Dawn P. Flanagan, Ph.D.

St. John’s University Yale Child Study Center, School of Medicine

CHC Ability

Gf Gc Gsm Gv Ga Glr Gs

Reading Achievement Math Achievement Writing Achievement

Inductive (I) and general sequential reasoning (RG) abilities play a moderate role in reading comprehension.

Language development (LD), lexical knowledge (VL), and listening ability (LS) are important at all ages. These abilities become increasingly more important with age.

Memory span (MS) is important especially when evaluated

within the context of working memory.

Orthographic Processing

Phonetic coding (PC) or “phonological awareness/processing” is very important during the elementary school years. Naming facility (NA) or “rapid automatic naming” is very important during the elementary school years.

(e.g., age 6). Associative memory (MA) may be somewhat important at select ages

Perceptual speed (P) abilities are important during all school years, particularly the elementary school years. Inductive (I) and general sequential (RG) reasoning abilities are consistently very important at all ages. Language development (LD), lexical knowledge (VL), and listening abilities (LS) are important at all ages. These abilities become increasingly more important with age.

Memory span (MS) is important especially when evaluated

within the context of working memory.

Inductive (I) and general sequential reasoning abilities is related to basic writing skills primarily during the elementary school years (e.g., 6 to 13) and consistently related to written expression at all ages.

Language development (LD), lexical knowledge (VL), and general information (K0) are important primarily after age 7. These abilities become increasingly more important with age.

Memory span (MS) is important to writing, especially spelling skills whereas working memory has shown relations with advanced writing skills (e.g., written expression). May be important primarily for higher level or advanced mathematics (e.g., geometry, calculus). Naming Facility (NA); Associative Memory (MA)

Phonetic coding (PC) or “phonological awareness/processing” is very important during the elementary school years for both basic writing skills and written expression (primarily before age 11).

Naming facility (NA) or “rapid automatic naming” has demonstrated relations with written expression, primarily the fluency aspect of writing.

Perceptual speed (P) abilities are important during all school years, particularly the elementary school years. Perceptual speed (P) abilities are important during all school years for basic writing and related to all ages for written expression.

See McGrew and Wendling (2010) for an extension of this work

   

Gf

– Induction (I) and general sequential reasoning (RG) play a moderate role in reading comprehension

Gc

– Language development (LD, lexical knowledge (VL), and listing ability (LS) are important at all ages. These abilities become increasingly more important with age

Gsm

– Memory span (MS) is important, especially when evaluated within the context of working memory

Gv

– Orthographic processing

  

Ga

– Phonetic Coding (PC) or phonological awareness; phonological processing – very important during the elementary school years.

Glr

– Naming facility (NA) or “rapid automatic naming” is very important during the elementary school years. Associative memory (MA) may be important at early elementary school ages.

Gs

– Perceptual speed (P) abilities are important during all school years, particularly the elementary school years.

   

Gf

– Induction (I) and general sequential reasoning (RG) play a moderate role in reading comprehension

Gc

– Language development (LD, lexical knowledge (VL), and listing ability (LS) are important at all ages. These abilities become increasingly more important with age

Gsm

– Memory span (MS) is important, especially when evaluated within the context of working memory

Gv

– Orthographic processing



Ga

– Phonetic Coding (PC) or phonological awareness; phonological processing – very important during the elementary school years.



Glr

– Naming facility (NA) or “rapid automatic naming” is very important during the elementary school years. Associative memory (MA) may be important at early elementary school ages.



Gs

– Perceptual speed (P) abilities are important during all school years, particularly the elementary school years.

 McGrew and Wendling (2010)  Need to move from general to specific   Reading -> basic reading skills; reading comprehension Math -> basic math skills; math application  Need to systematically take into account developmental level    Ages 6-8 years Ages 9-13 years Ages 14-19 years  Need to control for specification error  Seems necessary primarily if interested in percentage of variance accounted for in academic outcome  May pose more of a limitation (e.g., Flanagan et al. had over 100 studies in their review; McGrew and Wendling had less than 20)

Comparison tables may be found in: Flanagan & Alfonso (2011). Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Comparison tables may be found in: Flanagan & Alfonso (2011). Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Comparison tables may be found in: Flanagan & Alfonso (Eds.) (2011). Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Attention Processing Speed Short-term Memory (particularly Working Memory) Word Retrieval (Glr)

Broad Domain Markers

Gs

Processing Speed

Gc

Crystallized Intelligence Narrow Domain Markers

Work Mem (MW) Perc. Speed (P) Lang. Dev. (LD) Listen. Ability (LS) Gen. Info. (K0) Lex. Know. (VL) Assoc. Mem. (MA) Naming Fac. (NA) Phonetic Coding (PC)

Relevant WISC-IV tests

Digit Span (MS/MW) Letter-Number Seq. (MW) Coding (P/R9) Symbol Search (P) Cancellation (P) Vocabulary (VL) Similarities (LD/VL) Comprehension (LD) Information (K0) Word Reasoning (LD/VL)

XBA Supplemental Tests from WJ III Vis.-Aud.-Lrng. (MA)

Rapid. Pic. Nam. (NA) Retrieval Fluency (FI) (NA)

Snd. Aware (PC/MW) Snd. Blending (PC) Basic Reading Skills – ages 6 to 8 – WISC-IV Slide Adapted from Kevin S. McGrew

 Cross-Battery Assessment Approach  Classification system    Joint or CB-FAs Content Validity/Expert Consensus Facilitated the use of a common nomenclature  Beginning to link CHC and neuropsychological theory and research



Identify targets for remediation and determine what the student needs to improve academically

• Students Amy Belinda Carl

RTI at Tiers I and II

  Tier I Screening At-risk in Reading  Decoding   Fluency Comprehension  Tier II Treatment Protocol  Reading Recovery Mascolo and Flanagan (2010)

   Amy, Belinda, and Carl are making some gains in Reading Recovery

No appreciable change in reading performance

Tier II “nonresponders” 

CHOICE

  move to Tier III or conduct a “diagnostic assessment” Mascolo and Flanagan (2010)

One Size Does Not Fit All

Different Cognitive Ability Profiles Suggest Different Interventions

Different Cognitive Profiles Suggest Different Interventions

    Amy’s cognitive testing shows a significant deficit in phonetic coding – she doesn’t know how to translate symbols into sounds Ga deficit impacts her fluency – labored reading Lack of decoding and fluency impacts comprehension

Intervention should focus on Phonemic Awareness – Remediate Ga

Mascolo and Flanagan (2010)

Different Cognitive Profiles Suggest Different Interventions

     Gc deficit – speech-language impairment?

Comprehension is poor b/c of low Gc Poor vocabulary – needs to re-read to gain meaning, which impacts fluency

Intervention should focus on vocabulary development – Build Gc-VL, KO – and building fluency

Accommodation of extended time may be warranted due to a Gs deficit Mascolo and Flanagan (2010)

Different Cognitive Profiles Suggest Different Interventions

      Gsm deficit – memory span and working memory are deficient; visual memory ok Decoding is poor – he cannot hold the complete phonemic string in mind long enough to say the word Comprehension is poor because he needs to allocate all memory space decoding words and therefore cannot focus on meaning Fluency is impaired because he must re-read the text to gain meaning

Intervention should focus on developing a sight word vocabulary

Carl needs to be taught

compensatory strategies notes; one comprehension question at a time)

to assist with poor Gsm (text previews; guided Mascolo and Flanagan (2010)

     All had same academic deficits (decoding, comprehension, fluency)

All made slow gains with Reading Recovery

All had different patterns of cognitive strengths and weaknesses Reading Recovery – allocating time to areas that do not need to be trained Not enough explicit instruction in main problem area

because the intervention was not tailored

Mascolo and Flanagan (2010)

  No need to focus on comprehension and fluency Amy needs phonemic awareness training Mascolo and Flanagan (2010)

 When selecting a program or a technique to intervene with a student with a Ga deficit, consider one that     Teaches students to manipulate sounds by using letters (i.e., phoneme-grapheme correspondence) Uses individual or small group format Focuses on reading and spelling development (again, the phoneme-grapheme connection) Explicitly teaches student how to blend sounds

 Provides 44 lesson plans that include games to encourage phonemic awareness. The games are 

Say-It-and-Move-It

—the child learns to recognize phonemes by moving a disk for every phoneme heard 

Letter Name and Sound Instruction

and what the letter looks like —the child learns the name of the letter that produces the phoneme heard 

Phonological Awareness Practice

—the child participates in a range of simple phonological awareness tasks.

   No need to focus on decoding Belinda needs to focus on

building her vocabulary

She will also benefit from interventions designed to build fluency Mascolo and Flanagan (2010)

     Work on vocabulary building Teach morphology Activities to build listening skills Explicitly teach listening strategies Use text talks

http://teacher.scholastic.com/products/texttalk/overview/readaloud.htm



Choral Repeated Reading

     Students listen to the text being read and follow along by reading aloud and looking at the text (using their fingers to keep pace) 10 to 15 minutes Text can be higher than students’ instructional level Comprehension activities can be added Feedback and assistance can be provided

  No need to focus on comprehension or fluency Carl needs sight word reading and memory strategies Mascolo and Flanagan (2010)

Go to: http://www.mrsperkins.com/dolch.htm

Print Flash Cards Use folding-in technique (builds confidence)

Manifestations of Cognitive Weaknesses and Examples of Recommendations and Interventions (Flanagan, Alfonso, & Mascolo, 2011, in press)

Flanagan, D. P., Alfonso, V. C., Sotelo-Dynega, M., & Mascolo, J. T. (in press). Use of Ability Tests in the Identification of Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) within the context of an Operational Definition. In D.P. Flanagan & P.L. Harrison,

Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (3 rd edition

).

New York: Guilford. Flanagan, D. P., Alfonso, V. C., & Mascolo, J. T. (2011). A CHC-based Operational Definition of SLD: Integrating Multiple Data Sources and Multiple Data Gathering Methods. In Flanagan, D. P., & Alfonso, V. C. (Eds.),

Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification.

New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Student: Willie Age: 11 Grade: 3 Retained: 1

st

and 3

rd

grades

20 Pages of RTI Data

2 Pages of History/Background

Student

: Willie;

Course of Action

: “Tier 1 and Tier 2 Student Who is on his way to Tier 3”

Grade KG (05-06) Age 6 RLI

S S iii S

LNF

19 AA 13 MR 18 HR 29 MR

ISF

0 18 14 MR

PSF

0 4 HR

NWF

2 15 MR

DORF MISC PPVT 1 st (06-07) Age 7

ii iii ii 43 LR 53 AA 76 AA 68 AA 28 LR 25 HR 40 MR 0 2 10 HR 85

PPVT Stanford-10 1 st (07-08) Age 8

ii S iii 68 AA 39 LR 36 LR 30 MR 29 LR 42 MR 25 HR 6 MR 17 MR 18 HR 92 15%

PPVT Stanford-10 2 nd (08-09) Age 9

iii iii iii 19 HR 22 HR 26 HR 21 HR 36 HR 46 HR 89 20%

PPVT Stanford-10

94 8%

   Process of going from explicit to implicit memory Efficient way of managing overwhelming amounts of information Implicit memory-laying down of skills and habits that, once learned, do not have to be consciously thought about – eating, talking, walking, reading

Information on this slide was presented by

Elaine Fletcher-Janzen

at the 3 rd conference, Fordham University. New York, NY (May, 2011).

annual assessment

 

Pathology

   Labored reading Tires easily Faltering at math facts and subsequent math problems Does Willie demonstrate any of these characteristics?



Wellness

   Quick reader with prosody Instant math facts Takes to new math problems consistently

Information on this slide was presented by

Elaine Fletcher-Janzen

conference, Fordham University. New York, NY (May, 2011).

at the 3 rd annual assessment

  Check to see if skill deficit is more of a lack of automaticity than ability  This distinction is not clear based on the information provided for Willie Break down content and slowly build up to complex skills    Move from one level to another after mastery is fluid and automatic Keep instruction simple and rote Stay at learning level until mastery

Information on this slide was presented by

Elaine Fletcher-Janzen

at the 3 rd conference, Fordham University. New York, NY (May, 2011).

annual assessment

Did Willie Stay at Learning Level Until Mastery?

Assessment Grade 3: Reading Comprehension 2009-2010 1 2 3 2010-2011 1 FACT Success Probability 2% 2% 5% 4% Maze 5% 23% 1% 15% Word Analysis 2% 1% 2% 22%

OPM within and across grades often yield inconsistent results; difficult to interpret

3 rd OPM – at benchmark for early 3 rd Grade grade Date 9-30-10 10-12-10 10-26-10 Average WCPM Oral Reading Fluency - WCPM 97 129 115 113

   RTI data not explained; not placed in context RTI data not explained within the context of classroom performance, standardized test performance, etc.

RTI/data collection continued for too long…several years before considering SLD (other conditions) and special education eligibility

   Alan; 3 rd grade; repeated 1 st grade; age 10 From Report: “Response to Intervention Data”  “Alan has been receiving intensive Tier 3 interventions through the School-based Intervention Team since early Fall to address reading and communication concerns. Response to intervention data indicate that Alan has not shown adequate growth.” WHAT I DON’T KNOW        When intervention began Type of intervention Who delivered intervention Attendance during intervention Integrity of intervention delivery Whether or not the intervention was matched to child’s instructional level Whether or not the intervention was selected based on student’s demonstrated deficits in academic areas (vs. standard treatment protocol)

    Progress monitoring data not reported/explained in psychological report

Inconsistencies in progress monitoring data not explained

Progress monitoring data not integrated with other data sources See case of Johnny

Letter Naming Fluency

– one minute probe; KS score likely spurious due to unreliability of the measure (or some other factor); he knows his letters (see KTEA-II Letter-Word Identification) and has demonstrated that he can name them quickly

   

KTEA-II Letter & Word Recognition Recognizes all letters Demonstrated in K that he can say the letters quickly KS LNF score is not indicative of true performance

Letter Sound Fluency

– OK

Phoneme Segmentation Fluency

– OK (segment 3 to 4 phoneme words into individual phonemes in one minute)

Nonsense Word Fluency

KTEA-II) – perhaps a different evaluator (at KS and 1F). KS performance is unlikely because Johnny cannot read (see Nonsense Word Decoding on

 

KTEA-II Nonsense Word Decoding

performance is consistent with 1F NWF Both performances call into question the KS NWF performance

  Assessed Johnny’s accuracy and speed of reading grade level text Was accuracy impacted by his articulation difficulties? “pw for pi”, “sw for sl”, “f for th”, and “d for th”. He substitutes “d” for “g”, “w” for “l” (wov instead of love), “bw for bl”, “fw for fl”, “gw for gl” (gwass instead of glass), “pw for kl”,

 

Pre-Alphabetic

(e.g., when a child says “that says stop!” when they see a red octagonal traffic sign, but cannot read the word “stop” in isolation)

Partial-Alphabetic

  Understand that there is a relationship between letters and sounds Rely on beginning and ending sounds so they continue to make errors in reading words (e.g., reading “bank” as “book” or “bake” or “belt”)

 

Fully Alphabetic Phase

– students are able to sound out words successfully    They know the sound-symbol connections and move from guessing a word from the first or last letter to complete word decoding

sound by sound

. (e.g., /b/ /a/ /n/ /k/) When they see the same word more than a few times, then that word becomes automatically recognized.

As more and more words become “sight” words, students move into the consolidated alphabetic phase (e.g., /b/ /ank/)

There is an assumption that Johnny is AT the fully alphabetic phase. He is not. Therefore, developing this phase of reading should be the immediate goal for reading intervention

.

   Johnny was observed in his first grade classroom by the Speech Language Pathologist During the observation, students were working in their journals independently and participating in

Calendar Math

, weather review, and a movement/music activity. Johnny had a hard time getting started on his writing assignment

independently

. When his teacher prompted him, he said he

didn’t know what to write about

.

   Fan, dog, he, book

Can Johnny work in his journal independently?

Johnny doesn’t have the skills to write in a journal

 The observer also prompted him by encouraging him to draw pictures about their upcoming field trip to a dairy farm and she gave him several examples of what he might draw. When she asked him what he was going to draw, he stated that he was going to draw a “monster truck” and “hot lava.” Johnny wrote several letters on his paper and began copying another student’s name from the wall .



He is at this level



“I Miss Home”

 He is at the partial alphabetic stage and cannot write words or sentences…  It is a good idea to ask the child what he/she wrote (random letters? Or does what he said he wrote make sense within the context of the tasks?

 Recommendation in report:  “Johnny should work on improving his reading accuracy and reading speed”

Go to: http://www.mrsperkins.com/dolch.htm

Print Flash Cards

   Have Johnny tell you what he wants to write about Provide structure based on instructional level. For example,    Johnny wants to write about monster trucks.

__onster ___rucks are bi___. I have a re__ Monste__ Truc__.

Task: Fill in missing letters. Re-write first sentence.

This will keep Johnny busy during journal time with a journal activity that is at his instructional level.

Student

: Willie;

Course of Action

: “Tier 1 and Tier 2 Student Who is on his way to Tier 3”

Subject 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Kindergarten (age 6) 1 st (age 7) 1 st (Retained) 2 nd (age 9) 3 rd (age 10) 3 rd (age 11)

LangDevlp Reading Handwrtn Math Science Social Sts Art Music Phys Ed

N S S S N N N N S A A F D D A F F C C A A B B B A A A C B C A F C D D B A F C C B B A C C D B D C

FCAT Reading FCAT Math

20% 17% 8% 4%

    Academic achievement of kids who are retained is poorer than that of peers who are promoted.

Achievement gains associated with retention fade within two to three years after the grade repeated.

Kids who are identified as most behind are the ones "most likely harmed by retention." Retention often is associated with increased behavior problems.

National Association of School Psychologists

  Grade retention has a negative impact on all areas of a child's achievement (reading, math, and language) and socio-emotional adjustment (

peer relationships, self-esteem, problem behaviors

and attendance).

Students who are retained are more likely to drop out of school compared to students who were never retained. In fact,

grade retention is one of the most powerful predictors of high school dropout

.

National Association of School Psychologists

  Retained students are more likely to have poorer educational and employment outcomes during late adolescence and early adulthood.

Retention is more likely to have benign or positive impact when students are not simply held back, but receive specific remediation to address skill and/or behavioral problems and promote achievement and social skills.

National Association of School Psychologists

Multiple Reading Interventions tried with Willie Willie Remains Moderate to High Risk After Several Years of Intervention PM data alone will lead to SLD by default • • • • • • What about other causal factors, such as: Other disabilities (e.g., intellectual disability) Cultural or language difference Psychological factors Poor treatment fidelity Inappropriate intervention based on child’s cognitive strengths and weaknesses Significant behavioral or social-emotional issues

Progress Monitoring data alone do not answer the question of why the child is significantly behind same age and grade peers

    Differential diagnosis Psychological health of the student Expectations Treatment/Intervention

Information About Willie Collected via Parent Interview FACILITATORS TO LEARNING INHIBITORS TO LEARNING He is praised, encouraged, and rewarded for good behavior at home He is violent/aggressive kill a puppy) (rolls up and down hall when things do not go his way; cannot control his temper; tried to Mother came to the school and asked for help. She reported that “nothing seems to be working.” Good attendance Parent Unemployed; Food Stamps ; Low SES ; parents divorced Not toilet trained (cannot control his bowels; has accidents); Encopresis Family history of Learning Disability (Grandmother, aunts, cousins, and sister have learning disabilities) Behavioral difficulties at home (parent cannot control his behavior; constantly fighting ; lacks respect; curses at grandmother; fights with siblings) Poor peer relationships ; always fighting Delayed Language (first words at age 2; first phrases in 1 st grade) Serious family illness (Grandmother very sick and is bed bound) Parents have H.S. education or less (mother completed 11 th grade; father graduated from H.S.) Has poor self-esteem

Are We On The Right Track With RTI?

“Slow reading acquisition has cognitive, behavioral, and motivational consequences that slow the development of other cognitive skills and inhibit performance on many academic tasks. For example, knowledge bases that are in reciprocal relationships with reading are inhibited from further development. The longer this developmental sequence is allowed to continue, the more generalized the deficits will become, seeping into more and more areas of cognition and behavior. Or to put it more simply and sadly—in the words of a tearful 9-year-old, already falling frustratingly behind his peers in reading progress, ‘Reading affects everything you do.’ ” (p. 390) Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360-407.

  There are many approaches and methods that aid in understanding, identifying, and treating SLD  RTI    Ability-Achievement Discrepancy Third Method Approaches (“Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses”) Demand Analysis/Process Approach - School Neuropsychololgy There is no litmus test; the more well-versed you are in different approaches and methods, the more information you will gain about the child (including how to best help him or her)

Common Elements of “PSW Component” of Third Method Approaches to SLD Identification COGNITIVE STRENGTH/INTEGRITY

Average or higher abilities and processes; May also include strengths in academic skills Statistically significant difference between cognitive integrities and academic skill deficit(s) Academic deficit(s) is

unexpected

, not expected, because overall cognitive ability is at least average Statistically significant difference between cognitive integrities and circumscribed cognitive ability or processing deficit(s) Cognitive deficit(s) is

specific

, not general or pervasive, because overall cognitive ability is at least average

ACADEMIC WEAKNESS/FAILUR E

Academic Skills/Knowledge Deficits Consistent/Concordant

COGNITIVE WEAKNESS/DEFICI T

Cognitive Ability or Processing Disorder No Statistically significant Performance Difference (constructs are related empirically )

Sotelo, Flanagan, and Alfonso (2011). Overview of SLD Identification. In D. P. Flanagan & V. C. Alfonso, Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Flanagan, Fiorello, and Ortiz (2010); Hale, Flanagan, and Naglieri (2008)

Better Title: On the RELEVANCE of Intelligence……

“Historical Perspective” Slides from Nancy Mather

Name:_____________________ Age: ____ Grade: ____ Examiner:____________________ Date: ___________

KABC-II and KTEA-II Data with WJ III as Supplement

40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160

Grw

Broad/Narrow Cluster Reading Composite( ) Sound Symbol ( ) Reading Fluency__(_ _)

Ga

Broad/Narrow Cluster Nonsense Wd Decod( ) Phonol. Awareness_( ) WJ III Auditory Atten.

(___)

Glr/Gs

Broad/Narrow Cluster Assoc. Fluency_____(___) Naming Facility____(___) WJ III

Gs

Cluster __ (___)

Glr-MA

Broad/Narrow Cluster Rebus_____________(___) Atlantis_ __________(___) __________________(___)

Gsm

Broad/Narrow Cluster Word Order__ ( ) Number Recall_ ( ) WJ III Working Mem . (__)

Gf

Broad/Narrow Cluster Story Comp.__

( ) Pattern Reasoning ( _) _______________ ( )

Gv

Broad/Narrow Cluster Rover _ __( ) Triangles_______ ( ) _______________( )

Gc

Broad/Narrow Cluster Expressive Vocab. ( ) Verbal Knowledge ( ) _______________( ) Pattern of empirically or logically related cognitive

Domain-Specific

establishes basis for satisfying criterion of “below average aptitude achievement consistency”

Historical Concept of Intra Individual Discrepancies

Pattern of generally average cognitive abilities and processes

Unexpected Underachievement

ability profile” 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160

“Historical Perspective” Slides from Nancy Mather

“Historical Perspective” Slides from Nancy Mather

“Historical Perspective” Slides from Nancy Mather

“Historical Perspective” Slides from Nancy Mather

      Clinical Judgment SLD Assistant (Flanagan, Ortiz & Alfonso, 2007) Instruments on which deficit areas do not contribute to g estimate (e.g., GAI from WISC-IV)   GAI (average or better) > WMI and PSI in SLD (Prifitera, Soklofske, & Weiss, 2005) Pattern suggests Specific LD in Math (Geary et al., 2011) Academic areas not related to referral  Math achievement (average or better) > reading achievement Informal observations and assessments, teacher report CONVERGENCE OF INDICATORS

       

Bob

Gc = 109 Glr = 83 Gv = 100 Ga = 78 Gf = 112 Gs = 98 Gsm = 82

g value =

       

Bill

Gc = 86 Glr = 80 Gv = 100 Ga = 78 Gf = 88 Gs = 87 Gsm = 79

       

Bob

Gc = 109 Glr = 83 Gv = 100 Ga = 78 Gf = 112 Gs = 98 Gsm = 82

g value =

       

Bill

Gc = 86 Glr = 80 Gv = 100 Ga = 78 Gf = 88 Gs = 87 Gsm = 79

g value =

  g values close to 1 (e.g., .97, .98, .99) or higher    Suggest that deficient areas are likely to be domain-specific or circumscribed (vertical) Deficient areas may be amenable to remediation, depending on the developmental level of the student Deficient areas may be readily accommodated or compensated The greater the g value deviates from 1 in the negative direction, the more likely it is that the student’s learning and achievement will be constrained by ability deficits  Low average functioning in many cognitive and academic areas – general learning difficulty (horizontal), not SLD   Intellectual Disability Differential diagnosis requires consideration of data from multiple methods and sources

Name:_____________________ Age: ____ Grade: ____ Examiner:____________________ Date: ___________

KABC-II and KTEA-II Data with WJ III as Supplement

40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160

Grw

Broad/Narrow Cluster Reading Composite( ) Sound Symbol ( ) Reading Fluency__(_ _)

Ga

Broad/Narrow Cluster Nonsense Wd Decod( ) Phonol. Awareness_( ) WJ III Auditory Atten.

(___)

Glr/Gs

Broad/Narrow Cluster Assoc. Fluency_____(___) Naming Facility____(___) WJ III

Gs

Cluster __ (___)

Glr-MA

Broad/Narrow Cluster Rebus_____________(___) Atlantis_ __________(___) __________________(___)

Gsm

Broad/Narrow Cluster Word Order__ ( ) Number Recall_ ( ) WJ III Working Mem . (__)

Gf

Broad/Narrow Cluster Story Comp.__

( ) Pattern Reasoning ( _) _______________ ( )

Gv

Broad/Narrow Cluster Rover _ __( ) Triangles_______ ( ) _______________( )

Gc

Broad/Narrow Cluster Expressive Vocab. ( ) Verbal Knowledge ( ) _______________( )

GENERAL Learning Difficulty DOMAIN-GENERAL EXPECTED Underachievement (aka “Slow Learner”)

40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160

A diagnosis identifies the nature of a specific learning disability and has implications for its probably etiology, instructional requirements, and prognosis. Ironically, in an era when educational practitioners are encouraged to use evidence-based instructional practices, they are not encouraged to use evidence-based differential diagnoses of specific learning disabilities.

Virginia Berninger (2010)

On the Flanagan et al. and Kavale and Forness Operational Definitions of SLD…

These operational definitions provide an inherently practical method for SLD identification that carries the potential for increased agreement about the validity of SLD classification

Kavale, Holdnack, & Mostert (2005, p. 12)

The Importance of Assessing Cognitive Abilities and Processes and Academic Skills…

By identifying specific targets for remediation, the possibilities for truly individualized intervention are increased significantly.

Kavale, Holdnack, & Mostert (2005, p. 12)

The Value of Assessing Cognitive Abilities and Processes…

Even if a student never enters the special education system, the general education teacher, the student’s parents, and the student him- or herself would receive valuable information regarding why there was such a struggle in acquiring academic content, to the point of possibly needing special education Kavale, Holdnack, & Mostert (2005, p. 12)

as syndromes/disorders become more discretely defined, there may be a greater correspondence between diagnoses and treatment

Kratochwill and McGivern's ( 1996 ; p. 351 )

 

Dysphonetic Dyslexia

manner – difficulty sounding out words in a phonological

Surface Dyslexia

in print – difficulty with the rapid and automatic recognition of words 

Mixed Dyslexia

– multiple reading deficits characterized by impaired phonological and orthographic processing skills. It is probably the most severe form of dyslexia. 

Comprehension Deficits

print – the mechanical side of reading is fine but difficulty persists deriving meaning from 

(Ga-Phonetic Coding; Gsm-Memory Span, Working Memory)

 

(Multiple CHC abilities or processes involved; attention and executive functioning)



(Glr-Naming Facility; Gv-Orthographic Processing; Gs-Perceptual Speed; Gc Vocabulary Knowledge) (Gf-Induction, General Sequential Reasoning; Gc- Language Development; attention and executive functioning)

Feifer, S. (2011). How SLD Manifests in Reading Achievement. In Flanagan & Alfonso (Eds), Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Gf Gc Gv Ga Gsm Glr Gs etc

I,RG VL VL LD,MY VM VM VM PC PC

MW

MW MW NA NA OrthP OrthP EF, AC

Criterion DVs Dysphonetic Dyslexia Surface Dyslexia Mixed Dyslexia Comprehension Deficits

= most likely a strong predictor = most likely a moderate predictor = most likely non-significant

Note

: four subtypes from Feifer (2011); identification of IVs from Flanagan; Figure adapted from McGrew (2010)

as syndromes/disorders become more discretely defined, there may be a greater correspondence between diagnoses and treatment

Kratochwill and McGivern's ( 1996 ; p. 351 )

Measures and Processes involved suggested by Flanagan

Measures and Processes involved suggested by Flanagan

Nudging the Field….