UnderstanDing Psychological Reports

Developed by – Heather Peebles-Bradley and Patricia Watson

What is the Purpose of a psychoeducational Evaluation? The purpose of an evaluation is to answer the question: Why can’t this child learn or behave? The evaluation does not determine eligibility. Eligibility is a team decision, and should never be based on one piece of information.

What does it mean to say that a score is “significant?” Everyone has strengths and weaknesses; however, you would not say that everyone is disabled…. ….There are two types of significance:

What does it mean to say that a Score is “significant?” Statistically significant means that there is a difference between how a child should perform and how a child actually performs. A score is statistically significant if it occurs in less than 10% of the total population of children their age with 95% accuracy rate. Some tests will only allow for 90% accuracy. Clinically Significant also means that there is a difference between how a child should perform and how they actually perform. A score is clinically significant if it occurs in less than 5% of the total population of children their age with 95% accuracy rate, unless otherwise indicated.

I see a lot of variation in scores, but the student did not qualify I see a lot of variation in scores, but the student did not qualify. Also, the scores are below average. What does this mean? In order for a student to be disabled under the law, weaknesses and strengths must be both normative and ipsative.

Normative vs Ipsative Normative means that, when compared to the total population of children their age they either perform better (strength) or poorer (weakness). Ipsative means that, when compared to their ability (or when compared to what they are functionally capable of) they either perform better (strength) or poorer (weakness).

Example So, if a student has a 76 IQ, that would be a normative weakness. When compared to others their age, their ability falls below expectancy. However, if the student’s academic skills fall between 60 and 84, that would be within expectancy and would not be an ipsative weakness. In other words, you can’t expect a student to perform better than the skill set with which they have to work.

What are the areas of a psychoeducational evaluation, and why do you assess some areas and not others? The areas which are assessed during a psychoeducational evaluation depend on the referral concern.

The following are areas which are addressed: Cognition: A student’s ability to think, reason, and solve problems both quickly and accurately. This is also referred to as IQ or Intelligence testing. Processing: How a student recognizes, remembers, and thinks and reasons with information that they see or hear. Visual-motor Integration: How well the hand, eyes, and brain co-ordinate functioning together. Academic Achievement: Assessed in several areas of learning including reading recognition, reading comprehension, reading fluency (after second grade), math calculation, math applications, written expression, oral expression, and listening comprehension. In very young children, phonemic awareness may also be assessed. Spelling is not a recognized area of disability under IDEA.

Continued…. The following are areas which are addressed: Adaptive Skills Development: How well the student functions independently at home, school, or in the community with regard to communication, social skills, and practical living. Social and emotional functioning: How well a student interacts with others. This can also include rating scales for attentional concerns.

How do I make sense of the numbers? There are several types of scores in a psychological evaluation. Standard Scores (SS) are the most commonly used. With Standard Scores the mean (average) is 100 and any score from 85-115 would be considered average. When looking at Standard Scores, a good general rule of thumb is to add 15 points to the overall IQ score and subtract 15 points from the overall IQ sore. Anything that falls within this range of scores would be considered expectancy for this child. However, this is just a rule of thumb. Tests have computer scoring systems and/or hand scoring systems comprised of charts and tables which allow us to determine statistical and clinical significance.

types of scores in a psychological evaluation Continued…. T Scores (t score) have a mean of 50. Generally scores between 40 and 60 would be considered average. Z scores (z score) are developmental scores and used to calculate how far off of mean expectancy a child’s skills are. They range from -3.00 to +3.00. A child with a z score of 0.00 would be a child who is performing exactly where they should, given their age. A child with a z score of +1.00 would be functioning approximately one year ahead of developmental expectancy; whereas, a child with a z score of -2.00 would be functioning approximately two years behind developmental expectancy. Percentile Ranks provide an indication of where a child’s skills fall in relation to percentages of children in their same demographics.

All psychoeducational evaluations use age-based scores as opposed to grade based measurements. This means that a child’s skills and abilities are presented relative to other children their age as opposed to other children in their grade. On occasion, when a child has been deprived of educational learning experiences, grade-based scores can also be used in consideration for eligibility. The use of the scores would be based on clinical judgment and be representative of extreme cases. (Example: Children adopted from foreign countries.) With behavior, high scores are generally indicative of areas of concern. With all other areas, low scores would indicate areas of concern.

Why does the data not match the testing results? When looking at data for decision-making purposes, it is always important to consider multiple sources of data. Typically, the data we use would be from Tier 3 progress monitoring, classroom performance, Benchmark and State standardized instruments, and psychoeducational testing. It would be very rare that the psychoeducational evaluation results fail to align with all of the other data available. However, there are times when there is anomalous information.

These are some possible reasons why Data and evaluation results do not match: Tier 3 data shows a lack of progress, all other data indicates no disabling condition: Intervention was not research-based Intervention was not delivered with fidelity Intervention was not the correct one Below Average Learner

More possible reasons why Data and evaluation results do not match: Benchmark/standardized testing shows a lack of progress, all other data indicates no disabling condition: Test anxiety Needs additional accommodations during testing Does not respond well to testing format Needs test taking strategies for a particular format Attention Motivation/Apathy Below Average Learner

More possible reasons why Data and evaluation results do not match: Psychoeducational evaluation indicates areas of concern, all other data suggests adequate progress: This generally only happens with parental requests. This would suggest that, even though deficits are present, the student has developed coping strategies and mechanisms to help them perform in school, and, therefore, is not a disabled child. Classroom performance indicates areas of concern, all other data suggest no disabling condition: Typically, this would indicate a Tier 1 or Tier 2 concern. In other words, differentiation of instruction or classroom modifications would enhance a child’s skills. Attention could be of concern Lack of motivation and/or apathy toward school

What happens when the data and the testing results don’t align? For eligibility, you consider the preponderance of evidence to determine the reason why a child is struggling to learn in school and whether or not that reason is a disabling condition under the law. For educational planning purposes, you look at the data, formulate a hypothesis as to why they don’t align, and then develop a learning plan from that point.

I have a student who has a medical diagnosis, but they were not eligible for services. Why? Many students have medically diagnosed conditions. The American Medical Association estimates that 72% of all school-aged children have some diagnosed medical condition. These diagnosis range from mild to severe. When considering eligibility for services, you are making a determination as to whether or not the student is disabled under the law. Some students with diagnosed medical conditions have a condition which is so significant that it impairs their ability to learn and perform in school in a manner in which they should be capable. However, not all medical diagnoses would significantly impair student functioning so much so that they would be considered disabled.

What does a beLow Average Learner (slow learner) look like What does a beLow Average Learner (slow learner) look like? How can you tell from the data that a child is a beLow Average Learner? Not every child who struggles to learn is disabled. About 18% of students can be expected to struggle in school enough so that it is readily noticeable to themselves and to those around them. However, only 2% of those children actually struggle to such a significant degree that they are disabled. (Based on the NCE). The National Centers for Learning Disabilities estimates that about 25% of the population has some difficulty learning; however, you would not say that one in four people is disabled. Conversely, just because a student does not meet the eligibility criteria for special education support services, does not mean that they don’t struggle in school. There can be many reasons why children have difficulty learning. Not all of them have to be due to a disability.

What is a “Below Average Learner?” Slow learner is a horribly misleading term that applies to students in the Borderline to Low Average range of skills (approximately 73-89 IQ). They represent between 18 and 22% of the total population of school aged children. They often struggle to learn, perform, and meet standards in the school setting. It is a misleading because these students do not, in fact, learn slower than their peers. They do, however, have difficulty retaining knowledge and thinking and reasoning independently. Because of this, I tend to use the phrase “Below Average Learner.”

Signs that indicate you might be working with a beLow Average learner are: Has an IQ in the mid-70’s to high 80’s with evenly developed skills Does not meet expectancy in the CRCT by narrow margins Struggles in all academic areas Has benchmark scores 4th to 23rd percentile ranks Has comprehensive processing weaknesses Cannot generalize previously taught strategies to new, but similar situations Cannot think for themselves and requires much teacher direction and support to complete most tasks independently Has good rote memory skills Cannot follow multi-step directions Does not look to peers as models if they are unsure what to do Does not have higher-order problem solving skills Requires explicit and direct instruction, even on tasks which have previously been taught Is able to master most tasks that require rote memory Often looks as though they are not paying attention May appear to master a task and then, when later assessed, it is as if they have never seen the material before

When all of the below average learner characteristics are indicated pre-evaluation, then you may be looking at a learning profile consistent with a below average learner. However, many children with learning disabilities also exhibit some, but not generally all, of those characteristic. Other psychologists may use different criteria when screening files.

How can I use these results to guide instruction for a student? If significant cognitive or processing strengths or weaknesses are present, then it can provide you with invaluable information regarding how a child thinks, reasons, solves problems, generalizes information, transfers information, recognizes information, retains information, and applies information. In other words, it can tell you how a child learns best in school, and where the child may struggle. This can assist with developing instructional practices, classroom accommodations and modifications, study skills approaches, and metacognitive problem-solving strategies that will best help the student.

Remember, the primary purpose of a psychoeducational evaluation is NOT to determine eligibility. It is to help the Team discover why a child cannot learn in school. Once you understand why they cannot learn then you can develop a more cohesive and accurate plan to help them perform better in the school setting.

How can I determine, based on the evaluation results, which instructional approaches and accommodations are best for a student? Cognitive skills and processing abilities DO NOT work in isolation. There are as many different combinations of skills and abilities as there are children on the planet earth. That is because no two people’s brains are exactly the same. In my reports, you need to look for the phrase, “In the classroom setting…” this will let you know that, based on the information I just shared with you, the student will need the following in order to learn best in school. Also, look at the summary and recommendations. This is where I summarize all of the suggestions which were included in the report.

general cognitive and psychological processes and what they assess Thinking and Reasoning Vocabulary development Verbal abstract categorical reasoning Verbal abstract analogical reasoning/Pragmatic reasoning Visual analysis Visual synthesis Visual abstract categorical reasoning Visual abstract analogical reasoning Cognitive Efficiency Generalization

Memory Immediate Memory Working Memory Short-term memory Long-term Memory Rote Memory Recognition Memory Associational Memory Sequential Memory Global Memory Referential/Analogical memory Mnemonic memory

Visual/Auditory Skills Visual/Auditory closure Visual/auditory analysis Visual/auditory synthesis Auditory Comprehension Auditory Reasoning Auditory/Visual Attention Auditory/visual Figure ground Auditory/Visual Discrimination Auditory Visual Scanning Auditory Visual/Sequencing

Executive Functions/Metacognitive Processes Inhibition Shift Emotional Control/Regulation Initiation Memory Planning Organization Self-Monitoring