IDEA 2004, Rti, WISC-III and WISC-IV

6,966 views

Published on

Pocono Mountain School District presentation

0 Comments
4 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
6,966
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
19
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
109
Comments
0
Likes
4
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

IDEA 2004, Rti, WISC-III and WISC-IV

  1. 1. IDEA 2004, RTI, Process Assessment & the WISC-IV Pocono Mountain School District Tuesday, October 11, 2005 10:00 AM to 2:30 PM
  2. 2. IDEA 2004 & Assessment <ul><li>Greater emphasis on early identification and early intervention </li></ul><ul><li>School districts will be able to use up to 15% of their federal funds for early intervention </li></ul><ul><li>May be used for professional development, academic and behavioral supports </li></ul>
  3. 3. IDEA 2004 & Assessment <ul><li>School psychologists are ideally trained to develop academic interventions which are directly linked to improved academic achievement. </li></ul><ul><li>Law now gives psychologists & school districts the option to eliminate ability-achievement discrepancy requirements and to consider “ Response to Intervention ”. </li></ul>
  4. 4. Identification of Learning Disabilities Section 614 (b)(6) <ul><li>“ In determining whether a child has a specific learning disability, an LEA shall not be required to take into consideration whether a child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability.” </li></ul><ul><li>In determining whether a child has a specific LD, an LEA may use a process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as part of the evaluation procedures described in paragraphs 2 and 3 (of Section 614). </li></ul>
  5. 5. IDEA 2004 & Assessment <ul><li>The child is assessed in all areas of suspected disability </li></ul><ul><li>Assessment tools & strategies are provided that directly assist in determining educational need </li></ul><ul><li>Specially designed instruction and services are derived from assessment data </li></ul><ul><li>Evidenced-based instruction is key to intervention </li></ul>
  6. 6. 300.309 Determining LD <ul><li>The child does not achieve commensurate with age expectations in one or more of the following areas: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>oral expression </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>listening comprehension </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>written expression </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>basic reading skills </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>reading fluency skills </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>reading comprehension </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>mathematics calculation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>mathematics problem solving </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. 300.309 Determining LD <ul><li>Child fails to achieve a rate of learning to make sufficient progress to meet State-approved results in one or more of the 8 areas (see previous slide) </li></ul><ul><li>Assessment may include response to scientific, research-based intervention </li></ul>
  8. 8. 300.309 Determining LD <ul><li>The child’s exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance and/or achievement… </li></ul><ul><li>relative to intellectual development… </li></ul><ul><li>using appropriate (reliable & valid) assessments. </li></ul>
  9. 9. Response To Intervention (RTI) <ul><li>Was the student provided with appropriate high-quality, research-based instruction in the regular education setting? </li></ul><ul><li>Was the instruction delivered by fully-qualified personnel? </li></ul><ul><li>Was data-based documentation of repeated assessment of achievement completed at reasonable intervals? </li></ul><ul><li>Was there formal assessment of student progress during instruction? </li></ul>
  10. 10. IDEA 2004 & Early Intervention <ul><li>If the child has not made adequate progress after an appropriate period of time … referral for an evaluation must be made to determine if the child needs special education and related services. </li></ul><ul><li>Question: How much time is appropriate? </li></ul>
  11. 11. Written Report Must Include <ul><li>Whether the child has SLD’s </li></ul><ul><li>The basis for making the determination </li></ul><ul><li>Relevant behavior during observation of the child </li></ul><ul><li>Relationship of behavior to child’s academic functioning </li></ul><ul><li>Educationally relevant medical findings </li></ul><ul><li>Whether the child achieves commensurate with age </li></ul>
  12. 12. Written Report Must Include <ul><li>Strengths and weaknesses in performance and/or achievement relative to intellectual development in one or more of the 8 areas </li></ul><ul><li>Instructional strategies used </li></ul><ul><li>Student-centered data collected if a response to scientific, research-based intervention process was implemented </li></ul>
  13. 13. The Role of Intelligence Tests <ul><li>The task of assessing a child’s intelligence </li></ul><ul><li>necessarily involves more than simply obtaining </li></ul><ul><li>his or her scores. As Wechsler (1975) noted: </li></ul><ul><li>“ What we measure with tests is not what tests measure— </li></ul><ul><li>not information, not spatial perception, not reasoning </li></ul><ul><li>ability. These are only a means to an end. What </li></ul><ul><li>intelligence tests measure is something much more </li></ul><ul><li>important; the capacity of an individual to understand </li></ul><ul><li>the world about him and his resourcefulness to cope with </li></ul><ul><li>its challenges”. </li></ul>
  14. 14. Why Revise the WISC-III? <ul><li>New research on cognitive abilities </li></ul><ul><li>Demographic shifts (Hispanic population changes from 11% to 15%) </li></ul><ul><li>Regional changes (Growth of the West/South at expense of the Northeast) </li></ul><ul><li>Flynn Effects </li></ul>
  15. 15. “ Flynn Effect” <ul><li>Steady rising of IQ scores </li></ul><ul><li>Causes IQ test norms to become obsolete over time </li></ul><ul><li>To counter the “ Flynn Effect ”, IQ tests are “re-normed” ( made harder ) every 15 to 20 years by resetting the mean score to 100 </li></ul>
  16. 16. Wechsler IQ tests <ul><li>WISC-III has been replaced by WISC-IV </li></ul><ul><li>5 year period of development </li></ul><ul><li>Based on current neurocognitive model of information processing </li></ul><ul><li>Emphasizes Fluid over Crystalized Intelligence </li></ul>
  17. 17. Fluid Intelligence vs. Crystallized Intelligence <ul><li>Fluid Intelligence : The power to reason and use information in a novel situation. </li></ul><ul><li>Crystallized Intelligence : Acquired skills and knowledge (including knowledge about the best approach for solving problems) and the application of knowledge to specific domains. </li></ul>
  18. 18. Fluid Intelligence vs. Crystallized Intelligence
  19. 19. Revision Goals of PsychCorp <ul><li>Strengthen Four-Factor Model </li></ul><ul><li>Improve assessment of: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>􀂉 Fluid Reasoning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>􀂉 Working Memory </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>􀂉 Processing Speed </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Enhance clinical utility through process assessment </li></ul><ul><li>Provide strong evidence of clinical validity </li></ul>
  20. 20. Revision Goals of PsychCorp <ul><li>Remove time-bonuses where possible </li></ul><ul><li>Improve psychometric properties </li></ul><ul><li>Remove potentially biased items </li></ul><ul><li>Link to measures of achievement & memory </li></ul><ul><li>Link to measures of adaptive behavior & emotional intelligence </li></ul><ul><li>Improve cognitive process assessment capabilities </li></ul>
  21. 21. Process Assessment <ul><li>It’s not weather you win or lose but how you play the game (Edith Kaplan) </li></ul><ul><li>Careful, systematic observation of a child’s problem-solving behavior (whether correct or incorrect) yields significantly more useful information about cognitive and academic functioning than simple binary scoring (right or wrong) </li></ul>
  22. 22. Process Assessment <ul><li>The &quot;Boston&quot; Approach: Edith Kaplan & Harold Goodglass (Boston University) </li></ul><ul><li>Combined quantitative evaluation of tests with qualitative analysis of errors and how the test taker responds </li></ul><ul><li>This is called “ Process analysis ” </li></ul>
  23. 23. WISC-IV Subtests <ul><li>Core Subtests (10 of them) are administered to obtain composite scores </li></ul><ul><li>Supplemental Subtests (5 of them) extend the range of cognitive skills sampled and provide additional clinical information </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Enable clinician to complete additional discrepancy analysis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Can be used as substitutes for core subtests. </li></ul></ul>
  24. 24. Full Scale IQ <ul><li>Stronger contributions of working memory and processing speed </li></ul><ul><li>􀂉 30% each VCI and PRI </li></ul><ul><li>􀂉 20% each PS and WM </li></ul>
  25. 25. The WISC-IV is NOT the WISC-III <ul><li>See “ Changes in the Composition of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children: Fourth Edition ” copyrighted  by Dumont/Willis © http://alpha.fdu.edu/psychology/melissa_farrall_WISCIV.htm </li></ul><ul><li>Differences between the WISC-IV and WISC-III become apparent when assessing children with learning disabilities </li></ul>
  26. 26. WISC-IV: Decreased focus on Acquired Knowledge <ul><li>“Some children, such as those with weaknesses in acquired knowledge ( Information and Arithmetic ) may earn scores on the WISC-IV that are significantly higher than the WISC-III due to the decreased focus of the WISC-IV on knowledge that is generally acquired in school”. </li></ul>
  27. 27. WISC-IV: Increased focus on Ability to Solve Novel Problems <ul><li>“On the other hand, given the increased WISC-IV emphasis on the ability to solve novel problems, children with pronounced weaknesses in nonverbal fluid reasoning ( Matrix Reasoning and Picture Concepts ) may be dismayed to find that their IQ scores have dropped” rather than improved on the WISC-IV. </li></ul>
  28. 28. The WISC-IV is not the WISC-III <ul><li>The composition of the WISC-IV Full Scale IQ has changed by 50%.    </li></ul><ul><li>Changes in the composition of WISC-IV Verbal Comprehension, Perceptual Reasoning, and Working Memory Scales vary from twenty-five percent to seventy-four percent </li></ul><ul><li>Only Processing Speed remains intact </li></ul>
  29. 29. The Wechsler Intelligence Scales <ul><li>WISC-IV Index scores </li></ul><ul><li>Verbal comprehension </li></ul><ul><li>Perceptual reasoning </li></ul><ul><li>Working memory </li></ul><ul><li>Processing speed </li></ul><ul><li>Full scale IQ </li></ul><ul><li>Full scale IQ’s are running 10 to 15 points lower than on WISC-III </li></ul><ul><li>WISC-IIII Index Scores </li></ul><ul><li>Verbal comprehension </li></ul><ul><li>Perceptual organization </li></ul><ul><li>Freedom from distractibility </li></ul><ul><li>Processing speed </li></ul><ul><li>Verbal IQ </li></ul><ul><li>Performance IQ </li></ul><ul><li>Full scale IQ </li></ul>
  30. 30. WISC-IV Full Scale IQ Score <ul><li>Derives from VCI, PRI, WMI & PSI </li></ul><ul><li>No longer a Verbal & Performance IQ </li></ul><ul><li>Compared to WISC-III, the WISC-IV deemphasizes crystallized knowledge & increases the contribution of fluid reasoning </li></ul>
  31. 31. WISC-IV <ul><li>Verbal and Performance IQ scores are eliminated </li></ul><ul><li>The Verbal Comprehension Index is the functional equivalent of the Verbal IQ. </li></ul><ul><li>The Perceptual Reasoning Index is the functional equivalent of the PIQ. </li></ul><ul><li>You use the VCI and PRI as you would use the VIQ and PIQ. </li></ul>
  32. 32. The Wechsler Intelligence Scales <ul><li>WISC-IV Index scores </li></ul><ul><li>Verbal Comprehension subtests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Similarities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Vocabulary </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Comprehension </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(Information) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(Word Reasoning) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>WISC-III Index Scores </li></ul><ul><li>Verbal Comprehension subtests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Information </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Similarities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Vocabulary </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Comprehension </li></ul></ul>
  33. 33. The Wechsler Intelligence Scales <ul><li>WISC-IV Index scores </li></ul><ul><li>Perceptual reasoning subtests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Block Design </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Picture Concepts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Matrix Reasoning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(Picture Completion) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>WISC-IIII Index Scores </li></ul><ul><li>Perceptual organization subtests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Picture Completion </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Picture Arrangement </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Block Design </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Object Assembly </li></ul></ul>
  34. 34. Perceptual Reasoning Index <ul><li>Shift in emphasis from organization to reasoning </li></ul><ul><li>Emphasis on fluid reasoning in the perceptual domain </li></ul>
  35. 35. The Wechsler Intelligence Scales <ul><li>WISC-IV Index scores </li></ul><ul><li>Working memory subtests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Digit Span </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Letter/Number Sequencing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(Arithmetic) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>WISC-IIII Index Scores </li></ul><ul><li>Freedom from distractibility subtests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Arithmetic </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(Digit Span) </li></ul></ul>
  36. 36. Working Memory Index <ul><li>Essential component of fluid reasoning and other higher order skills </li></ul><ul><li>Closely related to achievement and learning </li></ul><ul><li>See Fry & Hale, 1996; Perlow, Juttuso, & Moore, 1997;Swanson, 1996 </li></ul>
  37. 37. The Wechsler Intelligence Scales <ul><li>WISC-IV Index scores </li></ul><ul><li>Processing speed subtests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Coding </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Symbol Search </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(Cancellation) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>WISC-IIII Index Scores </li></ul><ul><li>Processing speed subtests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Coding </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(Symbol Search) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(Mazes) </li></ul></ul>
  38. 38. Processing Speed Index <ul><li>Dynamically related to mental capacity, reading performance & development, and reasoning by conservation of resources (e.g. efficiency) </li></ul><ul><li>See Fry & Hale, 1996; Kail, 2000; Kail & Hall,1994; Kail & Salthouse, 1994; Berninger, 2001 </li></ul>
  39. 39. Process Scores <ul><li>In addition to the subtest and composite scores, several additional process scores which provide more detailed information about a child’s performance, are available. </li></ul><ul><li>No additional administration procedures are required to derive these scores. </li></ul><ul><li>Process scores can NEVER be substituted for core or supplemental subtest scores in the calculation of composite scores. </li></ul>
  40. 40. User Friendliness of WISC-IV According to PsychCorp <ul><li>Testing time reduced </li></ul><ul><li>Administration procedures simplified </li></ul><ul><li>Use of supplemental subtests for core subtests based on clinical need and appropriateness </li></ul><ul><li>Manual reorganization </li></ul><ul><li>Record Form reorganization </li></ul>
  41. 41. WISC-IV <ul><li>Uses 4 factor neuro-cognitive model </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Fluid reasoning (MR, PCn, SI, WR) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Quantitative knowledge (AR) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Crystallized knowledge (IN, VC) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Short term memory (DS, LN, AR) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Visual processing (PC, BD) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Long-term storage and retrieval (IN, VC) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Processing speed (CD, SS, CA) </li></ul></ul>
  42. 42. Core Subtest Differences <ul><li>WISC-IV </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased emphasis on fluid reasoning, working memory & processing speed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Removal of Information subtest from core battery reduces contribution of Crystalized knowledge </li></ul></ul><ul><li>WISC-III </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased emphasis on crystalized knowledge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased emphasis on verbal and non-verbal conceptualizations of intelligence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Little attention to Index scores </li></ul></ul>
  43. 43. WISC-IV: New Subtests <ul><li>Picture Concepts </li></ul><ul><li>Letter-Number Sequencing </li></ul><ul><li>Matrix Reasoning </li></ul><ul><li>Cancellation </li></ul><ul><li>Word Reasoning </li></ul>
  44. 44. Picture Concepts <ul><li>For each item, the child is presented with 2 or 3 rows of pictures and chooses one picture from each row to form a group with a common characteristic. </li></ul><ul><li>Measures fluid reasoning and abstract categorical reasoning (without verbal response). </li></ul><ul><li>Items progress from relatively concrete to more abstract. </li></ul>
  45. 45. Letter-Number Sequencing <ul><li>The child is read a sequence of numbers and letters and recalls the numbers is ascending order and the letters in alphabetical order. </li></ul><ul><li>Measure of working memory </li></ul><ul><li>Adapted from the WAIS-III (but new items) </li></ul><ul><li>Involves sequencing, mental manipulation, attention, short-term auditory memory, visuospatial imaging, and processing speed </li></ul>
  46. 46. Matrix Reasoning <ul><li>The child looks at an incomplete matrix and selects the missing portion from 5 response options. </li></ul><ul><li>Measures fluid reasoning and perceptual organization </li></ul><ul><li>Reliable estimate of general intellectual ability </li></ul><ul><li>4 types of items to assess skills </li></ul><ul><li>Continuous and discrete pattern completion </li></ul><ul><li>Classification </li></ul><ul><li>Analogical reasoning </li></ul><ul><li>Serial reasoning </li></ul>
  47. 47. Cancellation <ul><li>The child scans both a random and structured arrangement of pictures and marks target pictures within a specified time limit. </li></ul><ul><li>Measures processing speed and visual selective </li></ul><ul><li>attention </li></ul><ul><li>2 forms (Random & Structured) </li></ul><ul><li>Forms share identical target locations </li></ul><ul><li>Targets are animals </li></ul><ul><li>Foils are common non-animal objects </li></ul>
  48. 48. Word Reasoning <ul><li>The child is asked to identify the common concept being described in a series of clues. </li></ul><ul><li>Measures verbal comprehension, analogical & general reasoning ability, verbal abstraction, domain knowledge, the ability to integrate/synthesize different types of information and the ability to generate alternative concepts. </li></ul><ul><li>Designed to measure fluid reasoning with verbal material. </li></ul>
  49. 49. Subtest Substitution Rule <ul><li>Specific subtest per subtest replacement </li></ul><ul><li>Only one substitution per Index </li></ul><ul><li>No more than 2 substitutions per FSIQ </li></ul><ul><li>One subtest used as a replacement at a time </li></ul>
  50. 50. Computing Index and Full Scale IQ for Low Functioning Students <ul><li>Compute composite scores on each scale ONLY when student obtains raw score > 0 on at least one subtest on each scale </li></ul><ul><li>Compute Full Scale IQ only when student obtains raw score > 0 on at least one subtest from each of the four Indices </li></ul>
  51. 51. What PsychCorp Doesn’t Say <ul><li>Problems with WISC-IV </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Flynn Effects and classification of students </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Dropping Picture Arrangement </li></ul><ul><li>Dropping Object Assembly </li></ul><ul><li>Eliminating time requirements </li></ul><ul><li>Arithmetic dropped as core subtest </li></ul><ul><li>Information dropped as core subtest </li></ul>
  52. 52. Problems with Flynn Effects <ul><li>Increases those identified as “Mentally Retarded” </li></ul><ul><li>Decreases those identified as “Learning Disabled” </li></ul><ul><li>Decreases those identified as “Gifted” </li></ul>
  53. 53. I tested a student using WISC–IV and the scores were lower than previously reported on WISC–III. <ul><li>In addition to the difference in the core subtests on WISC-III and WISC-IV, the norms for the newer test are slightly harder due to the Flynn Effects . </li></ul><ul><li>Children may not be identified the same as they were previously due to the shift in conceptualization of intelligence reflected in the core subtests that contribute to the WISC–IV FSIQ. </li></ul>
  54. 54. I tested a student using WISC–IV and the scores were lower than previously reported on WISC–III. <ul><li>On the WMI (formerly called FDI on WISC–III), Letter-Number Sequencing replaces Arithmetic, a subtest on which many students tended to score well due to school-based learning of mathematical skills. </li></ul><ul><li>One additional processing speed subtest was added to the core battery (SS). Many students tend not to score as high on processing speed subtests relative to other indices, perhaps due to an approach to problem solving that stresses accuracy over speed. </li></ul>
  55. 55. Effects of Biblical Proportions <ul><li>The “ Mark Penalty ” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Incurred when a student's disability depresses not only measures of academic achievement but also estimates of the student's intelligence. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The same disability is depressing both the student's actual achievement and the estimate of the student's intellectual ability. </li></ul></ul>
  56. 56. Effects of Biblical Proportions <ul><li>The “ Matthew Effect ” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>WISC-III Verbal IQ scores particularly susceptible </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Theoretically, WISC-IV should not be as susceptible to Matthew Effects since crystalized intelligence is deemphasized. </li></ul></ul>
  57. 57. General Ability Index Score <ul><li>WISC-IV GAI provides score that is less sensitive to influence of working memory and processing speed </li></ul><ul><li>Children with LD or ADHD may obtain lower Full Scale IQ’s on WISC-IV due to problems in working memory and processing speed </li></ul><ul><li>GAI can substitute for FSIQ to determine eligibility for special education. </li></ul>
  58. 58. General Ability Index Score <ul><li>Based on 3 Verbal Comprehension subtests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Vocabulary </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Comprehension </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Similarities </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Based on 3 Perceptual Reasoning subtests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Block Design </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Matrix Reasoning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Picture Concepts </li></ul></ul>
  59. 59. Calculate the GAI <ul><li>GAI = Sum of scale scores for 3 Verbal Comprehension subtests and 3 Perceptual Reasoning subtests </li></ul><ul><li>Locate General Ability Sum of Scaled Scores in the left column of Table 1 (Tech. Report 4) and read across row to find GAI composite, percentile rank & confidence interval </li></ul>
  60. 60. When to use the GAI <ul><li>Significant discrepancy exists between VCI and WMI </li></ul><ul><li>Significant discrepancy exists between PRI and PSI </li></ul><ul><li>Significant discrepancy exists between WMI and PSI </li></ul><ul><li>Significant subtest scatter within WMI and/or PSI </li></ul>
  61. 61. Additional Process Assessment Tools <ul><li>Process Assessment of the Learner™ (PAL™): Test Battery for Reading and Writing (Dr. Virginia Berninger) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Orthographic (symbols) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Phonological (sounds) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rapid Naming (fluency) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Identifies underlying processes necessary for skilled reading & writing </li></ul></ul>
  62. 62. WIAT-II <ul><li>Linked to Process Assessment of the Learner™ (PAL™): Test Battery for Reading and Writing </li></ul><ul><li>Linked to WISC-IV, WPPSI-III and WAIS-III for Ability-Achievement discrepancy analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Co-normed with other Wechsler tests </li></ul>
  63. 63. Reading PAL Subtest PAL Intervention Activity Subword Orthographic Awareness Training Receptive Coding <ul><li>matching visually similar letters </li></ul><ul><li>search for words that contain target letters </li></ul><ul><li>name target letters in sets of letters that are visually similar </li></ul>Expressive Coding <ul><li>identify letters in words (e.g.; what is the third letter in the </li></ul><ul><li>word cupcake?) </li></ul>Phonological Awareness Training <ul><li>Syllable Segmentation and Phonemes </li></ul><ul><li>“ Find the Hidden” </li></ul><ul><li>“ Say the Missing” </li></ul><ul><li>“ Say the Word Without” </li></ul><ul><li>“ Substitute” </li></ul>Syllables Phonemes Rimes Pseudoword Decoding RAN Letters <ul><li>Talking Letters </li></ul>Word Text RAN Words Word Choice Story Retell Sentence Sense <ul><li>Word Decoding </li></ul><ul><li>Whole Word Reading </li></ul><ul><li>Word Families </li></ul><ul><li>Story Reading </li></ul>Copyright © 2000 by The Psychological Corporation
  64. 64. Writing Subword Word Text Alphabet Writing Word Choice Copy Task Note – Taking PAL Subtest PAL Intervention Activity <ul><li>Handwriting Lessons </li></ul><ul><li>ask students to write rather than say answers to </li></ul><ul><li>Orthographic Awareness activities </li></ul><ul><li>Talking Letters </li></ul><ul><li>Talking Letters </li></ul><ul><li>spelling activities </li></ul><ul><li>Composition </li></ul><ul><li>P lan </li></ul><ul><li>W rite </li></ul><ul><li>R eview </li></ul><ul><li>R evise </li></ul>Writing Strategy Copyright © 2000 by The Psychological Corporation
  65. 65. WIAT II Reading Composite Word Reading Subtest Pseudoword Subtest Reading Comprehension Subtest Letter-Sound ID Sight Word Accuracy Sight Word Automaticity Word Attack Skills Reading Rate Sentence Comprehension Passage Comprehension Word Accuracy in context Subword level Word level Subword level Text level Word and Text level Copyright © 2000 by The Psychological Corporation
  66. 66. WIAT II Written Language Composite Written Language Subtest Letter Production Word Spelling Homonyms Alphabet Writing (letter production) Writing Fluency (word production) Sentence Generation Sentence Combining Discourse Production Subword and word level Subword level Word level Text level Spelling Subtest Copyright © 2000 by The Psychological Corporation
  67. 67. <ul><li>Strengthen the link between assessment and instruction/intervention </li></ul><ul><li>Inclusion of ability – achievement discrepancy analysis using Verbal IQ, Performance IQ, and factor scores </li></ul><ul><li>Statistical linkage to a process instrument </li></ul>Development Goals of the WIAT - II
  68. 68. Revisions Guided by Research, Standards and Mandates <ul><li>Reading Subtests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Report of the National Reading Panel (2000) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Research by Virginia Berninger and others funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHHD) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Mathematics Subtests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Consistent with the Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (2000) by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Written Language Subtests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Research by Graham, Berninger, Abbott, Abbott, & Whitaker (1997), Berninger (1998; 2001), Moats (1995) </li></ul></ul>
  69. 69. Word Reading <ul><li>Letter Identification and Phonological </li></ul><ul><li>Awareness Items </li></ul><ul><li>Items 4-29: Letter recognition and identification </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>using all 26 alphabet letters </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Items 30-33: Phonological awareness </li></ul><ul><li>Items 34-38: Phonemic categorization </li></ul><ul><li>Items 39-41: Phonemic blending </li></ul><ul><li>Items 42-47: Sound-symbol relationships </li></ul>
  70. 70. Word Reading <ul><li>Word Reading Items </li></ul><ul><li>High frequency “sight” words </li></ul><ul><li>Initial or final consonants </li></ul><ul><li>Consonant digraphs (/th/, /sh/, /ph/, /ch/) </li></ul><ul><li>Consonant blends (/sl/, /fr/, /pl/) </li></ul><ul><li>CVVC (consonant, vowel, vowel, consonant pattern) </li></ul><ul><li>Syllabication (dividing the word into syllables) </li></ul><ul><li>Prefixes, suffixes, and roots </li></ul><ul><li>Applying pronunciation and accent rules </li></ul>
  71. 71. Qualitative Observations <ul><li>Substitutes visually similar letters </li></ul><ul><li>Provides nonword responses for rhyming words </li></ul><ul><li>Pronounces words automatically </li></ul><ul><li>Laboriously “sounds out” words </li></ul><ul><li>Self corrects errors </li></ul><ul><li>Loses place when reading words </li></ul><ul><li>Makes accent errors </li></ul><ul><li>Adds, omits, or transposes syllables </li></ul>
  72. 72. Pseudoword Decoding <ul><li>Measures the ability to apply phonetic decoding skills. </li></ul><ul><li>Nonsense words are designed to be representative of the phonetic structure of words in the English language. </li></ul><ul><li>Recording errors phonetically can help with later error analysis. </li></ul>
  73. 73. Pseudoword Decoding <ul><li>The Pseudoword Decoding subtest can be used to evaluate whether the phonological decoding mechanism is developing in an age-appropriate manner. </li></ul><ul><li>Frequently, older students who are struggling in reading, will demonstrate non-mastery of the alphabet principle as they are unable to decode unfamiliar words. </li></ul>
  74. 74. Written Expression <ul><li>Assesses the writing process. </li></ul><ul><li>Is divided into 5 sections: Alphabet Writing, Word Fluency, Sentences, Paragraph , and Essay . </li></ul><ul><li>Alphabet Writing (PreK-Grade 2) is timed and is a measure of automaticity and recall of sequential information. </li></ul><ul><li>Word Fluency assesses the ability to generate and write a list of words that match a prescribed category. </li></ul><ul><li>Sentences evaluate the ability to combine multiple sentences into one meaningful sentence or to generate sentences from visual or verbal cues. </li></ul>
  75. 75. Written Expression <ul><li>The Paragraph (given to Grades 3-6) can be evaluated analytically using a rubric scoring system based on organization, vocabulary, and writing mechanics (spelling and punctuation). </li></ul><ul><li>The Essay (given to Grades 7-16) can be evaluated analytically using a rubric scoring system based on organization, vocabulary, theme development and writing mechanics. </li></ul><ul><li>Both the the Paragraph and the Essay can be scored holistically, but analytic scoring is required for a subtest standard score. </li></ul><ul><li>Word count is a Supplemental score . </li></ul>
  76. 76. Written Expression <ul><li>Direct measure of written discourse </li></ul><ul><li>Goes beyond indirect methods of assessing writing ability </li></ul><ul><li>Measures vocabulary and editing skills </li></ul><ul><li>Measures skill in formulating an idea and developing that idea into coherent discourse </li></ul>
  77. 77. Ability-Achievement Discrepancy Analysis <ul><li>Reynolds has cautioned that “determining a severe discrepancy does not constitute the diagnosis of LD; it only establishes that the primary symptom of LD exists”. </li></ul><ul><li>Evidence separate from test results should indicate that the child has a “failure to achieve” or lack of attainment in one of the principal areas of school learning. </li></ul><ul><li>Clinical evidence and direct observation must indicate that the child has a “psychological processing disorder” </li></ul><ul><li>Processing problems may include but not be limited to difficulties in attention and concentration, conceptualization, information processing or comprehension of written and spoken language. </li></ul>
  78. 78. Evidenced Based Instruction <ul><li>Learning Disabilities Association of America </li></ul><ul><ul><li>http://www.ldanatl.org/ </li></ul></ul><ul><li>What Works Clearinghouse </li></ul><ul><ul><li>http://whatworksclearinghouse.org/ </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Access Center </li></ul><ul><ul><li>http://www.k8accesscenter.org/ </li></ul></ul>
  79. 79. References <ul><li>Psychological Corporation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>http://harcourtassessment.com/haiweb/Cultures/en-US/default.htm </li></ul></ul><ul><li>John Willis & Ron Dumont </li></ul><ul><ul><li>http://alpha.fdu.edu/psychology/ </li></ul></ul><ul><li>National Association of School Psychologists </li></ul><ul><ul><li>http://www.nasponline.org/ </li></ul></ul>

×