1. Part 2 in the SAS-E Clinician’s Toolbox Decoding the Psychoeducational Assessment 1

2. Overview You shouldn’t have to be a professional psychologist to read a psycho-ed... –But it helps What do most local psycho-eds contain? What should they contain? Meet some of my friends –Johnny, age 5 –Janey, age 12 –Sandy, age 14 –Sally, age 7 2

3. Comparison: The Engine of Assessment Same-aged peers Own abilities Across tasks Academic potential vs. achievement 3

4. Report Sections Identifying info Reason for referral Background Observations / Interview Test Results Summary Recommendations 4

5. Step 1: Student Ability What is intelligence? –Academic potential How far a child will likely go in school How is it usually measured? –WISC-IV (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Fourth edition) –Stanford Binet V –Occasionally Woodcock Johnson III Cognitive Most reports – ‘70’s style – 2 or 3 pages about the test not the kid –Percentiles sprinkled about –See Johnny (next slide) 5

6. Johnny - Ugh 6 The good news Some are two pages long

7. Now meet Janey – age 12 7

8. Step 2: Student Skills What is academic achievement? –Skills student has acquired through schooling How is it measured? –WIAT-III (Wechsler Individual Achievement Test – Third Edition) –Woodcock Johnson III Achievement Scales –WRAT-IV (Wide Range Achievement Test – Fourth Ed.) Most reports – 70’s style – 2 or 3 pages about the test –Percentiles sprinkled about –No formal comparison with potential –See Johnny Part 2 (next slide) 8

9. Johnny Part 2 - Ugh 9 The bad news Failed to compare potential to achievement Johnny actually doing a little better than verbal reasoning would predict

10. Percentiles - purple Age & grade equivalents (relate only to that domain, should not be generalized) - orange Formal comparison to potential - blue Hello again Janey – age 12 10

11. Meet Sally – age 7 with LD Formal comparison to potential - blue –Gap between potential & achievement in some areas of reading 11

12. Many ways to define LD Outdated: letter reversals – early now disproven hallmark Outdated: “ACID” profile - poor WISC arith’c, compre’n, info, digit span –Cool name but later research didn’t hold up Achievement score under 80 (9 th percentile) –BUT what if their IQ is 80? Verbal vs. performance IQ gap –Is Nonverbal LD just social + spatial deficits? –BUT V & P often differ widely but do OK in school (hidden unreferred’s) –AND many V = P but child still underperforms Most common now: potential vs. achievement (slides above) –Can digest differences among abilities & underperformance 12

13. Step 3: If gap between potential & achievement, find out why Most commonly, measures of: –Phonological processing –Memory –Executive function (mental gymnastics, planning) Vast majority of reports don’t bother & so: –Fail to go beyond teacher’s impressions –Miss crucial learning problems –Can’t give good recommendations See Sally Part 2 (next 2 slides) 13

14. Hello again Sally – age 7 with LD 14

15. Hello again Sally – age 7 with LD 15

16. Step 4: Parent & Teacher Ratings What is measured? –Behaviour & emotion, general coping –Attention How is it measured? –CBCL (aka Achenbach) or BASC-II –Connors 3 Most reports –Give a long list of average, at risk, clinically significant –Some give no interpretation –See Sandy Part 2 (next slide) 16

17. Sandy Part 2 - Ugh 17

18. Most get ratings from home and school –Some compare across settings Should give concerns with: –What likely drives those behaviours or emotions –Implications See Sally Part III (next slide) Step 4: Parent & Teacher Ratings 18

19. Hello again Sally – age 7 with LD 19

20. Step 5: Summary & Recommendations Coding –School & parent decision –Only “severe” codes (40’s) confer extra $$$ Code 54 (learning disability) does not (hence rare follow-up) Coding Criteria http://education.alberta.ca/media/825847/spedcodingcriteria.pdf http://education.alberta.ca/media/825847/spedcodingcriteria.pdf Diagnosis –If evidence of a diagnosis in the data, should diagnose –Rationale should be outlined –Criteria easily available online Recommendations should: –Be specific to the child –Flow from data in report 20

21. Standard IQ & Achievement Long paragraphs about the test not the kid Long lists of “average, at risk”; no interpretation Long recommendations with no priorities Vague diagnosis No diagnosis despite evidence of one Quality IQ & Achievement Crisp results about kid For LD, follow-up measure Interpret results Targeted & relevant recommendations Differential diagnosis What should a Psycho-Ed buy you?- 21

22. Q & A Contact SAS-Enhanced Tanya at 780-400-4576 tspencer@casaservices.org 22