EDUC 621
TEST REVIEW TEMPLATE
Your name: Deshia Waterson
Name of instrument: Oral and Written Language Scales, Second Edition: Listening Comprehension
and Oral Expression
Author(s) of instrument: Elizabeth Carrow-Woolfolk
Date of current publication: 1995-2011 Publisher: Western Psychological Services
Base all answers on information provided in MMY (available through Liberty University Online
Library), course textbook, and, if necessary, recent scholarly sources.
1. List all “global” areas and their corresponding subtests that comprise each global area (add more
or less space as needed):
A. List all Global Areas (aka Domains, Clusters): These areas comprise groups of subtests.
Listening Comprehension ; Oral Expression
B. List all Subtests: lexical/semantic (vocabulary), syntactic (grammatical morphemes–function
words, inflections, sentence structure), supralinguistic (nonliteral language), and pragmatic
2. State the age range this test can be administered to 3-21 years old.
3. State the purpose of the test:
Designed to measure oral language 'across receptive and expressive processes’
4. Describe the qualifications required for an examiner to administer this test:
To be a qualified professional with a minimum of a bachelor's degree in speech-language
pathology or a related field, have completed specific training on the OWLS-II assessment, and
possess the necessary materials including the test manual, record forms, and easels to present
stimuli and record responses
5. List the types of scores (e.g., standard scores, percentile rank, scaled scores, age equivalent, grade
equivalent, etc.) this test uses to report results. Your answer should follow the examples stated
here. Do not list anything else.
Listening Comprehension, Oral Expression, Oral Language Composite, [Receptive Language
Composite, Expressive Language Composite (when used with OWLS-II Listening Comprehension and
Oral Expression Scales)].
6. List the instrument’s technical data (including actual numbers) regarding validity, reliability, and
standardization / normative process.
Page 1 of 5
, EDUC 621
Validity:
The validity of the OWLS-II Listening Comprehension and Oral Expression assessment was
established using three methods: construct validity, convergent validity, and discriminative
validity. The OWLS-II is grounded in the Integrative Language Theory, which serves as the
foundation for its measurement approach. Construct validity evaluates the extent to which the
assessment accurately measures and supports these theoretical constructs. Analytical findings
confirm that the factor structure of the OWLS-II aligns with the Integrative Language Theory,
validating the distinct scoring and interpretation of its scale scores.
Reliability:
The OWLS-II Listening Comprehension and Oral Expression assessment demonstrates strong
reliability across its subtests and composite scores. Reliability was evaluated using internal
consistency, test-retest reliability, and interrater reliability. The internal consistency of the subtests
is high, with coefficient alpha values typically ranging from .85 to .95, indicating strong reliability
across age groups. Test-retest reliability coefficients are also consistently above .85, demonstrating
the stability of scores over time. Additionally, interrater reliability is strong, particularly in scoring
open-ended responses in Oral Expression, ensuring consistency among different evaluators.
Overall, the OWLS-II is a highly reliable measure of listening comprehension and oral expression
skills.
Standardization/Normative Process:
The OWLS-II Listening Comprehension and Oral Expression assessment was developed using a
nationally representative group of people to make sure it works well for individuals from different
backgrounds. To do this, researchers gathered data from people of various ages, locations, income
levels, and racial and ethnic groups. This broad range of participants helps make the test fair and
useful for many different populations.
The test's norms, or typical performance levels, were created from this diverse group. These norms
Page 2 of 5
TEST REVIEW TEMPLATE
Your name: Deshia Waterson
Name of instrument: Oral and Written Language Scales, Second Edition: Listening Comprehension
and Oral Expression
Author(s) of instrument: Elizabeth Carrow-Woolfolk
Date of current publication: 1995-2011 Publisher: Western Psychological Services
Base all answers on information provided in MMY (available through Liberty University Online
Library), course textbook, and, if necessary, recent scholarly sources.
1. List all “global” areas and their corresponding subtests that comprise each global area (add more
or less space as needed):
A. List all Global Areas (aka Domains, Clusters): These areas comprise groups of subtests.
Listening Comprehension ; Oral Expression
B. List all Subtests: lexical/semantic (vocabulary), syntactic (grammatical morphemes–function
words, inflections, sentence structure), supralinguistic (nonliteral language), and pragmatic
2. State the age range this test can be administered to 3-21 years old.
3. State the purpose of the test:
Designed to measure oral language 'across receptive and expressive processes’
4. Describe the qualifications required for an examiner to administer this test:
To be a qualified professional with a minimum of a bachelor's degree in speech-language
pathology or a related field, have completed specific training on the OWLS-II assessment, and
possess the necessary materials including the test manual, record forms, and easels to present
stimuli and record responses
5. List the types of scores (e.g., standard scores, percentile rank, scaled scores, age equivalent, grade
equivalent, etc.) this test uses to report results. Your answer should follow the examples stated
here. Do not list anything else.
Listening Comprehension, Oral Expression, Oral Language Composite, [Receptive Language
Composite, Expressive Language Composite (when used with OWLS-II Listening Comprehension and
Oral Expression Scales)].
6. List the instrument’s technical data (including actual numbers) regarding validity, reliability, and
standardization / normative process.
Page 1 of 5
, EDUC 621
Validity:
The validity of the OWLS-II Listening Comprehension and Oral Expression assessment was
established using three methods: construct validity, convergent validity, and discriminative
validity. The OWLS-II is grounded in the Integrative Language Theory, which serves as the
foundation for its measurement approach. Construct validity evaluates the extent to which the
assessment accurately measures and supports these theoretical constructs. Analytical findings
confirm that the factor structure of the OWLS-II aligns with the Integrative Language Theory,
validating the distinct scoring and interpretation of its scale scores.
Reliability:
The OWLS-II Listening Comprehension and Oral Expression assessment demonstrates strong
reliability across its subtests and composite scores. Reliability was evaluated using internal
consistency, test-retest reliability, and interrater reliability. The internal consistency of the subtests
is high, with coefficient alpha values typically ranging from .85 to .95, indicating strong reliability
across age groups. Test-retest reliability coefficients are also consistently above .85, demonstrating
the stability of scores over time. Additionally, interrater reliability is strong, particularly in scoring
open-ended responses in Oral Expression, ensuring consistency among different evaluators.
Overall, the OWLS-II is a highly reliable measure of listening comprehension and oral expression
skills.
Standardization/Normative Process:
The OWLS-II Listening Comprehension and Oral Expression assessment was developed using a
nationally representative group of people to make sure it works well for individuals from different
backgrounds. To do this, researchers gathered data from people of various ages, locations, income
levels, and racial and ethnic groups. This broad range of participants helps make the test fair and
useful for many different populations.
The test's norms, or typical performance levels, were created from this diverse group. These norms
Page 2 of 5
