tagline
WETA

Search LD OnLine

Get our free newsletter

advertisement

Forums
Parenting a Child with LD or ADHD

Understanding the Results

Go to page:   |<   <   1   2   >   >|


Author Message
Joined: Nov 03, 2005
Posts: 69138
Other Topics
Posted Feb 21, 2002 at 8:53:51 PM
Subject: Understanding the Results

Okay. We got back the eval. results from the psychologist today. Thru him we were told the occupational therapist found weaknesses and that there are students with same test results who are recieving therapy, but our son doesn't present the same and she doesn't think he needs the one on one with a therapist. But, she is willking to consult with teachers and us on what we can do. We will get to talk with her directly at the IEP determination meeting on Tuesday.

and the results are: (I put everything in the Standard Score Results)

WISC III
Verbal 110
Performance 91
Full 101

Verbal Subtest Performance Subtests

Information 11 Picture Completion 4
Similarities 12 Coding 7
Arithmetic 10 Picture Arrangement 12
Vocabulary 14 Block Design 10
Comprehension 11 Object Assembly 10
Digit Span 12 Symbol Search 1


WJ-III
Letter-Word ID 103 Spelling 86
Reading Fluency 114 Writing Fluency 93
Passage Comp. 99 Writing Samples 101
Broad Reading 107 Broad Written Lang 90

Calculation 97
Math Fluency 102
Applied Problems 97
Broad Math 98

Oral & Written Language Scales (OWLS)
Oral Expression 112
Listening Comp. 97
Oral Composite 107


Please note that in scoring the WISC III, he felt our son really didn't try on the symbol search and threw that one out. But, I am concerned from that point that the pscyologist is saying there seems to be a visual discrimination problem - and note, that is the test which was set aside for the scoring. Yes, he was tired from the rest of the testing, but it's my understanding that they give it the same way nationwide and that is how all others would also be. Anyway, he is stating that he doesn't see our 8 yr old, 2nd grader as eligible for Sp. Ed. under learning disabiltiy, although there is definite dysgraphia, and evidence of difficulty with sequencing, visually discriminating between similar words, fine motor control and identifying beginning consonant blends.

In his summary, Z would score better than 75 peers verbally and only about 27 nonverbally. In essence, he is looking to go with a 504 Plan with accomodations and modifications in regulary class. His fine and gross motor skills are at low-normal and just below normal range - but haven't got the exacts on that yet.

Any thoughts?? - We meet for as a IEP team on Tuesday to review the full results of everyone.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 21, 2002 9:01:22 PM

Sorry about the tight reading on the WISC III results - had it spaced out and then it pushed together when I posted.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 21, 2002 10:24:57 PM

From the scores you have posted, your child is not eligible for learning disability. For starters, look for a 22 point discrepancy between IQ and achievement scores. Thus, best case scenario would be using the higher verbal IQ and looking for reading, written language or math scores at 88 or lower. You son did not meet that discrepancy. I do not know how they determine eligibility for OT. The majority of his scores are "right on" with his full-scale IQ, and mimimally (nonsignificantly) discrepant from the higher verbal score.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 21, 2002 10:52:22 PM

Did an OT test him? You don't typically base OT eligibility on psychological testing, in fact, I have never seen it done. However, based on those scores, he wouldn't be eligible for specific learning disability.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 5:56:44 AM

Cheryl,

Yes he was tested by an OT. We just haven't spoken with her directly like we did the psych. Our knowledge is 2nd hand thru psych on what the OT is going to be saying at meeting. We were told that yes they have other students in OT who tested at the same levels our son did, but their cases presented differently than our sons and she doesn't think one on one therapy will help him.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 6:10:12 AM

I guess my questioning is more with the scoring of the WISC III. I understand that the current scores do not make him eligible, but if the Performance subtest of Symbol Search was used how good/bad would that have to be if all other factors were "as is" to show a


WISC III
Verbal 110
Performance 91
Full 101

Verbal Subtest

Information 11
Similarities 12
Arithmetic 10
Vocabulary 14
Comprehension 11
Digit Span 12

Performance Subtests
Picture Completion 4
Picture Arrangement 12
Coding 7
Block Design 10
Object Assembly 10
Symbol Search 1

I am concerned from that point that the pscyologist is saying there seems to be a visual discrimination problem - and note, that is the test which was set aside for the scoring. If the Symbol search test had been scored in at the 4 or 7 in comparison to the other two subtests which dealt with looking at pictures - what would the scoring for performance been. Guess I need to find out how the scoring is computed from the subtests to give the Performance #.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 7:53:02 AM

your son has a 19 point spread between IQ and preformance, the wisc protocalls state that if their is more then a 15 point dicrepency between the two it is not an accurate measure of the childs IQ.

In addition to this you have sub test scatter on the preformance section of the wisc- that is more then 3 points between the different subtests 12-4=8point descrepency. (you have it on the verbal side too but 14-10=4 is far less of a concern.)

we normally see this in reversal, that is the preformance is higher then the verbal- then we know the child needs a non verbal IQ test, In the past when I have seen it this way all most all the kids turned out to be dyslexic. you might want to have your child tested for dyslexia.

The only thing I can say for certain about these scores is that they do not accurately represent the childs IQ.

The other thing I can say Is something has to be wrong to cause this split, so more information is needed.

Whatever is going on it isnt affecting your childs achivement scores to badly, yet. But you will need to stay on top of it, your child is somhow compensating for the low preformance ability right now but as kids get older its harder and harder to compensate, and eventually it begins to effect achievement.

I imagine allready its very difficult for your child to copy things, eigther from a board, overhead or book. As your child gets older and is expected to take notes and study from them it looks like he will have greater difficulty.

I suggest you send your childs compleate ETR/MFE to a advocacy agency, I am sure they will reccommend futher testing.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 9:38:30 AM

I believe "Symbol Search" is one of the optional subtests. I may be wrong, however there are two subtests, one in verbal and one in performance, that are optional. Symbol Search is not an intelligence issue, so it does not have to even be given. If I am wrong, anyone, correct me.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 9:48:12 AM

I have never heard anything to the effect that when there is a discrepancy between the two scores, more than 15 points, that this is not accurate. Never. Where did you ever encounter this? We have children who show spreads between verbal and performance IQ. I am afraid I disagree with you on that call and if a parent walks into a meeting informing the psych. that the test is not a valid measure of IQ, this parent may be misinformed. Our psych. will be coming around today and I will ask her if there is any statement to this effect in the protocols. If I learn anything more or if I learn that I am wrong, I'll sign on during recess and post thusly.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 10:12:35 AM

From my understanding of the test what it means is that the full scale IQ is not a unitary construct if there is a significant verbal/performance IQ split. It does not mean the IQ test is invalid. What has been explained to me is it means that if this split does exist that the higher score is more likely closer to the individuals true potential and that that score is used to compare against achievement tests to see if a ablitly/achievement discrepency exists. For example my sons performance IQ is 104, his verbal is 82 with a full scale of 92. Due to obvious verbal difficulties it is felt is performance score is a better indicator of his potentional. His performance score was measured against his WIAT results to determine if a discrepency existed between his ability and achievement. His reading composite was 68 his writing composite 75 and math composite 101. When compared to his performance IQ he met the significant difference in both reading and writing, had his scores been compared to his full scale he would of only met it in reading and then just barely. Hope this helps.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 10:24:56 AM

I think the definition of a SLD may vary from system to system and state to state; in my son's case, his FSIQ of 122(V125,P113) and WJIII standard scores in the 90's(average) did not qualify him for special ed(in Mass.) The psychologist said a split of 12pts, which was what my son had, between V and P is not uncommon. We have chosen to obtain private tutoring, and will continue this. It is my feeling that above average LD kids aren't well served by the sped system.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 11:39:54 AM

12 points is not statistically significant, 15 points is.

and since some people want to be horrifically technical I had defined subtest scatter as a difference of 3 points (which is a common method to use) but per the manual subtest scatter is 3 points away from the statistacal mean of the subtests in eighter the verbal or nonverbal section of the test.

so you would add up all the scores on one side of the test, devide by the number of items, then if any of the origional scores were father then three points away from the mean, then you have subtest scatter. which means the I score is not an actual reflection of the childs ability and another test is needed.

all of you have the right to see the test protocals yourselves, the school can not legally give you a copy, so you have to go in and read them there.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 11:55:47 AM

Anitya, all psychological tests are only accurate within their statistical boundries. All phychological tests that compile more then one score, are suseptable to both intertest and intratest scatter. (one is within test scatter the other is between test scatter) Each test has different numbers regarding what is and isnt statistically significant. these are found in the test protocalls, every test has them, they are the rules for administering, scoreing and interperting the test results.

the wisc, is only accurate within statistical boundries, a 15 point discrepency between verbal and nonverbal IQ exceeds these boundries, for this test, a discrepency of greater then 3 from the mean in eighter section of the test (verbal or non verbal) also exceeds these boundries.

below is an article, it has a "general" section on subtest scatter, it will help you understand. but it is speaking in general, each test has its own statistical boundries.


http://www.ldonline.org/bulletin_boards/pld.html

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 1:58:44 PM

Sar I think you should read the article I linked below. Schools can be rotton, they may not want to serve your child because he is doing well, but that dosnt mean the disability dosnt exist and isnt affecting him, or preventing him from living up to his ability.


please read the section labled "serving children with non verabl learning disabilities" carefully.

http://www.ldonline.org/bulletin_boards/pld.html

you should also read this, it is clairification from the federal government about serving students who have IQ's above the norm.

http://www.ldonline.org/ld_indepth/gt_ld/lda_advocacymemo.html

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 2:54:56 PM

Dana,

He would not qualify for services in my state either. There certainly are many children who are borderline who could benefit from therapy who do not qualify for services in the school. Anitya and Lisa are correct that the full scale score is the one that would not be used when there is a wide discrepancy between the verbal and performance scores. It is very important to look at the subtest scores when there is scatter. The scores do indicate some visual problems just as your psychologist has suggested. You can either pursue private therapy and/or further evaluation for that, or you could go ahead and try one of the home training programs to strengthen those skills. An inexpensive home therapy program with strong visual training that immediately comes to mind is Audiblox (some parents here at LD Online have used it):

http://www.audiblox2000.com./

As far as the OT goes, it'll be great if the OT can give you exercises to do with him at home. It is not always necessary for an OT to provide direct service to improve a writing problem. Sometimes being pulled out of class for so many "special" services causes a child to have even more academic problems!

Janis

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 6:09:47 PM

According to our psych. the scatter has nothing to do with the validity of what the test is measuring. The statistics will tell what percentage of the population has that particular spread. A 15 point spread, as our psych. could recall is generally found in 25% of the population, for example. This makes this kind of spread happen in about 1:4 people. This does not make the lower score invalid, it simply points to uneven devlopment within the individual. Within the normal range of human abilities/strengths/weaknesses it is totally typical for people to have relative strengths and weaknesses. It is totally possible to be a great swimmer and an mediocre basketball player. There is nothing abnormal about this, statistically most people have more consistent talents, but some people's talents are notably greater in one area than another.

Now if you have firsthand experience with this test and if you can post the quote from the protocols, I'll be happy to return to our psychologist with this information.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 6:25:57 PM

Good point, thanks for explaining your understanding. But, I want to say something that is, perhaps, not what everyone will want to hear. As a teacher of about 12 years experience, I have followed children across years (6) who have had this split. I have seen a performance score of 98 remain about 98 and a verbal of 72 remain 72, even despite therapy and the gradual, annual increase of language scores of very specific language tests. But, when the verbal IQ is retested, it remains in the same range. I also have found this this kind of child, depite good nonverbal intelligence, has significant and serious difficulties understanding the language around him or her. This child remains several years below in all language comprehension. Thus, concepts that are taught in upper grades and secondary grades become increasingly difficult. To the extent that pictures can be used to teach, great, but there is much we teach that cannot be thoroughly taught in pictures. So, this very low verbal IQ seems to be a lifelong pattern. When something is a lifelong (th e 6 years I am familiar with, anyway) I have trouble calling the 99 the true potential.

We need to move beyond this notion of a single unified intelligence. Intelligence is multi-faceted. The multiple-intelligences theory is on the right track. A child can have lowish ability in one area of intelligence and superior ability in another. I also like the way Gardener likens all human abilities to intelligence. I look at intelligence like this (over simplified):

Intelligence = raw "spiritual" power or universal "intelligence"

Spirit, if you like a more religious term. This "universal intelligence" or "raw spirit" is the lifeforce of the universe. You can plug in whatever religions connotation you subscribe to to explain the origin of this force.

Because this force or raw intelligence permeates the universe, it flows through us. To whatever extent we are open in different ways to this flow, we manifest "intelligence." So, a great ice skater like Sarah Hughes has a particular kind of body/kinesthetic intelligence in genius proportion. She can sense the whereabouts of her body in space and in relation to what is around her and use that feedback to execute difficult maneuvers and to improve her maneuvers. Another person manifests a great deal of intelligence via visual arts channels and is a gifted painter, yet another is a gifted musician. There is no rule that says all humans must have almost equal ability in all human endeavors and outlets.

But, ability on one area is genuine ability. A deficit in an area may well create a lifelong challenge for the individual.

Thanks for letting me expound. I appreciate it and welcome feedback.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 6:31:33 PM

My, I am all over this topic. I am compelled to tellyou that we would have qualified your child in my district, most likely. We just qualified a child with a Performance of about 117, verbal of 106 or 111 (I am not sure) and standard scores in the upper 90's (some even over 100!). But, I tested her and felt there was an LD. So I informed the psych. thus and she went on a hunting expedition to find a way to explain a processing deficit.

See, we are not all bad people who try to keep all youngsters from getting services. We are not required, in most states or districts, to educate all children to their potential. The districts that have made these statements in their mission statements need to change them, now. "Potential" is not an agreed upon, concrete concept that can be proved in all cases.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 7:26:43 PM

I for one am not inflamed by what you said. I agree with the theory of multiple intelligence. I feel we all have our strengths and our weakness and that we should build off these strengths and not squelch them just because it is not what school is about. I do feel therapy helps these kids though maybe not increase their IQ but live up to that potential that is there. A good example is my youngest son who is PDD. Before he started therapy at the age of 2 he was completely non-verbal. He communicated by dragging me by the hand and placing my hand on what he wanted. He would rock, spin, bang his head ect. It took a long time but he eventually got to a point he could communicatte. We started with sign language, after he learned signs to get his basic needs met he seemed to relax. This relaxation seemed to help him develop speech. He communicates very well now. He is learning to read and his express his ideas on paper. He no longer routinely rocks, spins or bangs his head. I don't think he would of been able to get this far without therapy. I am not saying he will be able to do high school work--but we use to think he would never learn to speak, read, or write. I quess what I am saying is that an IQ is just a number and yes it may provide valuable information but........

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 8:01:33 PM

Anitya- I will point parents in the right direction, I will assist them to find help, If I have information on hand I can share I will, But I will not break the Law by posting copyright material on an open message board for a teacher who dosnt care to do the work herself.

If I had a copy of the protocals I could post a page number but I dont, as I said you have to go into the office to read them. Even the psychologist can not give out copies of the protocalls they are part of secure test materials (none the less parents still have the right to read them). So if you have a child who you think is being cheated out of his education because the school is useing a test instrument inappropriatly, then it is worth your time to go read the material. If however you are a teacher who is getting paid by the district to gaurd the school wallet then I guess its not worth your time.

Back to top Profile Email
Anonymous
Joined Nov 28, 2014
Posts: 69138

Other Topics
Posted:Feb 22, 2002 8:08:39 PM


3. Check for verbal/performance scatter.
"The normal range difference of scores between the two test levels-verbal and performance-should be under 15 points so as to indicate a more consistent pattern of performance. A 15 or more difference between Verbal IQ and Performance IQ is considered by many to be an indicator of scatter and uneven performance that could be the result of,for example,emotional problems,language difficulties,or processing problems."

From "Special Educators Guide to 109 diagnostic tests.
written by Roger Pierangelo,Ph.D and George Giuliani,Psy.D.

Symbol search: measures visual discrimination

Coding: Measures ability to associate meaning with symbol,visual motor dexterity(pencil manipulation),flexibility and speed in learning tasks.

The scale scores can range from 1 to 19 with 10 being the midpoint Any score less then three points either way is or should be considered and investigated by the psychologist.

Back to top Profile Email

Go to page:   |<   <   1   2   >   >|