comprehensive, efficient, & precise: using a core ... · the core-selective evaluation process...

GreatIdeasConvention2016LearningLab

Comprehensive,Efficient,&Precise:UsingACoreSelective-EvaluationProcess(C-SEP)withtheWJIV

BatteryofTeststoIdentifySLD

TammyStephensPhD,HMH/RiversideEdwardSchultzPhD,MidwesternStateUniversity

12/4/2015

1

Core-Selective Process (C-SEP):

Using the WJ IV to Efficiently and Comprehensively Diagnose

Specific Learning Disabilities

Tammy L. Stephens, Ph.D. Account Executive, Riverside/HMH

Edward K. Schultz, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Midwestern State University

Stephens & Schultz, 2016 (TCASE 2016)

Agenda

• Welcome and Introductions

• History of SLD Identifications (Pros & Cons)

• Legal Considerations

• Core Selective Evaluation Process (C-SEP)

• WJ IV Core Tests

• Diagnostic Precision & Cognitive Complexity

• Case Study


Description

• Texas Educational Diagnosticians and LSSPs have been using CHC theory-based assessment as one of the methods since the movement away from the discrepancy models.

• Advances in both CHC Theory and in test design, specifically the WJ IV Battery of Tests, has led to greater efficiency in the testing process as well as improved diagnostic precision.

• This session will demonstrate how to use the WJ IV using the Core-Selective Evaluation Process (C-SEP), yielding diagnostically useful information in less time.


12/4/2015

2

The Participant Will be Able to…..

• Understand and apply the lessons from the last decade regarding SLD identification

• Interpret test data using a variety of statistically sound techniques.

• Increase diagnostic precision using the Core-Selective Evaluation Process (C-SEP)

• Identify SLD using single-batteries by interpreting results using the norms and scoring software created for the test, specifically the WJ IV.


Current Practice

• The Texas regulations allow several options to school districts to develop local policy in order to identify SLD including IQ/Achievement approaches, RTI, cross battery approaches (XBA), processing approaches, and integrated models such as RTI/XBA.

• Each of these methods have features that help answer complex referral questions, however each of these methods have disadvantages related to comprehensiveness, efficiency, precision, and legal ramifications.


Pros of Discrepancy Approaches

• Easy to apply and arguably efficient

• Simple to understand & interpret

• Consistency across interpretations

• Administratively/Legally Appealing due to quantifiable scores and cuts


12/4/2015

3

Cons of the Discrepancy Approaches

• IQ/Achievement discrepancy lacks comprehensiveness and precision.

• Overreliance on the standard scores, assessment does not inform intervention, and under- identifies students with low-average IQs and over-identifies students with high IQs.

• Potential for rigid adherence to cut-scores.


Pros of Cross-Battery Approaches

• Useful when using single batteries that do not sufficiently measure theory-based constructs (e.g., CHC factors)

• Results inform intervention.

• Comprehensive and flexible

• Useful for ELLs and identify students with low or lower IQs.

• Theory-Driven


Cons of Cross-Battery Approaches

• Contrived norms utilized instead of actual test norm samples (precise) for interpretation

• Complicated-time consuming pg. 361 (XBASS)

• Inconsistency in professional development resulting in varying degrees of implementation

• Transferring scores from single-batteries such as the WJ IV to XBA software impacts precision by replacing actual norms with contrived norms.

• Necessity and efficiency of inputting scores in two different places is in question (potential for error)


12/4/2015

4

Cons of Cross-Battery Approaches

• Misinterpretation/disregarding of scores (divergent scores). P. 192

• Global ability is now “relevant” for Dual-Discrepancy PSW Analysis –subject to misuse to get 3 “yes’s

• Over-emphasis on mathematical formulas using standard scores and less on clinical judgment.


Core-Selective Evaluation Process (C-SEP)

• The Core-Selective Evaluation Process to identify specific learning disabilities (SLD) is an efficiently focused, data-driven professional judgment process rooted in contemporary CHC theory.

• Specifically, using a single-battery (WJ IV core battery of tests from the cognitive, achievement and oral language) as a foundation of the evaluation, integrated with current policy and practice, the most salient features of SLD are assessed in order to comprehensively and efficiently describe an individual’s unique pattern of strengths and weaknesses.


Pros of Using C-SEP Model the WJ IV

• Efficient. (power to accomplish something)-more cognitively complex measures makes testing more robust yet efficient.

• Comprehensive. Comprehensively-measures the most salient features of SLD (language)

• Precise.-use of actual norms

• Diagnostic. Ability to go into greater depth. New narrow-beyond CHC


12/4/2015

5

Pros of C-SEP Model Using the WJ IV

• One-step scoring –no transferring

• Beyond Standard Scores-RPI’s, CALP, etc.

• PSW analysis using actual norms, GIA

• Intra-individual differences (COG, ACH, OL)

• OL as a predictor

• Scholastic APT Cluster

• Gf-Gc

• Oral Expression, Listening Comp are directly measured.


Legal Considerations

• Tests should be used for the purposes for which they were published.

• Interpretation should be conducted using the actual test norms UNLESS crossing batteries is necessary.

• Varying levels of expertise in using more complex eligibility models (e.g., XBA) results in inability to explain results.


Legal Guidelines

• Specific Learning Disability:

…Means a DISORDER in one or more basic psychological processes, involved in understanding or in using LANGUAGE, either written or SPOKEN, which may manifest itself in an imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations….


12/4/2015

6

Step 1: Measure Psychological Processes (CORE 7)

• Administer the WJ IV Cognitive CORE 7 and

analyze the student’s performance.

• If one of the G’s is not average or above average, further exploration IS warranted through the utilization of selective testing procedures.


Step 2: Measure Language (CORE 4)

• ….. or in using LANGUAGE, either written or SPOKEN, and which may manifest itself in an imperfect ability to listen, think, speak…. (core 4)

• Comprehension-Knowledge (Gc) – Picture Vocabulary and Oral Comprehension (primarily)

• Auditory Processing (Ga) – Segmentation

• Cognitive Processing Speed (Gs) and (Glr) – Rapid Picture Naming


Step 3: Measure Academics

• Get a focused referral question

• Core or Selective

• Cautions concerning Achievement Tests

– Curriculum differences

– Standard Scores can be misleading

– Limited number of item (avg. 3 per grade)


12/4/2015

7

Step 4: Use Integrated Data Analysis Procedures to Identify PSWs

• Regulations and Research

• Profile Analysis

• Multiple lenses


WJ IV & C-SEP Model

“It is a delight to see the level of leadership and practical solutions Dr Schultz and Stephens have brought to contemporary evaluation practices. The C-SEP model parallels one of the author’s team design objectives of the WJ IV.” - Dr. Fred

Schrank, author of the WJ IV


The Woodcock-Johnson® IV Assessments

• Tests of Cognitive

Abilities

• Tests of Achievement

Forms A, B, and C

• NEW! Tests of Oral

Language

Three batteries are co-

normed. Stephens & Schultz, 2016 (TCASE 2016)

12/4/2015

8

Organization of the WJ IV

WJ IV

Cognitive Achievement Oral Language

Standard Extended Standard Extended Standard

Battery Battery Battery Battery Battery

A

B

C

10 tests 8 tests 11 tests 9 tests 12 tests

7 clusters 10 clusters 15 clusters 7 clusters 9 clusters


WJ IV & C-SEP Model

• The organization of the WJ IV tests fit nicely

into a C-SEP model of SLD Determination

• Provides a core set of tests in each battery

Cognitive: Tests 1–7

Achievement: Tests 1–6

Oral Language: Tests 1–4

• Most cognitively complex and ecologically valid tests in each battery

• Increases ease and flexibility of use


Summary

• The updated WJ IV Tests are more cognitively complex and ecologically valid resulting in a more robust and efficient test instrument.

• Core-Selective Evaluation Process (C-SEP) provides an efficient and comprehensive SLD eligibility model while utilizing the robustness of the WJ IV tests.

• Legal implications exist when evaluators neglect to interpret test scores using the actual test norms and scoring system; instead, they are manipulated and entered into a third-party software program (e.g., contrived norms & increased error rate)


12/4/2015

9

Tammy L. Stephens, Ph.D.

Account Executive, Riverside/HMH

[email protected]

Edward K. Schultz, Ph.D.

Associate Professor, Midwestern State University

[email protected]

Contacts


mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Comprehensive,Efficient,&Precise:UsingaCoreSelective-EvaluationProcess(C-SEP)withtheWJIVBatteryofTeststoIdentifySLD

TammyL.Stephens,Ph.D.&EdwardK.Schultz,Ph.D.

Inthelastdecade,schooldistrictsacrossTexashavebeenutilizingseveralmethodsforidentifyingspecificlearningdisabilities(SLD)includingdiscrepancymodels,patternsofstrengthsandweaknessesapproaches(PSW),andintegratedRTIprocesses.Manyofthesemethodshaveresultedinlegalimplications,theovertestingofstudents,andthemisuseofstandardizedtests.ThispresentationwillintroduceanewmethodologyofSLDevaluation,theCore-SelectiveEvaluationProcess(C-SEP).TheC-SEPmodelisatime-efficient,comprehensiveassessmentprocessthatallowseducatorstomakediagnosticallyprecisedecisionswithinanySLDidentificationframework.Finally,thepresenterswilldemonstratehowtousetheC-SEPmodelwiththerecentlyrevisedWJIVwhilepinpointinguniquescoringfeaturesoftheWJIVbatteryoftests.

Afterattendingthispresentation,participantswillbeableto:

• UsetheC-SEPapproachwithRTI,PSW,andDiscrepancyapproaches.• IdentifytheCoreTestswithineachbattery,• DescribetheCore-SelectiveEvaluationProcess(C-SEP)usingtheWJIVCognitive,

Achievement,andOralLanguage.• UtilizetheCore-SelectiveEvaluationProcess(C-SEP)withtheWJIVtoidentify

patternsofstrengthsandweaknesses.• ComprehensivelymeasurethesalientfeaturesofSLDinamoreefficient,focused,

anddiagnosticallymanner.

Agenda

• ReviewthevariousmethodsofSLDidentificationo Discrepancy,Response-to-Intervention,PatternsofStrengths&Weaknesseso DiscusslegalconsequencesofvariousSLDidentificationmethods

• IdentifySLDusingsinglebatteries(SpecificallytheWJIV)• IntroduceanddescribetheCore-SelectiveEvaluationProcess(C-SEP)usingtheWJ

IVCognitive,Achievement,andOralLanguagewhilehighlightingbenefits• IntroducetheCoretestsfortheWJIVCognitive,Achievement,andOralLanguage• UtilizetheCore-SelectiveEvaluationProcess(C-SEP)withtheWJIVtoidentify

patternsofstrengthsandweaknesses.• DemonstrateusingtheC-SEPapproachtocomprehensivelymeasurethesalient

featuresofSLDinamoreefficient,focused,anddiagnosticallymanner.

comprehensive, efficient, & precise: using a core ... · the core-selective evaluation process...

Documents