Lakhasly

Original TOWL published in 1978 and modified in 1983.Recommended Administrator: The TOWL-4 is a level B test and the examiner's manual recommended that examiners have "some formal training in assessment", such as a college or university course. Examiners also need to have a strong knowledge of English language usage, conventions, grammar and the proper construction of sentences and compositions to be able to score the subtests (recommended college graduate level of proficiency). Amount/Type of training needed: The TOWL-4 manual states that individuals with the qualifications stated above should be able to competently administer the subtests after familiarizing themselves with the specific administration instructions provided and practicing scoring for the spontaneous writing subtests. Reliability: The examiner's manual presents evidence to support the reliability of the instrument. Coefficient alpha values are provided for each subtest at different ages and grades. These showed Internal Consistency for most subtests (.72-.96), and for composite scores (.82-.96). Test-Retest reliability was mostly within acceptable range (93% rounded to .80 or above). Alternate Forms of composite scores (Immediate: .94 & .95) showed internal consistency but Alternate Forms Delayed (.73- .94) was not proven to be reliable in the Spontaneous Writing composite score. Interscorer Differences fell within acceptable ranges of (.80-.99). The information and evidence presented shows that the TOWL-4 has reasonable internal consistency and test-retest reliability, with the exception of a few subtest scores in the .71-.75 range, and the Spontaneous Writing composite score. Improvements in reliability over the years are clearly delineated in the manual. Validity: The TOWL-4 Examiner's Manual Evidence provided support for the content validity by providing a detailed description of the test format and content of the test. A rationale for the specific content of each subtest was provided and a rationale for changing the content form previous versions was included in the Item Analysis. The manual also provides a discussion on the Criterion-Prediction Validity and showed a comparison with 3 other tests of literacy, the WLOS, the ROS and the TORC-4. The results showed Level 1-A criterion of acceptability in two out of three comparison studies, supporting the validity. Standardization: The TOWL-4 was normed on a sample of 2,205 students in 17 states that was collected between 2006 and 2007. The authors chose four major standardization sites as representative of the regions of the United States. The demographic characteristics of the sample included "geographic region, gender, race, ethnicity, household income, education level of parents, and disabling condition" (Hammill & Larsen, p. 56), and were matched with the 2007 U. S. Census.Subtests one through five are called "contrived" and include Vocabulary (using a word in a sentence), Spelling (writing dictated sentences with an emphasis on correct spelling), Punctuation (writing dictated sentences with an emphasis on correct punctuation), Logical Sentences (editing illogical sentences) and Sentence Combining (integrating two or more sentences into one grammatically correct sentence). Subtests six and seven are called "spontaneous", and are based on a story written by the subject in 15 minutes; subtest six, Contextual Conventions, measures orthographic and grammatical conventions.These individual scores are then combined into three composite scores, Contrived Writing, Spontaneous Writing and Overall Writing.

Original TOWL published in 1978 and modified in 1983. Revised TOWL-2
published in 1988. Revised TOWL-3 published in 1996. TOWL-4 published in 2009.
Type of Test: meant for individual administration but has instructions and cautions for small
group administration; standardized, norm-referenced
Purpose of Test: Designed to identify students who have problems in writing and to
determine the degree of the problem. It assesses the linguistic, conventional and conceptual
aspects of writing. It can be used as a diagnostic tool to guide remediation and to qualify
students for accommodations, and to monitor progress in writing skills.
Recommended Administrator: The TOWL-4 is a level B test and the examiner’s manual
recommended that examiners have “some formal training in assessment”, such as a college or
university course. Examiners also need to have a strong knowledge of English language
usage, conventions, grammar and the proper construction of sentences and compositions to be
able to score the subtests (recommended college graduate level of proficiency).
Amount/Type of training needed: The TOWL-4 manual states that individuals with the
qualifications stated above should be able to competently administer the subtests after
familiarizing themselves with the specific administration instructions provided and practicing
scoring for the spontaneous writing subtests.
Reliability: The examiner’s manual presents evidence to support the reliability of the
instrument. Coefficient alpha values are provided for each subtest at different ages and
grades. These showed Internal Consistency for most subtests (.72-.96), and for composite
scores (.82-.96). Test-Retest reliability was mostly within acceptable range (93% rounded to
.80 or above). Alternate Forms of composite scores (Immediate: .94 & .95) showed internal
consistency but Alternate Forms Delayed (.73- .94) was not proven to be reliable in the
Spontaneous Writing composite score. Interscorer Differences fell within acceptable ranges
of (.80-.99). The information and evidence presented shows that the TOWL-4 has reasonable
internal consistency and test-retest reliability, with the exception of a few subtest scores in the
.71-.75 range, and the Spontaneous Writing composite score. Improvements in reliability over
the years are clearly delineated in the manual.
Validity: The TOWL-4 Examiner’s Manual Evidence provided support for the content
validity by providing a detailed description of the test format and content of the test. A
rationale for the specific content of each subtest was provided and a rationale for changing the
content form previous versions was included in the Item Analysis. The manual also provides
a discussion on the Criterion-Prediction Validity and showed a comparison with 3 other tests
of literacy, the WLOS, the ROS and the TORC-4. The results showed Level 1-A criterion of
acceptability in two out of three comparison studies, supporting the validity.
Standardization: The TOWL-4 was normed on a sample of 2,205 students in 17 states that
was collected between 2006 and 2007. The authors chose four major standardization sites as
representative of the regions of the United States. The demographic characteristics of the
sample included “geographic region, gender, race, ethnicity, household income, education
level of parents, and disabling condition” (Hammill & Larsen, p. 56), and were matched with
the 2007 U. S. Census. Data was also further stratified by age.
Format/Organization: The TOWL has four components: an Examiner’s Manual,
Record/Story Scoring Forms (used with both form A and B), separate student response
booklets for Form A or B, and Picture Cards (a sample and one each for form A and B).
There is also a Supplemental Practice Story Scoring Booklet included, to allow examiners to
rehearse the scoring process. The test is comprised of seven subtests. Subtests one through
five are called “contrived” and include Vocabulary (using a word in a sentence), Spelling
(writing dictated sentences with an emphasis on correct spelling), Punctuation (writing
dictated sentences with an emphasis on correct punctuation), Logical Sentences (editing
illogical sentences) and Sentence Combining (integrating two or more sentences into one
grammatically correct sentence). Subtests six and seven are called “spontaneous”, and are
based on a story written by the subject in 15 minutes; subtest six, Contextual Conventions,
measures orthographic and grammatical conventions. Subtest seven, Story Composition,
evaluates the sophistication and interest of the story based on standard literary elements such
as plot and character development. These individual scores are then combined into three
composite scores, Contrived Writing, Spontaneous Writing and Overall Writing.
Scoring: The TOWL-4 is hand-scored using the Examiner’s Manual. For the contrived
subtests, raw scores are calculated by adding together the number correct on both item types
(1= correct, 0=incorrect). These all start at the first question and have a ceiling of three,
making administration easier. For the spontaneous subtests, examiners score subjectively
using a scale between 0 and 3, depending on the question, which are then added to achieve
raw scores. The raw scores are converted into percentiles and scaled scores using appendices
in the manual, and all scores are recorded on the cover of the Record/Story Scoring Form.
Subtest scores can then be combined into composite scores by using the sum of the scaled
scores in each composite area and assigning a percentile, a descriptor and a composite index
found in the appendices. This can then be analyzed for a difference score to determine
statistically or clinically significant differences using tables provided in the manual.
Limitations of Test: Test results are not to be used to diagnose or make specific remediation
plans. Subtests such as spelling are not extensive enough to pinpoint strengths and
weaknesses, so are to be used as a guideline only. There are also no recommendations for
remediation strategies.
Advantages of Test: The TOWL clearly breaks down the subtests into conventional,
linguistic and cognitive areas. The test is not timed and therefore is less stressful for all
students, and allows for thinking time for students with processing issues and learning
disabilities to show they are capable of the cognitive aspects of the test. It is estimated to take
60-90 minutes, and the story is done first, allowing students to display their best writing while
still “fresh.” If the test is done by an English teacher familiar with written output problems,
or a learning assistance professional, it can yield insights into where a student struggles most
and can help them to set goals for further testing and remediation