bridging the achievement gap - pearson...

Bridging the Achievement Gap: Allie’s Story

Gloria Maccow, Ph.D., Assessment Training Consultant

Copyright © 2015. Pearson, Inc., and or its affiliates. All rights reserved. 1

Bridging the Achievement Gap:

Allie’s Story

Gloria Maccow, Ph.D.

Assessment Training Consultant

Copyright © 2015. Pearson Inc., and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.

Objectives

Analyze test results to determine

– why Allie has not responded to reading

interventions;

– if Allie has a Specific Reading Disability

(Dyslexia); and

– what interventions are needed to improve Allie’s

academic performance.

2 | Copyright © 2013. All rights reserved.





Reason for Referral

• Allie was referred by her mother for a psycho-

educational evaluation due to academic concerns

regarding the development of her reading and

spelling skills.

• Allie’s mother and teachers described weaknesses

in decoding skills, building a sight word vocabulary,

reading accuracy and fluency, and spelling skills.

• This evaluation was completed for the purpose of

diagnosis and treatment planning.


Who is Allie?

recently

completed

4th grade

intellectually

curious,

responsible,

creative,

hardworking,

compassionate,

sociable

enjoys

horseback

riding and

fashion

easily

distracted by

sounds

adopted from

Russian

orphanage at

age 11

months

needs

supervision

for homework

assignments





Allie’s Reading


Reading Specialist Mother Allie

Struggles with

• sound-symbol

associations

• pronouncing new or

unfamiliar words

• with oral reading

accuracy and rate

• spelling

• writing letters quickly

• copying from board

• using good grammar and

mechanics in writing

• Allie guesses

words based on

the first few

letters

• Transposes

words within

sentences.

• Substitutes

words to make

sense with how

she is reading

the sentence.

• Reading is

difficult.

• Words “bunch up”

on the page.

• Embarrassed

when asked to

read aloud in

class because she

reads slowly.


Previous Evaluations


Evaluation 1 Evaluation 2

Brief Intelligence Test SS=126

Average scores for

– phonological processing

– decoding

– oral reading fluency

– reading comprehension

Normative weakness in

– spelling

– decoding fluency

– oral reading fluency Weaknesses in spelling and handwriting

DNQ for special education services

Recommended diagnosis of

reading disorder (dyslexia)





Hypotheses

How does our knowledge of reading and

readers help us to generate hypotheses?

Good Readers Struggling Readers

Reading Disability


Three Types of Struggling Readers

Nonspecific Reading Disability

(Hyperlexia)

“Garden Variety” poor readers

Specific Reading

Disability

(Dyslexia)

Deficient

Decoding

Comprehension

Deficient

Adequate

Adequate





What is Dyslexia?

• Specific learning disability

• Neurological in origin

• Characterized by difficulties with

– accurate and/or fluent word recognition and by

– poor spelling, and

– poor decoding abilities.

(IDA; Adopted by the Board of Directors: November 12, 2002)


What is Dyslexia?

• Difficulties typically result from a deficit in the

phonological component of language

• Difficulties are often unexpected in relation to other

cognitive abilities and the provision of effective

classroom instruction.

• Secondary consequences may include problems in

reading comprehension and reduced reading experience

that can impede growth of vocabulary and background

knowledge.

(IDA; Adopted by the Board of Directors: November 12, 2002)





Hypotheses

What are our hypotheses about

Allie’s reading skills?

Allie is struggling with

grade-level reading

comprehension

Reading comprehension

difficulties are secondary to

decoding difficulties


Assessment Questions

• Is Allie learning at a slower rate than her

classmates?

• Is her achievement unexpected relative to her

cognitive abilities?

• Which cognitive abilities are related to identified

under-achievement?

• Which assessment instruments will help you

answer your questions?




Sensory-Motor Functions Attentional Processes

Executive Functions

Memory and Learning Processes

Language Processes Visual-Spatial Processes

Speed and Efficiency of Cognitive Processing

Overall Cognitive Functioning and Academic Achievement

Social-Emotional, Cultural, Environmental, and Situational Factors

Learning – A Multi-Factorial Process (Miller, 2007)


Selecting a Battery of Tests

What are the research-supported

cognitive abilities that underlie

performance of specific academic skills?





Reading-Related Processes

Contributing Processes

• Phonological Processing

• Rapid Naming

• Visual-Spatial Abilities

• Language Comprehension

• Auditory Working Memory

• Executive Functions

• Fine-Motor Skills


Math-Related Processes

Contributing Processes

• Attention

• Executive Functions

• Language Comprehension

• Visual-Spatial Processing

• Working Memory





Assessment Instruments

• Beery-Buktenica

Developmental Test of

Visual-Motor Integration,

Sixth Edition

• Clinical Evaluation of

Language Fundamentals,

Fifth Edition

• Kaufman Test of Educational

Achievement, Third Edition

• Wechsler Intelligence Scale

for Children, Fifth Edition

• NEPSY: A Developmental

Neuropsychological

Assessment, Second Edition

– selected subtests

• Process Assessment of the

Learner, Second Edition –

selected subtests

• Wechsler Individual

Achievement Test, Third

Edition – selected subtests


Cognitive Abilities

• Does Allie’s general cognitive ability

indicate she is capable of learning at the

expected rate?

• Are there intra-individual cognitive

strengths and weaknesses?




WISC-V Index/Subtest Standard Score/

Scaled Score

Percentile

Rank Classification

Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) 100 50 Average

Verbal Comprehension Index 100 50 Average

Similarities 8 25

Vocabulary 12 75

Visual Spatial Index 97 42 Average

Block Design 8 25

Visual Puzzles 11 63

Fluid Reasoning Index 109 73 Average

Matrix Reasoning 11 63

Figure Weights 12 75

Working Memory Index 94 34 Average

Digit Span 7 16

Picture Span 11 63

Processing Speed Index 111 77 High Average

Coding 12 75

Symbol Search 12 75



Comparing Score Differences





Comparing Score Differences


Visual-Motor Integration

Test/Subtest Standard Score Percentile Rank

Beery VMI 86 18

KTEA-3 Writing Fluency 79 8




Ancillary Indexes


Scaled Score

Percentile

Rank Classification

General Ability Index 101 53 Average

Cognitive Proficiency Index 104 61 Average


8 8

11

12

12

51

7

12

12

11

42

Ancillary Indexes


Scaled Score

Percentile

Rank Classification

Quantitative Reasoning Index 103 58 Average

Figure Weights 12 75

Arithmetic 9 37

Auditory Working Memory

Index

89 23 Low Average

Digit Span 7 16

Digit Span Forward 6 9

Digit Span Backward 8 25

Digit Span Sequencing 9 37

Letter-Number Sequencing 9 37






Attention/Executive Functioning

Subtest Scaled Score Percentile Rank

NEPSY-II Animal Sorting 14 91

NEPSY-II Auditory Attention

and Response Set

Auditory Attention 7 16

Response Set 8 25

Rapid Automatic Naming and Visual-Verbal Associative Learning


Scaled Score

Percentile

Rank Classification

Naming Speed Index 111 77 High Average

Naming Speed Literacy 113 81

Naming Speed Quantity 106 66

Symbol Translation Index 99 47 Average

Immediate Symbol Translation 102 55

Delayed Symbol Translation 97 42

Recognition Symbol

Translation

101 53

Storage & Retrieval Index 107 68 Average


Subtest Standard Score Percentile

KTEA-3 Letter Naming Facility 104 61





Cognitive Abilities

Relative Strengths

Ability to abstract conceptual information from visual details and to effectively apply that knowledge using visual-perceptual integration.

Ability to rapidly identify visual information, make quick and accurate decisions, and rapidly implement those decisions.

Good breadth of word knowledge.


Cognitive Abilities

Relative Weaknesses

Some aspects of verbal concept formation, cognitive

flexibility, and/or associative and categorical thinking.

Visual-motor skills relative to overall visual-perceptual and

spatial reasoning ability.

Can best utilize working memory in problem solving when a

visual rather than oral stimulus is used, or when the mode

of response requires recognition rather than free recall.





Academic Achievement

• Are there deficits in academic skills?

• If yes, in which areas?

• What are the underlying causes of any

identified skill deficits?


Academic Skills

Composite/Subtests Standard Score

(Mean=100) Percentile

Rank

Reading 88 21

Letter-Word Recognition 88 21

Reading Comprehension 92 30

Written Language 86 18

Written Expression 90 25

Spelling 84 14

Math 92 30

Math Concepts & Applications 92 30

Math Computation 95 37





Reading Comprehension

• Is Allie struggling with grade-level demands in

reading comprehension? If yes,

• Is the weakness in reading comprehension due

to weaknesses in

– language comprehension?

– vocabulary

– decoding



Composite/Subtest Standard

Score

Percentile

Rank

KTEA-3 Reading Understanding


Reading Vocabulary

87

92

86

19

30

18





Receptive Language

Composite/Subtest Standard Score Percentile

Rank

90% Confidence

Interval

KTEA-3 Listening

Comprehension

108

70 99-117

CELF-5 Receptive

Language Index 95 37 90-100

Word Classes 9 37

Following Directions 11 63

Semantic Relationships 8 25


Vocabulary

Subtest Scaled Score Percentile

WISC-V Vocabulary 12 75

Subtest Standard Score Percentile

KTEA-3 Reading

Vocabulary 86 18





Fluency


Score

Percentile

Rank

KTEA-3 Reading Fluency Composite 83 13

Silent Reading Fluency 94 34

Word Recognition Fluency 84 14

Decoding Fluency 79 8

WIAT-III Oral Reading Fluency Subtest 78 7

KTEA-3 Oral Fluency Composite 105 63

Associational Fluency 110 75

Object Naming Facility 99 47


Decoding


Score

Percentile

Rank

KTEA-3 Decoding Composite

Letter & Word Recognition Subtest

80

88

9

21

Nonsense Word Decoding Subtest 75 5





Written Expression


Score

Percentile

Rank

KTEA-3 Expression Composite

Written Expression Subtest

85

90

16

25

Oral Expression Subtest 85 16


Spelling and Orthographic Processing


Score

Percentile

Rank

KTEA-3 Orthographic Processing Composite 87 19

Spelling Subtest 84 14

Letter Naming Facility Subtest 104 61

Word Recognition Fluency Subtest 84 14

Subtest Scaled Score Percentile Rank

PAL-II Word Choice

Accuracy 12 75

Fluency 12 75

PAL-II Expressive Coding 6 9





Math

Subtest Standard

Score

Percentile

Rank

KTEA-3 Math Concepts & Applications 92 30

KTEA-3 Math Computation 95 37

KTEA-3 Math Fluency 95 37


Ability and Achievement

• Is Allie’s academic achievement within the

expected range given her cognitive

abilities?

• Do the test results support a diagnosis of

Specific Reading Disability (Dyslexia)?






Ability and Achievement

Which cognitive factors might explain her

under-achievement?





Cognitive Hypothesis Testing


Processing Strength WISC-V Fluid Reasoning Index

SS = 109

B. Discrepant? Yes/No

A. Discrepant? Yes/No

Processing Weakness WISC-V Auditory Working Memory

Index SS = 89

Achievement Weakness KTEA-3 Decoding Composite

SS = 80

Cognitive Hypothesis Testing (PSW Analysis)





Processing Strength WISC-V Fluid Reasoning Index

SS = 109

B. Discrepant? Yes/No

A. Discrepant? Yes/No

Processing Weakness WISC-V Auditory Working Memory

Index SS = 89

Achievement Weakness KTEA-3 Reading Fluency

Composite SS = 83

Cognitive Hypothesis Testing (PSW Analysis)


Written Language Problems and the Three Word Forms (Berninger, 2003)

Differential

Diagnosis





Dyslexia?

Allie’s achievement in reading comprehension is

lower than expected given her ability to learn. The

comprehension difficulties are secondary to

weaknesses in decoding. She evidenced

– difficulties with accurate and fluent word recognition

– poor spelling, and

– poor decoding abilities.


Subtypes of Specific (Reading) LD

Phonological/Dysphonetic Subtype

Orthographic/Surface/Dyseidetic Subtype

• Unable to use a phonological route to bridge letters and sounds.

• Frequently guesses words based on initial letter.

• Over-relies on visual and orthographic cues to identify words in print.

• Tends to memorize whole words because of poor decoding strategies.

• Unable to automatically, effortlessly recognize printed words.

• Read letter-by-letter and sound-by-sound.

• Struggle to name words with non-predictable patterns – e.g., island = izland.

• Fluency is adversely affected.

(Feifer & De Fina, 2000)





Subtypes of Specific (Reading) LD

Mixed Subtype

• Most severe type of RD.

• No usable key to unlock the functional code of literacy.

• Has difficulty across the language spectrum – poor phonological processing, slow rapid and automatic word recognition, inconsistent language comprehension.

(Feifer & De Fina, 2000)


Profiles of Subtypes

Hallmark Skills and Abilities Phon. Ortho. Mixed Comp

Comp-Fluency Language Global

Cognitive ability S S S S S S W

Phonological processing W S W S S

RAN S W

Nonword reading W W S S W

Word recognition W W S S W W

Orthographic coding S W W W

Listening comprehension S S S W W W

Reading comprehension W W W W

Oral grammar W

Spelling W W W

Reading fluency W W W S W W

W

W

S

Intervention Tool for LD Subtypes





Interventions

What can we do to improve Allie’s

achievement when she enters grade 5?


General Approach

• Present information visually as opposed to

aurally to improve Allie’s working memory

functioning. Recognize that tasks that require

visual-motor integration may be challenging for

her.

• Shorten the amount of spoken information given

at one time and supplement aural information

with visual reminders.





General Approach

• Utilize and build upon Allie’s strong oral vocabulary,

intellectual curiosity, and attention to visual detail when

addressing her areas of weakness.

• Select a wide variety of texts that cover many different subject

areas. Encourage reading for different purposes, such as

learning, entertainment, and communication with others.

• Plan writing assignments with a variety of different purposes

and audiences in mind. Incorporate visual nonverbal stimuli

into instruction, such as writing descriptive essays about

pictures, settings, or experiences and tracking her progress

on simple line graphs or charts.


General Approach

Minimize distractions during learning activities.

Consider preferential seating arrangements away

from auditory distractions (e.g., doors opening and

closing, air conditioning units).






• Allie’s language comprehension skills are generally

strong, but weaknesses in word recognition and

decoding sometimes interfere with her reading

comprehension.

• Instruction should help Allie monitor her own reading

comprehension and teach strategies for resolving

comprehension problems and determining the meaning

of unknown words.

• Incorporate silent reading activities as well; for example,

she might be asked to silently read three sentences and

choose the one that makes sense.


Reading Fluency

• Instruction should aim to improve Allie’s reading speed

and accuracy at the level of the word, phrase, sentence,

and paragraph.

• Provide Allie with practice reading phrase cards with the

goal of improving how quickly she can read all

accurately. Each card should have a phrase, such as

“jumping over her fence” or “walked across the street.”

• Also practice reading sentences that contain those

phrases (e.g., “The dogs jumped on the chair”) and vary

the sentences (e.g., “The dogs are jumping on the chair”

and “The dog jumps on a chair”).





Written Expression

• Provide grammar instruction that improves

communication ability in both oral and written

language by incorporating listening, speaking,

reading, and writing activities.

• Provide tasks that require both receptive (e.g.,

which one is correct?) and expressive (e.g.,

say/write a sentence using this word) modes of

response.


Writing Fluency

• Encourage writing by hand to improve writing

fluency. Emphasize legibility and good form, not

necessarily perfect penmanship.

• Reinforce the goal of writing as effective

communication. Consider whether modified writing

tools, such as a triangle pencil or pencil grip, or

writing on a slightly inclined surface may be helpful.

• Allow extra time on writing tests and assignments, if

needed.





Language Arts

• Weave reading, spelling, and vocabulary

instruction together, so each one builds upon the

other.

• Maintain a focus on comprehension and

meaning when reading and spelling new words.

• Also incorporate phonological, orthographic,

morphological, syntactic, and pragmatic layers of

word knowledge.


Orthographic Coding

• To improve visual inspection of words (orthographic

coding), ask Allie to find a target word among

orthographically similar words (e.g., pedestrian:

pedstrian, pedestrian, pedestrien, pedestrin).

• This can also be done under timed conditions to

track speed of visual processing.

• Include distractors with misspellings in the medial

and final letter positions, where Allie makes most of

her reading errors.





Math

• Provide explicit, systematic instruction,

especially in the areas of algebra,

fractions, and time and money.

• Teach explicitly the vocabulary and

language that is used during math

instruction (as well as in science and other

subject areas).


Additional Interventions

For additional recommendations for

interventions, see the case study







Resources

Berninger, V. W. (2007). PAL-II user’s guide. San

Antonio, TX: Pearson.

Feifer, S. G., & De Fina, P. A. (2000). The

neuropsychology of reading disorders: Diagnosis and

intervention workbook. Middletown, MD: School

Neuropsych Press, LLC.

Hale, J. B., & Fiorello, C. A. (2004). School

neuropsychology: A practitioner’s handbook. New York:

Guilford.



Resources

Joseph, L. M. (2006). Assessing, understanding, and

intervening on reading problems. Bethesda, MD: National

Association of School Psychologists.

Miller, D. C. (2007). Essentials of school neuropsychological

assessment. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

(2nd ed. June 2003). Report of the National Reading Panel.

Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of

the scientific research literature on reading and its implications

for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769).

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.






Resources

Shaywitz, S. (2003). Overcoming dyslexia: A new and

complete science-based program for reading problems at

any level. New York: Vintage Books.

Wolf, M., & Bowers, P. G. (1999). The double-deficit

hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 91, 415–438.

Customer Service 1-800-627-7271 (USA)

1-866-335-8418 (Canada)

Comments or Questions Gloria Maccow, Ph.D.

[email protected]

www.psychcorp.com

www.pearsonassess.ca

bridging the achievement gap - pearson...

Documents