• Do Language–Based Processing Tasks Separate Children with Language Impairment from Typical Bilinguals? (2006, background): “…et al. (1997) compared the performance of “majority” (White) children and “minority” (primarily African American) children on an experience-dependent measure of language, the Oral Language Scales (OLS) from the Woodcock Language Profi-ciencyBattery–Revised(Woodcock,1991),alongwithCLPT andNWR.”
• English vocabulary development in bilingual kindergarteners: What are the best predictors? (2006, methodology): “Expressive vocabulary was measured with the Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery-RevisedPicture Vocabulary subtest (Woodcock, 1991) in English.”
• Effects of Accommodations on High-Stakes Testing for Students with Reading Disabilities (2006, methodology): “In addition to the administration of the TAKS, each student received an individual assessment of oral language vocabulary using the Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery-Revised Picture Vocabulary subtest (Woodcock, 1991).”
• Use of Evidence-Based, Small-Group Reading Instruction for English Language Learners in Elementary Grades: Secondary-Tier Intervention (2007, methodology): “Measures Two primary measures of early literacy skills were used, the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) as a repeated measure and the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test on a pre- and post-basis.”