![](https://csdnimg.cn/release/download_crawler_static/19915316/bg1.jpg)
INTELLECTUAL ESTIMATE
OF
TESTS FOR KINDERGARTEN CHILDREN
415
REFERENCES
UARTLI',TT,
M.
S.
Properties
of
sufficiency and statistical tests. Found in
J.
Meyers,
Fundamentals
of
Ezperzmental Design.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon,
1966.
BROWN,
T.
&
Rice,
J.
The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test: Validity
for
EM&.
American Journal
of
Mental Deficiency,
1967,
71,
901-903.
BUDOFF,
M.
&
PURSEGLOVE,
E.
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test performance of institutionalized
mentally retarded adolescents.
American Journal
of
Mental Deficiency,
1963,
67,
756-760.
BUI~NETT, A. Comparisons
of
the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Wechsler
-
Bellevue, and
Stanford-Binet
on
educable retardates.
American Journal
of
Mental Deficiency,
1965,
69,
712-715.
DILORENZO,
T.
&
BRADY,
J.
Use of the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test with preschool children.
Psychological Reports,
1968,
22,
247-251.
DUNN, F. M.
Minneapolis
:
American
Guidance Service, Inc.,
1955.
DUNN,
F.
&
BROOKS,
S.
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test performance of educable mentally retarded.
Training School Bulletin,
1960,
57,
35-40.
DUNN,
J.
A.
Validity coefficients for the new Harris
-
Goodenough Draw-A-Man Test.
Perceptual
and
Motor
Skills,
1967, 24, 299-301.
FINE,
M., BOROUGHS, M.
&
KAPLAN, M. Comparability of Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test and
Revised Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale
IQ's
with lower class pre-school children.
The School
Psychologist
(Newsletter, Division
16), 1967,
21,
137-139.
GOODENOUGH,
F.
L.
Measurement
of
Intelligence by Drawings.
New York: Harcourt, Brace
&
World,
Inc.,
1926.
HARRIS, D. B.
The Goodenough-Harris Drawing Test: Manual.
New York: Harcourt, Brace
&
World,
Inc.,
1963.
HIRSCHENFONG,
S.,
JARAMILLO,
S.
&
BENTON,
J.
Comparison of scores of the revised Stanford-Binet
(L), Columbia Mental Maturity Scale, and Goodenough Draw-A-Man Test
of
children witah
neurological disorders.
Psychological Reports,
1966,
19,
15-16.
MEIN, R. Use of the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test with severely subnprmal patients.
American
Journal
of
Mental Deficiency,
1962,
66,
269-273.
RESIMAN,
J.
&
YAMOKOSKI,
T.
Can intelligence be estimated from drawings of a man?
Journal
of
THOMPSON,
C.
W. The Harris-Goodenongh Draw-A-Man Test as a predictor
of
intelligence with
suspected educable retardates.
Dissertation Abstracts,
1969,
29,
4339-4340.
THOMPSON,
J.
&
FINLEY,
C. The relationship between the Goodenough Draw-A-Man Test and the
Stanford-Binet Form L-M in children referred
for
school guidance services.
California Journal
of
Educational Research,
1963,
14,
19-27.
The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test: Expanded Manual.
School Psychology,
1973,
11,
239-244.
THREE ALTERNATIVE ROLES
FOR
THE SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST
SEENA GRANOWSKY AND LUCY T. DAVIS
Duke University
While the field of school psychology has experienced rapid growth, the role
of the school psychologist has become increasingly unclear. After a brief look at
the school system-psychologist relationship, the current authors will present,
from a search
of
the literature, three alternative roles which appear to have emerged
for school psychologists.
Historically, the blending
of
psychology and education began in the early
20th century, when the testing movement as
a
part of psychological services began
with the development
of
the Binet Simon
I.&.
test
(Bennett,
1970).
From that
time, school psychologists have helped to extend the knowledge of individual
differences in mental ability through the use of assessment techniques. After
World War
11,
testing was expanded to include the assessment
of
personality
dynamics.
Until the
1960s,
then, the role of the psychologist seemed clear. Using