Running head: The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory 1

The Efficacy for Classroom Stakeholders in Using CHC (Cattell-Horn-Carroll) Theory of Broad
and Narrow Cognitive Abilities to Plan Intervention and Instruction: A Literature Review

Camille Jones
Houston Baptist University

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

Findings on the Efficacy for Classroom Stakeholders in Using CHC (Cattell-Horn-Carroll)

Theory of Broad and Narrow Cognitive Abilities to Plan Intervention and/or Instruction

ABSTRACT

This paper reviews research studies that examine ways in which classroom stakeholders might
apply the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory of broad and narrow cognitive abilities to plan
intervention and/or instruction for students in pre-referral school settings. Rather than limit g or
intelligence to a single construct or quotient, CHC Theory draws on diagnostic instruments and
factor analytic data sets to structurally identify nine (9) or more broad human cognitive abilities
and more than 70 narrow abilities. Since few practical references linking CHC Theory to
classroom instruction in ways beneficial to classroom stakeholders have been encountered, this
literature search aimed to locate, summarize and analyze research studies linking CHC constructs
to classroom intervention and/or instructionmaking CHC Theory accessible to teachers and
other classroom stakeholders. The search yielded 9 studies directly or indirectly linking
instruction to 7 broad cognitive abilities: 1) long-term retrieval--G(lr), 2) fluid intelligence-G(f), 3) crystallized intelligence--G(c), 4) short-term memory G(sm), 5) processing speed--G(s),
6) quantitative reasoning--G(q) and 7) language-based abilities (reading and writing--G(rw).
Findings suggest that most classroom stakeholders could benefit from scaffolded exposure to
CHCtype cognitive models that neurologically illustrate how consistently implementing
evidenced-based instructional strategies (like response-to-intervention (RTI)) might either help
prevent or intervene against learning challenges and thus benefit academic outcomes for both
general education and exceptional learners.

Keywords: CHC, broad and narrow cognitive abilities, instructional strategies, pre-referral

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

Introduction
Background
In 2004, a cohort of research psychologistsworking with the data sets of pioneer
research psychologists Raymond Cattell, John Horn and John Carrollpublished a model of
cognitive functioning now known as the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory of human cognitive
abilities (McGrew, 1997). Spearmans early work on intelligence and psychometrics found a
single construct known as g (Spearman, 1925)which led to certain accepted psychometric
constructs, including an intelligence quotient derived as a scaled score (Spearman, 1925).
Rather than limit intelligence or g to a single construct or score, CHC Theory draws on data sets to
structurally identify by strata nine (9) broad cognitive abilities and more than 70 narrow cognitive
abilities (Flanagan, 2013). Nine (9) broad cognitive abilities are regularly identified with CHC

constructs: 1) fluid reasoning (Gf); 2) crystallized intelligence (Gc); 3) visual processing (Gv); 4)
processing speed (Gs); 5) auditory processing (Ga); 6) short-term memory (Gsm); 7) long-term
retrieval (Glr); 8) Reading and writing (Grw); and 9) quantitative knowledge (Gq) (McGrew,
2010).
The CHC model quantitatively is derived from and based on structural evaluations
performed on more than 450 numerical factor analytic cognitive data sets reanalyzed by
psychologist and psychometrician John Carroll--in order to preliminarily identify a structure of
cognitive abilities (Carroll, 1983).

Description of the Issue/Topic

CHC Theory and its research extensions in large part have remained the exclusive
domain of psychologists, psychometricians and diagnosticians. In addition, while broad
cognitive abilities as defined by Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory have been shown to predict

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

school achievement, the ecological validity of CHC constructs has not been widely applied to
general education classroom settings and/or to student instruction aside from intervention prior to
student referral for a full and individual evaluation (FIE) (Flanagan, 2007).

Ideas about

applying CHC Theory also rely upon how CHC constructs get represented in current diagnostic
battery tests and subtests like Woodcock-Johnson Cognitive, Achievement and Oral Language,
Fourth Edition (WJ-IV COG, WJ-IV ACH, WJ-IV OL, Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children,
Fifth Edition (WISC-V), and Stanford-Binet, Fifth Edition (SB5) (McGrew & Flanagan, 1998).

Definitions of Key Terms

Definitions of terms essential to understanding CHC research findings are best presented
through the contexts in which CHC researchers define and operationalize notions of cognitive
abilities (broad and narrow), and through the methods normally used by research psychologists
to examine these abilities. For most, cognitive functions are associated with cognitive neural
systems (McGrew, 2005). From a neuropsychological perspective, academic learning takes
places at the synapses level, which is a function of networks of neurons in human brains (Jensen,
1998). Theories of cognitive ability hypothesize as to the structure, levels and relationships
between synapses and abilities (Flanagan, 2012). Currently, CHC cognitive theory directly
impacts constructs for diagnostic ability testing.

Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory of Cognitive Ability

Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory of Cognitive Ability represents a psychometric table of
human cognitive developments (McGrew, 2005). Research psychologists also found that CHC
theory represents factor analysis of the multiple dimensions of general intelligence (g) (McGrew,
2005). Mather and Wendling (co-authors of Woodcock-Johnson cognitive batteries) also define

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

these broad cognitive abilities in terms of individual experiences (Mather, 2005). Table 1
summarizes these cognitive abilities and further defines and illustrates each (Mather, 2005).

Specific Learning Disabilities:

Under Federal Law, children with specific learning disabilities (SLD) exhibit a disorder in
one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using spoken
ore written languages, and including aspects of cognitive deficits which require interventions.
Current criteria for the identification of SLD must include effective evidence-based classroom
instructionand address patterns of strengths and weaknesses (National Center for Learning
Disabilities, 2009). Amendments to the federal act IDEA 2004 required response to intervention
as an integral part of a multi-level prevention, screening and assessment system to maximize
(individualize) achievement for all learners (National Center on RTI, 2010).

Response to Intervention (RTI) is, therefore, a preventative, evidenced based practice that
connects with intervention and instruction for all classroom stakeholders.

Instructional Interventions
For this study, evidence-based instructional practices like RTI are: 1) practices informed by
research whose characteristics and consequences of environmental variables are empirically
established and directly inform what practitioners can do to produce a desired outcome (Dunst,
Trivette and Cutspec, 2002). Second, instructional interventions (like RTI) improve academic
learning by assisting students in meeting learning standards and by promoting academic
productivity and achievement (National Center on RTI, 2010). Third, instructional interventions
(like RTI) provide multiple means of representation, expression and engagement (Dunst, Trivette

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

and Cutspec, 2002). Each of these definitions contributes distinctive meaning when applied
either to broad or narrow human cognitive abilities as used by learners in classroom settings.
Table 1 summarizes and defines CHC Theory Constructs as to broad cognitive abilities.
Table 1
Summary of Studies, Findings and CHC Constructs Discussed (*Excerpt from CHC Construct)
CHC Ability

CHC Defined

Relationship to Academic Learning

Comprehensio
n-Knowledge
(G(c))

Language
comprehension
& general
knowledge

Highly predictive of academic success; Strong and

consistent relationship with reading, writing math
throughout the school year, learning vocabulary
answering factual questions and comprehending oral
or written language.

Fluid
Reasoning
(G(f))

Use deliberate &

controlled
mental
operations to
solve problems
Store &
consolidate new
info and fluently
retrieve stored
info
Declarative &
Procedural
Knowledge
related to
literacy
Apprehend &
Maintain
awareness of
info useful for
problem solving

Significant relationship to higher level skills in

reading, writing and math: problem solving, drawing
inferences, mental flexibility, transferring and
generalizing, thinking conceptually.

Long-Term
Storage &
Retrieval
(G(lr))
Reading/
Writing
(G(rw))

Short-Term
Memory
(G(sm)

Significant relationship with reading, writing and math:

especially in early stages of skill acquisition. Organizing for
retrieval strategies for recall. Tied increasingly with
creativity.
Significant relationship with ability to identify words from
text, knowledge of mechanics of writing, the rate at which a
person can read connected discourse with full
comprehension.
Significant relationship to reading, writing
and math (Working Memory)
attending/following directions, recalling
sequences, listening to factual information,
taking notes.

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

Processing
Speed (G(s))

Automatically &
fluently perform
relatively easy
elementary
cognitive tasks.

Gs significantly relates to perceptual

speed of achievement abilities in 1)
basic reading, 2) reading
comprehension, 3) math problem
solving and 4) written expression.

Visual-Spatial
Processing
(G(v))

Perceive,
discriminate &
manipulate
images.

Gv significantly relates to visual

memory of achievement ability in
1) reading fluency, 2) advanced
math abilities and 3) math
calculations and problem solving
(Flanagan, 2007). No significant

relationship to current IQ tests.

Figure 1 charts general, broad and narrow abilities relevant to research reviewed in this study.

Figure 1. Cattell-Horn-TheoryCurrent model of General, Broad and Narrow Cognitive Abilities

Since prior research found distinctive differences in cognitive ability, CHC theory holds
that relationships amongst cognitive abilities can be derived by classifying these into three
different strata: stratum I, "narrow" abilities; stratum II, "broad abilities"; and stratum III,
consisting of a single factor of "general ability" (or g) (Flanagan, 2005). Psychologist John

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

Carroll first proposed a three-stratum theory of cognitive ability in 1983 (Carroll, 1983). Figure
2 illustrates CHC three-stratum theory:

Figure 2. An illustration of John B. Carroll's three stratum theory of modern cognitive

broad abilities: fluid intelligence (Gf), crystallized intelligence (Gc), general memory and
learning (Gy), visual perception (Gv), auditory perception (Gu), retrieval ability (Gr), cognitive
speediness (Gs), and processing speed (Gt).
Figure 2 also models structural methods for relating cognitive abilities across strata.
Carrolls three strata defined as narrow, broad, and general cognitive ability draw upon
factor-analytic study of correlations of variables from data such as psychological tests, academic
grades and more. Each stratum accounts for variation in correlations within the previous stratum
(Carroll, 1983).

Carroll concluded that each reflected physiological factors (e.g., in neuron,

synapses and nerve firing rate) that explain differences in human ability (Carroll, 1983).
CHC theory holds particular relevance to licensed school psychologists and to
diagnosticians administering psychoeducational assessment. Five (5) of the 7 major intelligence
tests incorporate CHC theory as their foundation for specifying and operationalizing all cognitive
abilities/processes, e.g. WISC-V, WJ IV, SB5, KTEA-II and DAS-II (McGrew, 1998). Since

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

all current intellectual test instruments fail to effectively measure all 10 broad stratum abilities,
an alternative method of cognitive assessment and interpretation known as Cross Battery
Assessment was developed (Flanagan, 2008). An important catalyst for research psychologists
recommendations to administer Cross-Battery Assessments stems from recognition of the
inability of current test instruments to operationalize all CHC broad and narrow ability constructs
(Flanagan, 2008).

Educational Significance of the Topic

Research seems to confirm that notwithstanding developmental factors, each student
exhibits a pattern of cognitive strengths and weaknesses as defined by the Cattell-Horn-Carroll
(CHC) Theory of Broad and Narrow Cognitive Abilities (Flanagan, 2007). Yet, CHC Theory is
applied most frequentlypursuant to the language of IDEA 2004in referral settings where
diagnosticians and/or licensed school psychologists have evaluated a student for learning
disabilities and results with recommendations formally are required (Flanagan, 2007).

Previously, CHC Theory researchers largely examined possible interventions related to

specific learning disabilities (SLD). While numerous quantitative and qualitative studies outline
the evidence-based rationales for training classroom teachers in Response-to Intervention
methods, no prior research has examined the extent to which public schools provide professional
development training to teachers and other classroom stakeholders in aspects of CHC theory, or
in aspects of cognitive school psychology that are also transferable or generalizable to classroom
instruction. Many administrative teams continually require elementary and secondary K-12
educators to differentiate and respond to intervention through tiered instruction (National Center
on RTI, 2010). Often they do so without concurrently exposing teachers to a more detailed sense

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

10

of the neurological reasons why differentiated instruction can be critical at all stages of literacy
and numeracyparticularly as a preventative measure prior to engaging the special education
referral process.

Research Question
Given the potential for applying the CHC cognitive model within classrooms to more
appropriately differentiate instruction and meet needs for all learners, which studies use CHC
categories to examine ways to plan differentiated intervention, instruction and/or enrichment for
pre-referral students?
Purpose
The purpose of this review of the literature is to analyze studies that use CHC categories
to examine ways to plan differentiated intervention, instruction and/or enrichment for pre-referral
students. A discussion of search methods used for reviewing the literature follows, along with
summary, analysis, critique and comparison of the relevant studies.

Methods
A systematic search was undertaken to identify studies that involved the application by
various classroom stakeholders (teachers, students, specialists) of CHC Theory and related
constructs concerning cognitive abilities to plan either intervention or instruction. Identified
studies that met pre-determined inclusion criteria were summarized in terms of participants,
target behaviors, procedures and results.

Search Strategy Used To Locate Studies

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

11

Four (4) library subscription databases were searched: 1) PsycInfo, 2) ERIC, 3) the
Professional Development Collection, and ProQuest, combining certain domain terms with both
truncation and several Boolean operators. The search was limited to English-language, peerreviewed journals.

The initial key word search: CHC Theory AND RTI OR response to

intervention OR instruction AND cognitive functioning OR crystallized intelligence OR fluid

intelligence AND Pattern of strength* weakness*, resulted in 19,057 studies--compelling a more
efficient search strategy.

The following keyword search of the same three databases gained 263 results:
CHC Theory OR Patterns of Strength* AND Weakness* AND response to intervention OR
instruction AND cognitive* OR crystallized intelligence OR fluid intelligence AND Pattern
strength* weakness*. While these results were more manageable in number, the next step was to
further delimit my terms.
A third, more refined keyword search of the same three databases ensued: CHC Theory
AND RTI or instruction or intervention or enrichment AND Patterns of strength* weakness*,
resulting in 10 to 11 hits from peer-reviewed sources. I further restricted certain search
parameters within each database--by indicating a preference for peer-reviewed articles rather
than all published work.
Two additional search strategies were used to increase the likelihood that all relevant
studies were identified. An ancestral search was conducted by searching the reference lists of
articles identified in the database search. Second, the final keyword search was conducted for
articles from researchers writing in English as well as in languages other than English (Japanese,
Spanish and French). Two related studies were found (Bland, 2015) (Beaujean, 2014).

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

12

In sum, a tiered search of: 1) PsycInfo, 2) ERIC, 3) the Professional Development

Collection and 4) ProQuest resulted in a sufficient number of peer-reviewed studies and
dissertations to analyze findings on the efficacy in classroom stakeholder use of the CHC Theory
of broad and narrow cognitive abilities as an intervention and/or instructional tool.

Inclusion Criteria Used For Studies In Review

Five factors informed the inclusion criteria for studies in this literature review: 1) Must be
an original research study (primary source); 2) Must use Cattell-Horn-Carroll Theory (CHC
Theory) of cognitive ability (as opposed to, for example, Sternbergs Triarchic Theory or
Spearmans Theory et al) as a neuropsychological basis for determining and differentiating
interventions; 3) Must consider instructional applications of CHC Theory--in classroom
contexts and/or applied to school-aligned content areas; 4) Must include classroom
stakeholders in pre-referral settings: learners as teachers, professionals and students; may
include students with Individual Educational Plans (IEPs); may include twice exceptional
students and/or non-identified students; and 5) must include instruction as either intervention,
enrichment and/or both.
Results

Studies examining how relating long-term retrieval (Glr) to creativity might inform
instruction
As a broad cognitive ability, long-term retrieval (Glr) is defined as the ability to store,
consolidate, and retrieve information over periods of time measured in minutes, hours, days and

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

13

years (Schneider, W.J. & McGrew, K. (2012). Figure 3 depicts the narrow abilities associated
with long-term retrieval (Flanagan, 2008).

Article #1: Avitia (2014):

The study by Avitia examined possible relations between creativity and intelligence,
largely by operationalizing the cognitive constructs of Fluid Reasoning (Gf) and Crystallized
Knowledge (Gc) as defined by CHC Theory (Avitia, 2014).

Earlier Cattell-Horn-Carroll Theory researchers hypothesized that creativity was strongly

linked to the CHC broad factor of fluid reasoning (Gf) (Cattell & Butcher, 1968). More recent
studies link creativity to the CHC broad ability of long-term storage and retrieval (Glr)i.e. the
ability to store and then retrieve information from long-term memory (Flanagan, Ortiz &
Alfonso, 2007). For this study, the researchers sought specifically to confirm two key
hypotheses: 1) creativity would account for more variance in long-term retrieval than in
crystallized knowledge (as measured via performance assessments, an achievement questionnaire
and a self-report measure); and that 2) rated creative performances (in the distinct domains of art
and writing) would show significantly different relationship with intelligence measures (Avitia,
2014)..

Participants and Instruments

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

14

Drawing upon correlational research methods to test for relationship between long-term
retrieval and creativity, researchers administered eight (8) diagnostics to 116 university studyparticipants: four (4) long-term retrieval subtests derived from the Kaufman Assessment Battery
for ChildrenII (Kaufman, 2004), one (1) crystallized intelligence (Gc) (crystallized intelligence
achievement) subtest from the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement II Brief (Kaufman,
2005), and three (3) distinct creativity measures including self-assessments and rated creative
performance in drawing and writing. The KABC-II has 18 subtests of two types: core and
supplementary. Figure 1 sets forth the structure of the Kaufman-Battery long-term retrieval
subtests (Kaufman, 2004). The findings suggested significant relation only between long-term
retrieval and creative drawing (statistically significant relations were found neither between
long-term retrieval and creative writing nor between long-retrieval and self-assessed creativity).

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

15

Gv (Visual Processing): 8 Tests

Gsm (Short- Term Memory): 3 Tests
Glr (Long-Term Retrieval): 4 Tests

Atlantis: examiner teaches the student

nonsense names for pictures. The student
must point to the correct picture when read
out the nonsense name.
Atlantis Delayed: examiner repeats the
Atlantis subtest 1525 minutes later to
demonstrate delayed recall.
Rebus: the examiner teaches the student
the concept associated with a rebus
(drawing) and the student reads aloud
phrases composed of these rebuses.
Rebus Delayed: the student repeats the
Rebus subtest input 1525 minutes later to
demonstrate delayed recall of paired
associates.

KABC-II

Gf (Fluid Reasoning): 2 Tests

Gc (Crystallized Ability): 3 Tests

Figure 1. Long-term retrieval subtests, adapted from the Kaufman Assessment Battery for
Children, 2nd ed. (KABC-II) (Kaufman, 2004).
Table 1 sets forth the coefficients of correlation between the creativity measures and long
term retrieval and crystallized intelligence (Avitia, 2014).

Table 1
Coefficients of Correlation Between the Creativity Measures and Glr and Gc (Avitia, 2014)

Self-Assessed
Creativity
CAT
Drawings
Poems
CAQ
Visual
Music

G(lr)

G(c)

.09

.00

.37

.25

(.06)
.23

.11
.13

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

Dance
Architectural

.00
.11

16

.11
-.10

Note * p < .01.

Studies focused on how Grw (reading and writing) abilities inform instruction
Article #2: (Hajovsky, 2014)
The first research study in this section, conducted jointly between psychologists at
The Universities of Kansas, Memphis and Texas, aimed to investigate 1) the influences of human
cognitive abilities (HCA or CHC Theory) on the development of reading decoding (RD as a
narrow ability), 2) how these influences may change across grade levels, and 3) how the
combination of cognitive abilities and reading decoding (RD) results in reading comprehension
(RC) across grade levels (Hajovsky, 2014). Researchers examined structural relations between
the Cattell-Horn-Carroll abilities and reading achievement outcome variables across child and
adolescent development using diagnostic test data sets from normed samples (Hajovsky, 2014).

Participants

Participants were selected from the co-normed sample for the Kaufman Assessment
Battery for Children, Second Edition (Kaufman, 2004) and the Kaufman Test of Educational
Achievement, Second Edition (KTEA-II)--representing a stratified sample of 2117 students from
grades 1-12--who were then further selected through random sampling techniques, and given
alternate test forms (Hajovsky, 2014). One group of 1128 students took KTEA-II FORM B (n=
1128). Another group of 989 student-participants KTEA-II FORM A (n= 989) (Hajovsky,
2014).
.

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

17

As part of co-norming, each student-participant took both the Kaufman Assessment

Battery for Children, Second Edition (KABC-II) and the Kaufman Test of Educational N = 2117
student-participants - representing a stratified sample from grades 1-12 in Kaufman Battery conorming who were further selected through random sampling/Short-term memory (Gsm), and
Long Term retrieval (Glr)--both CHC broad cognitive abilities--were correlated (functioning
more or less as independent variables) to reading decoding (RD) and Reading comprehension
(RC)--both narrow abilities (Hajovsky, 2014).
.
Method

Researchers estimated single-group models using a cross-validation technique

(cross validation of a prediction equation with at least one group other than the group on which it
was developed; results in the removal from the equation of those variables no longer found to be
related to the criterion measure). Researchers used multi-group structural equation models to 1)
test equality amongst effects across stages of development and 2) determine whether those
effects were moderated by grade level (Hajovsky, 2014). Researchers also used nonequivalent
models to test the directionality of influences between the narrow ability of reading decoding
(RD) and reading comprehension (RC) (Hajovsky, 2014).

Results
The direct effects of long-term retrieval and short-term memory on reading decoding
were the same across grade groupings. The direct effect of comprehension--knowledge on
reading comprehension was smaller in Grades 1-3 when compared with Grades 4-12. In

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

18

addition, the path from reading decoding (RD) to reading comprehension (RC) was much larger
in Grades 1-3 compared with Grades 4-12. Nonequivalent model results suggest that the
directionality of influence is from reading decoding (RD) to reading comprehension (RC) and
not vice versa (Hajovsky, 2014).

Findings

Findings supported moderation by grade level for the direct effects of comprehensionknowledge (Gc) and reading decoding (RD) on reading comprehension (Havoksy, 2014). In
Grades 1-6, the direct effect of comprehension-knowledge on reading decoding was smaller than
the direct effect in Grades 7-12 (Hajovsky, 2014). Researchers also found the direct effect of
comprehension--knowledge on reading comprehension to be much smaller in Grades 1-3
compared with Grades 4-12. Alternately, the path from reading decoding (RD) to reading
comprehension (RC) was much larger in Grades 1-3 compared with Grades 4-12 (Hajovsky,
2014). Applying nonequivalent models along with their correlation methods, researchers found
uni-directionality of influence: reading decoding (RD) influenced reading comprehension (RC),
not vice versa. Results support a differentiated view of reading development with increases in
comprehension-knowledge (Gc) and decreases in reading decoding (RD) as a way to explain
individual differences in reading comprehension (RC) over time (Hajovsky, 2014).

Article #3: (Floyd, 2012)

Purpose

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

19

The second research study in this section aimed to investigate the cognitive abilities that
explain reading comprehension across childhood and early adulthood (Floyd, 2012). Drawing
from the standardization sample of the Woodcock-Johnson III, the researchers conducted
analyses with large, stratified participant samples, representing age groups from early childhood
to early adulthood: ages 5 to 6 (n = 639), ages 7 to 8 (n = 720), ages 9 to 13 ( n = 1,995), ages
14 to 19 (n = 1,615), and ages 20 to 39 (n = 1,409) (Floyd, 2012).

Methods
Research methods included causal-comparative quantitative research techniques (e.g.
explanatory models and analysis of direct and indirect effects on reading comprehension of
various broad and narrow abilities), as well as factor analysis representing general intelligence
(g), Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) broad abilities, and reading decoding skills as part of narrow
abilities (Floyd, 2012).
Results
Results revealed significant direct effects for the narrow ability of reading decoding skills
(RD) and for the broader cognitive ability of crystallized intelligence (G(c)) on reading
comprehension across all age levels (Floyd, 2012). Memory-related abilities, processing speed,
and auditory processing demonstrated indirect effects on reading comprehension through reading
decoding skills (Floyd, 2012). The magnitude of direct and indirect effects varied as a function
of age (Floyd, 2012).
Findings
Findings provided support for integrative models of reading that include both direct and
indirect effects of cognitive abilities on reading comprehension and for consideration of

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

20

developmental differences in the cognitive aptitudes predicting reading comprehension (Floyd,

2012).
Critique
The findings of both Hajovsky and Floyd connect to other CHC-related recommendations
and studies on building reading abilities--in that each study closely examines multiple
components of reading literacy -- like reading decoding (RD) versus comprehension (RC) and
each study uses quantitative research methods to explore how these factors relate to one another
and to improved student reading achievement. One critique is that neither study extends nor
applies its research findings sufficiently to a classroom settingso that specific interventions
and/or activities could be linked to their conclusions as to effects and factor impacts.

Studies on how stratification of cognitive abilities might differently inform intervention

and/or instruction - General versus Broad Ability Stratification and Their Effects on
Intervention and Instruction

Article #4: (Beaujean, 2014)

Previous research using the CattellHornCarroll (CHC) theory of cognitive abilities has
shown a relationship between cognitive ability and academic achievement. Most of this research,
however, has been done using the Woodcock-Johnson family of instruments with a higher order
factor model. For CHC theory to grow, research should be done with other assessment
instruments and tested with other factor models.

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

21

This study examined the relationship between different factor models of CHC theory and
the factors relationships with language-based academic achievement (i.e., reading and writing)
(Beaujean, 2014).

Participants
Researchers used a co-norming participant sample of 550 students ages 6 through 16
from both the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children4th Edition (WISC-IV) and the
Wechsler Individual Achievement Test2nd Edition (WIAT-II) (Female (n = 268); (M = 282);
60.72% = C, 18.36%= H; 15.36%= AA, 5.27% =A/NA & Other) (Beaujean, 2014).

Methods
Researchers used a structural equation modelling (SEM) framework to model relations
amongst CHC factors; 2) used multiple indices to fit models with sample data; 3) uses R
statistics programing for analyses, 4) examines the WISC-IV factor structure using higher order
CHC model, and allowed for skew, kurtosis and regression analysis in factor loadings(Beaujean,
2014). To examine the hypotheses as to the relation between different CHC factor models and
language-based achievement, the researchers fit three models--mapping these onto three different
predictor scenarios (Beaujean, 2014). Thereafter, they derived regression coefficients for all
three models and both achievement variables (Beaujean, 2014). To account for missing data for
280 of the 550 participants, researchers also estimated parameters using full information
maximum likelihood, robust estimation and standard errors (Beaujean, 2014).

Findings

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

22

Researchers found that bifactor and higher order models of the subtests of the Wechsler
Intelligence Scale for Children4th Edition produced a different set of Stratum II factors which
have very different relationships with the language achievement variables of the Wechsler
Individual Achievement Test2nd Edition (Beaujean, 2014).
Researchers found that the factor model used to represent CHC theory makes little
difference when general intelligence is of major interest, but it makes a large difference when the
Stratum II factors become of primary concern, especially when used to predict other variables
(Beaujean, 2014).

Broad Ability Stratification and its Effect on Intervention and Instruction

Article #5: (Blanch, 2015)
Fluid and crystallized (GfGc) intelligence theory has been used extensively to evaluate
the influence of cognitive abilities on educational outcomes within cross-sectional and
longitudinal research designs (Blanch, 2015).

Participants and Methods

This study evaluated the contribution of fluid and crystallized abilities in the performance
of a 1-week instructional process with an old dataset applying a latent curve model. Methods
centered on using an archived data set for latent curve model application (Blanch, 2015). This
allowed researchers to specify latent learning growth factors and to account for individual
differences in the final levels of performance and the rate of learnings in the instructional project
(Blanch, 2015).

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

23

Findings
Researchers found that fluid abilities (Gf) had a significant impact on the rate of learning,
whereas crystallized abilities (Gc) had a significant impact on the final learning performance
(Blanch, 2015). There was also a significant indirect effect of Gf onto the final learning
performance through Gc. These findings are in accordance with some of the premises posited by
the GfGc intelligence model (Blanch, 2015).

Article 6: (Niileksela, 2014)

This study aimed to better understand the relations between learning disabilities and
different levels of latent cognitive abilities, including general intelligence (g), broad cognitive
abilities, and specific abilities based on the CattellHornCarroll theory of intelligence (CHC
theory) (Niileksela, 2014). Data from the Differential Ability ScalesSecond Edition (DAS-II)
were used to create a multiple-indicator multiple cause model to examine the latent mean
differences in cognitive abilities between children with and without learning disabilities in
reading (LD reading), math (LD math), and reading and writing(LD reading and writing)
(Niileksela, 2014).
.
Results
Statistically significant differences were found in the g factor between the norm group
and the LD groups (Niileksela, 2014). After controlling for differences in g, the LD reading and
LD reading and writing groups showed relatively lower latent processing speed (Gs), and the LD
math group showed relatively higher latent comprehension-knowledge (G(c)) (Niileksela, 2014).

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

24

Some differences in some specific cognitive abilities arose, including lower scores in spatial
relations and numerical facility for the LD math group (G(q), and lower scores in visual memory
for the LD reading and writing group (Niileksela, 2014).

Studies on Application and Interpretation of CHC Cognitive Domains by Classroom

Stakeholders: Teachers and Psychologists

Article #7: (Fiorello, 2009)

This study compared ratings by a sample of teachers (n = 53) and school psychologists (n
= 86) of the importance of the CHC cognitive abilities in the classroom (Fiorello, 2009).
The scale demonstrated adequate reliability (total scale = .93, median = .74), although
evidence of construct validity varied between teachers and school psychologists. Both teachers
and school psychologists rated quantitative ability, crystallized knowledge, and fluid reasoning
as most important to school success. However, school psychologists rated short-term memory
and quantitative ability as more important than did the teachers. Importance of these differences
for consultation is discussed.

Methods
Researchers used quantitative methods, survey and mixed methods (Fiorello, 2009).
As treatment, teachers and psychologists took the CHC Cognitive Abilities Questionnaire
(The CAQ) developed by the researchers to assess the level of importance given by respondents
to CHC abilities that have been shown to correlate with academic learning (Fiorello, 2009).
Several tryouts or pilots of questionnaires were completed prior to the final administration

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

25

(Fiorello, 2009). Respondents were also asked to complete the Broad Abilities Descriptive
Questionnaire (BADQ) after completing CAQ (Fiorello, 2009). Respondents were to use BADQ
to rate the importance of CHC Broad abilities on the same scale as CAQ and these ratings were
correlated with respondent ratings on CAQ to provide evidence of construct validity (Fiorello,
2009).

Figure 4. CHC Cognitive Abilities Questionnaire (The CAQ) (Fiorello, 2009)

Method: Survey (Broad Abilities Descriptive Questionnaire (Fiorello, 2009)

BADQ

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

26

Figure 5. Broad Abilities Descriptive Questionnaire (BADQ) (Fiorello, 2009)

Methods Affecting Results

Researchers assigned importance of CHC abilities (independent variables) to classroom
success (dependent variables) (Fiorello, 2009). The definition of "classroom success" was
operationalized through (depended upon) survey and questionnaire (Fiorello, 2009). Another
level of variable analysis: the distinctive training of teachers (independent variable) and/or
school psychologists (independent variable) impacted the importance assigned to CHC abilities
(in this case, the dependent variable) (Fiorello, 2009).

Findings
Amongst practitioners, school psychologists rated CHC short-term memory (Gsm) and
quantitative abilities (Gq) higher than teachers although both groups agreed that crystallized

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

27

intelligence, fluid reasoning and quantitative abilities are important to classroom success
(Fiorello, 2009).

Studies on Application and Interpretation of CHC Cognitive Domains to Instruction by

Classroom Stakeholders: Educational Diagnosticians

Article #8: (Proctor, 2011)

The sole dissertation amongst this search, Proctor focused on educational diagnosticians'
perceptions on the link between CHC theory and recommendations for instructional
interventions and accommodations (Proctor, 2011).

Purpose:
Specifically, this study had a four-fold purpose: (1) to determine to what extent
educational diagnosticians possess knowledge of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of cognitive
ability and its relationship to academic learning, (2) to determine to what extent educational
diagnosticians recommend possible evidence-based instructional interventions based on CHC
theory, (3) to determine to what extent educational diagnosticians recommend accommodations
based on CHC theory, and (4) to determine educational diagnosticians' perceptions regarding
their training and/or preparation programs and knowledge on how to recommend possible
instructional interventions and accommodations based on the relationship between cognitive
ability and academic learning as presented in Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory (Proctor, 2011).

Methods

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

28

In her dissertation, Proctor used quasi-experimental methods, mixed methods and

qualitative research methods (Proctor, 2011). Proctor organized mixed methodology into two
phases. Initially, quantitative methods were used through survey research (Proctor, 2011).
Phase One used online surveys for data collection-to determine the validity of significant
variables generated in survey research (Proctor, 2011).

Participants
Survey-participants were forty-two (42) educational diagnosticians listed on the Texas
Registry of Professional (licensed) Educational Diagnosticians (Proctor, 2011). Likert scale
instrumentation rated their skills acquired for linking CHC cognitive ability with academic
learning on a 15 point scale (rating from "low to high"). Scales also rated the extent to which
participants recommended instructional interventions and accommodations on a 15 point scale-rating from "never" to "always". Survey responses analyzed through both descriptive statistics
and a cross tabulation X2 test (Proctor, 2011).

In Phase Two, researchers drew upon a more qualitative method by using focus group
research (Proctor, 2011). A focus group functions like a group interview where the researcher is
trying to collect shared understandings form several individuals as well as to get views from
specific people (Gay, 2012). Focus group Metaplan session procedures offered an active method
of data collection during which a given researcher acts as a moderator to the process and guides
participants through a discussion (Gay, 2012).

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

29

Five educational diagnosticians participated in the focus group (Proctor, 2011). Proctor
(2011) used a semi-structured interview schedule like Metaplan in order to pose questions to the
group and encourage all participants to respond (Gay, 2012). Researchers clarified how
participating educational diagnosticians acquired knowledge of linking and correlating cognitive
ability factors to academic learning and learned of their recommendations for instructional
interventions and accommodations (Proctor, 2011).

Results indicated that most educational diagnosticians reported having knowledge of the
relationship between CHC theory of cognitive ability factors and academic learningan
important competency for diagnosticians writing recommendations (Proctor, 2011). Focus group
members also reported that most of them recommended instructional interventions and
accommodations based on this knowledge (Proctor, 2011).

The results also specified that most educational diagnosticians believe that they receive
quality training programs related to the relationship between cognitive ability and academic
learning as presented in Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory. Nevertheless, they reported a need
for better formal preparation in linking cognitive ability factors to academic learning-presumably
in classroom settings (Proctor, 2011).
Proctor (2010) created a CHC Intervention Linking Tool that appeared prior to the
publication of her study. Figure 7 sets demonstrates its structure:

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

30

Figure 7. Linking CHC to Intervention Tool (Proctor, 2010)

Proctor provides classroom practitioners with an interactive interface that would allow them
to customize and then reset the options as they complete cognitive abilities information
concerning a student (Proctor 2010). As developed and communicated, however, the CHC
Linking Tool raises concern as to its intended generalizability. Was the CHC Intervention Tool
approved for use with Tier 1 learners? Proctor previously stipulated that the CHC Intervention
Tool served students in intervention (Proctor, 2010). Was there a larger initiative to share this
linking tool also with general educators?

Proctor stated its intended scope: The Linking CHC

to Intervention Tool ...may be duplicated and utilized in educational settings as a tool to represent
evaluation results. (Proctor and Albright, 2010).

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

31

Studies on the Development of CHC Ability Stratification and Their Effects on

Intervention and Instruction: The Case for Preschool Cognitive Abilities

Article 9: (Chang, 2014)

This study examined the underlying constructs measured by both the Woodcock-Johnson
Tests of Cognitive Abilities, Third Edition (WJ-III COG) and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence
Scales, Fifth Edition (SB5), based on the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory of Human
Cognitive Abilities as applied to preschool cognitive abilities (Chang, 2014).

Participants

This study reported the results of the first joint confirmatory factor analysis of the WJ-III
COG and SB5 test batteries with an independently collected preschool-aged sample.

An independently collected sample of 200 preschool-aged children of 4 to 5 with no

known disorders or disabilities took the WJ-III COG and SB5(Chang, 2014).

Fourteen subtests

from the WJ-III COG and 10 subtests from the SB5 were administered to the participants
(Chang, 2014). . Both tests were individually administered in a randomized counterbalanced
order, with 44.5% of the sample receiving the WJ-III COG first and 55.5% receiving the SB5
first (Chang, 2014). The examiners were all graduate students enrolled in a school psychology
program who had received graduate-level training in cognitive assessment. Test administration
was completed within a 2-week period over three sessions to minimize changes related to

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

32

development. Each participant was tested under standardized conditions (Chang, 2014). After
administration, computer scoring programs were used to score the protocols for both the WJ-III
COG and SB5 (Chang, 2014).

Methods

Researchers applied confirmatory factor analyses with likelihood estimation to evaluate

three models of increasing complexity and two alternative models to determine which model best
describe the underlying constructs measured by the WJ-III COG and the SB5 (Chang, 2014).
Descriptive analyses were conducted to obtain means and standard deviations for the overall
composite scores and subtest scores of the WJ-III COG and SB5 (Chang, 2014).
Results
Chang concluded that none of the models used displayed a good data fit (Chang, 2014).
All the same, results showed that the underlying construct of the two tests was best represented
by a Three-Stratum alternative CHC model-- in which the Gf factor and subtests were omitted.
Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to provide further insights into the actual latent
structure underlying the data. Implications of findings to guide school-based practitioners in
using cross-battery assessment with preschool children were addressed ((Chang, 2014).

Findings
Chang found that certain findings pertaining to cognitive abilities were attributable to
particular developmental influences in preschool children (Chang, 2014). Since investigating the
cognitive ability of young children in relation to the CHC theory is still relatively limited, Chang

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

33

found replicating this investigation to be warranted to determine whether the findings could be
supported with confidence (Chang, 2014). Future studies should verify whether the cognitive
ability structure of preschool-aged children is indeed displayed as two or three levels (Chang,
2014).
Limitations also arose: young children undergoing cognitive ability testing are likely to
be those referred for early childhood evaluations with suspected developmental delays; it is
imperative and necessary to conduct future research regarding the use of WJ-III COG and SB5
with populations with special needs or clinical samples (Chang, 2014). Second, the selected
sample only included children between ages 4 and 5 (Chang, 2014). Studies using joint
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to understand the underlying construct of the WJ-III COG
and SB5 should be replicated with older children and adolescents to determine whether the
present findings attributed to developmental influences are actually unique to preschool children
(Chang, 2014).

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

34

Article 10: (Tusing, 2004)

While a substantial number of published studies examined tests of cognitive abilities, few
research findings focused on preschool cognitive tests. This second study examined the relation
between cognitive ability measures for young children and Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory
(Tusing, 2004).

Participants
Tests and subtests from a sample of 158 children between 4 and 5 years of age were used
in a series of joint factor analysestested with the Differential Ability Scales, Second Edition
(DAS-II)-the Upper Preschool Level and with the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive
Ability-Revised (Tusing, 2004).

Findings
Although a series of models and broad ability cognitive factors were explored by
researchers, the CHC theory of cognitive abilities best supported by the data (Tusing, 2004).
Findings provided evidence for a greater differentiation of young children's cognitive abilities
than were typically interpreted (Tusing, 2004). Findings also revealed that greater
differentiation in preschool cognitive abilities was best detected when examined at the level of
narrow (rather than broad) abilities (Tusing, 2004).

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

35

Synthesis of Research Reviewed

Table 5 below provides a Summary, Critique and Synthesis of the Studies related to
Classroom Applications of CHC Theory presented in this literature review.
Table 5.
Summary of Studies, Findings and CHC Constructs Discussed (*Excerpt from CHC Construct)
CHC Ability

Defined

Author
& Study

Comprehensi
onKnowledge
(G(c))
Fluid
Reasoning
(G(f))

Language
comprehension
& general
knowledge
Use deliberate &
controlled
mental
operations to
solve problems

All Studies

Store &
consolidate new
info and fluently
retrieve stored
info
Declarative &
Procedural
Knowledge
related to
literacy

(Avitia,
2014)

Apprehend &
Maintain
awareness of
info useful for
problem solving.

(Niileksela,
2014)

Long-Term
Storage &
Retrieval
(G(lr))
Reading/
Writing
(G(rw))

Short-Term
Memory
(G(sm)

(Blanch,
2015)
(Beaujean,
2014)
Chang,
2014
(Tusing,
2007)

Relevance
of Findings to
Classroom
Instruction
Gc narrow abilities need to be
tied with content area tasks.
Look beyond verbal/nonverbal
dichotomy with PreK for Gc.
Gf controls rate of learning, Gc
controls mastery;
Preschoolers will show greater
differentiated development when
narrow cognitive abilities are
primed. Look beyond
verbal/nonverbal dichotomy
with PreK .CHC is developing.
Use creative drawing
to build retrieval of
tough concepts.

(Floyd,
2012)
(Havofsky,
2014)

Get reading
decoding
strategies
mastered
early.
Unidirectiona
l effects on
RC. Their
gains are
important in
earlier
grades.
Use a pattern of
strengths and
weaknesses to
gauge were LD *
non-LD strengths
are.

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

Processing
Speed (G(s))

VisualSpatial
Processing
(G(v))

Automatically &
fluently perform
relatively easy
elementary
cognitive tasks.
Perceive,
discriminate &
manipulate
images.

(Niileksela,
2014)

(Avitia,
2014)
(Tusing,
2007)

36

For twice-exceptional students,

Dyslexics, SLD and non-SLD
including preschoolers, the great
frontier for intervention is
Visual/ Spatial much of which
cannot be measured in current
IQ tests.

Note * Studies that were most topically relevant and current were selected for review.

Discussion

CHC Research Applied to Teaching Practice

Only one research diagnostician (Proctor, 2011) amidst many research psychologists
(Flanagan and Ortiz, 2013) directly draws upon CHC findings to link CHC broad and narrow
abilities to intervention and instruction. Previously, CHC Theory researchers examined
interventions related to specific learning disabilities (SLD). With statewide urging for proactive
work amongst diagnostician-practitioners, future studies might practically model for teachers
how to link CHC cognitive abilities to pre-referral instruction for all.

Table 7 in the Appendix models some of the CHC-aligned classroom instructional

strategies that may prevail with diagnosticians and classroom stakeholders alike.

Because of the verbal-nonverbal dichotomy often found in analysis of preschool

cognition, psychologist, diagnosticians and others are only just recognizing how differentiated
their abilities can be. At present, findings suggest that certain cognitive abilities (e.g.
crystallized knowledge and language) are developmentally dependent on when they present.

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

37

Recognition of fluid reasoning amongst preschoolers still meets with many certain limitations
(which should form an important basis for future CHC research).

Limitations with the Literature Review

Several limitations should be addressed and/or expanded on in future work. First, the
number of studies critiqued in this literature review was small--compared with the number of
predictors and variables raised by CHC Theory and human cognitive ability.

Suggestions for Future Research

Although the analyses conducted by the researchers detailed methods and sampling
measures with high reliability and validity, future studies could ideally include more varied
participants, and/or employ more qualitative data collection techniques to deepen participantperspectives. In addition, many different domains and methodologies of cognitive ability linked
to classroom instruction could be studied. This literature review could prompt for greater action
research as wellby more fully including classroom stakeholders interested in examining how
cognitive psychology might affect instruction in specific contextsin ways that complement the
educational research process.

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

38

References

Avitia, M. J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Beyond g and c: The relationship of rated creativity to
long-term storage and retrieval (Glr). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and The Arts,
8(3), 293-302.
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytic studies. New York:
Cambridge University Press
Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M., & Cutspec, P. A. (2002). An evidence-based approach to
documenting the characteristics and consequences of early intervention practices.
Centerscope, Vol. 1, No. 2.
Hajovsky, D. J. (2014). A Multigroup Investigation of Latent Cognitive Abilities and Reading
Achievement Relations. School Psychology Review, 43(4), 385-406..
Jensen, E. (1998). Teaching with the brain in mind. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision
and Curriculum Development.
Flanagan, D. P., & Harrison, P. L. (2005). Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests,
and issues. (2nd Edition). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., & Alfonso, V. C. (2007). Essentials of cross-battery assessment.
(2nd Edition). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Floyd, R., Meisinger, E., Gregg, N., & Keith, T. (2012). An explanation of reading
comprehension across development using models from Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory:
Support for integrative models of reading. Psychology In The Schools, 49(8), 725-743.

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

39

Floyd, R. G., Keith, T. Z., Taub, G. E., & McGrew, K. S. (2007). Cattell-Horn-Carroll cognitive
abilities and their effects on reading decoding skills: g has indirect effects, more specific
abilities have direct effects. School Psychology Quarterly, 22(2), 200-233.
Beaujean, A. A., Parkin, J., & Parker, S. (2014). Comparing CattellHornCarroll factor models:
Differences between bifactor and higher order factor models in predicting language
achievement. Psychological Assessment, 26(3), 789-805.
Blanch, A. (2015). Evaluating fluid and crystallized abilities in the performance of an
educational process. Instructional Science, 43(3), 427-442
Tusing, Mary E., and Laurie Ford. (2004). "Examining Preschool Cognitive Abilities Using a
CHC Framework." International Journal of Testing 4, no. 2: 91-114.
Niileksela, C. R., & Reynolds, M. R. (2014). Global, Broad, or Specific Cognitive Differences?
Using a MIMIC Model to Examine Differences in CHC Abilities in Children with
Learning Disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(3), 224.
Chang, M. A. (2014). Joint Confirmatory Factor Analysis of The Woodcock-Johnson Tests of
Cognitive Abilities, Third Edition, and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth
Edition, with a Preschool Population. Psychology in The Schools, 51(1), 32-57.
Proctor, B. (2012). Relationships between CattellHornCarroll (CHC) Cognitive Abilities and
Math Achievement Within a Sample of College Students With Learning Disabilities.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(3), 278-287.
Fiorello, C. A., Thurman, S. K., Zavertnik, J., Sher, R., & Coleman, S. (2009). A comparison of
teachers' and school psychologists' perceptions of the importance of CHC abilities in the
classroom. Psychology In The Schools, 46(6), 489-500.

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

40

Flanagan, D. P., Fiorello, C., & Ortiz, S. O. (2010). Enhancing Practice through Application of
CHC Theory and Research: A Third Method Approach to SLD Identification.
Psychology in the Schools, 40, 739-760.
Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., & Alfonso, V. C. (2008). Response to intervention (RTI) and
cognitive testing approaches provide different but complementary data sources that
inform SLD identification. Communiqu, 36 (5), 16-17
Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., & Alfonso, V. C. (2013). Essentials of cross-battery assessment
(3rd edition). New York: Wiley.
Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., Alfonso, V. C., & Dynda, A. M. (2008). Best practices in
cognitive assessment. Best Practices in School Psychology V, Bethesda: NASP
Publications.
McGrew, K. S. (1997). Analysis of the major intelligence batteries according to a proposed
comprehensive Gf-Gc framework. In D. P. Flanagan, J. L. Genshaft, & P. L. Harrison
(Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 151-179).
New York: Guilford.
McGrew, K. S., Flanagan, D. P., Keith, T. Z., & Vanderwood, M. (1997). Beyond g: The impact
of Gf-Gc specific cognitive abilities research on the future use and interpretation of
intelligence tests in the schools. School Psychology Review, 26(2), 189-210.
Proctor, C. M., & Stephens, T. L. (2010). Linking CHC to Intervention Tool: A Tool for
Explaining Assessment Results and Recommendations. Texas Womans University. The
DiaLog: Journal of the Texas Educational Diagnosticians Association, 39 (1), pp. 8-16

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

41

Flanagan, D., McGrew, K. & Ortiz, S. (2000). The Wechsler Intelligence Scales and Gf-Gc
theory. A contemporary approach to interpretation. Boston. Allyn & Bacon.
McGrew, K. & Flanagan, D. (1998). The intelligence test desk reference (ITDR): The Gf-Gc
cross-battery assessment. Boston. Allyn & Bacon.
McGrew, K. (1994). Clinical Interpretation of the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive
AbilityRevised. Boston. Allyn & Bacon.
National Center on Response to Intervention (March 2010). Essential Components of RTI A
Closer Look at Response to Intervention. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Education, Office of Special Education Programs, National Center on Response to
Intervention.
Spearman, C. (1925). "Some Issues in the Theory of "g" (including the Law of Diminishing
Returns)". Nature 116 (2916): 436.

The Efficacy For Classroom Stakeholders In Using CHC Theory

Appendix

Figure 8. The CHC Periodic Table of Human Abilities (McGrew, 2012).

42