Transcript INTELLIGENCE TESTING OF INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE BLIND OR


INTELLIGENCE TESTING OF
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE BLIND OR
VISUALLY IMPAIRED:
A Position Paper

Marnee Loftin, MA, TSBVI
Carol Evans, PhD, Davis District, UT
Debbie Willis, MA, APH
July 20, 2012
AER International, Bellevue, WA




1
THE BEGINNING…

APH established a Task Force in Jan.
2007

Asked question of Task Force:

“Do IQ tests provide meaningful information
for individuals with visual impairment?”
2
THE ANSWER…

The Task Force responded that:

“IQ tests can provide meaningful
information to individuals who are blind
and visually impaired, as well as to their
instructors, families, and decision makers.”
3
HOWEVER IT IS IMPORTANT:

“… provided that all tests be administered
in accordance with key points that reflect
the uniqueness of the population, as well
as appropriate cautions.”
4
THE TASK FORCE STARTS:

The Task Force developed a position
paper and key points that reflect:

Appropriate preparation for administration

Cautions in administration

Cautions in interpretation
5
CONTENTS OF POSITION
PAPER CONSIST OF:

PREPARATION

Administration

Specialized Training Needed

Reasons for Evaluation

Collaboration between Disciplines

Eye Conditions and Developmental History
6
(Continued)

ADMINISTRATION

Adaptations

Tactile and Symbolic Representation
7
(Continued)

INTERPRETATION

Qualitative Interpretation

Reporting Results
8
POSITION STATEMENT
When appropriate practices are
followed, cognitive or intelligence
testing of individuals who are
blind or VI provides useful and
valuable information to testtakers, their families, instructors,
and other decision makers.
9
ISSUE 1: ADMINISTERING
INTELLIGENCE TESTS
GUIDELINE: Intelligence test
results yield valuable information
about an individual and increase
the usefulness of the overall
evaluation.
10
PRIOR TO ADMINISTRATION
THE EVALUATOR MUST:

Ensure completion of Functional
Vision/Learning Media Assessment
(FV/LMA) by TVI or O&M Specialist

Understand

… information contained in the FV/LMA and
ways to use it in testing
11
(Continued)

… the impact of adaptations and
modifications upon test results

… the importance of making tests accessible
without changing content assessed or of level
of difficulty

Support of collaborative evaluations for
ensuring the highest quality outcomes
12
ISSUE 2: SPECIALIZED
TRAINING
Guideline 2: Those administering tests
need specialized training in theory of
assessment and test construction as
well as child development and
communication methods of
individuals who are blind and VI
13
Professional Preparation of
Evaluator must include:

Constructs of intelligence

Theory of tests and measurement

Typical and atypical child development

Test administration with general and
special populations

Understanding of collaborative evaluations
14
The Professional Evaluator must:

Accept the concept of collaborative
evaluation

Incorporate expertise of VI professionals
in the evaluation process

Collaborate in all phases from preparation
for testing to report writing
15
ISSUE 3: REASONS FOR
EVALUATION
Guideline: The reason for the
evaluation, and the resulting
specific clinical judgments and
recommendations, should be
clearly documented in each
individual’s report.
16
The Evaluator must:

Request information about specific
reasons for evaluation

Avoid accepting reasons that relate only to
regulations
17
Specificity of these requests will:

Improve test selection

Answer referral questions

Minimize simple reporting of scores

Increase applicability of results
18
The Recommendations should:

Be clear to all stakeholders

Avoid professional jargon

Explain technical terms

Apply to real-life situations and promote
increasing independence and selfadvocacy
19
The Evaluation should not be
used as the sole determinant of:

Cognitive abilities

Presence of additional disabilities

Eligibility for special programs
20
ISSUE 4: COLLABORATION
Guideline: The visual impairment
and/or rehabilitation professional,
classroom teacher, family, and
individual must be involved during
the planning, evaluation, and
report writing process.
21
COLLABORATIVE
EVALUATIONS WILL ALWAYS:

Gather information from all individuals

Actively solicit and discuss information

View collaboration as an on-going process

Reflect the professional expertise of all
22
ISSUE 5: EYE CONDITION AND
DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

Guideline 5: The evaluator should be
aware of the individual’s medical and
developmental history, as well as the
implications of the eye condition on
the tasks to be performed (and
implementation of recommendations).
23
Specific information necessary
includes understanding of:

Medical history

Developmental patterns and relationship
to vision

Early intervention

Congenital vs. Adventitious vision loss

Neurological vs. Ocular vision problems
24
ISSUE 6: ADAPTATIONS
Guidelines: Adaptations, which include
accommodations that do not change the
concepts tested nor the difficulty level of
the test items, should be planned in
advance in collaboration with the visual
impairment and/or rehabilitation
professional and the test developer, and
be well-documented in the final report.
25
ACCOMMODATIONS SHOULD:

Provide access to the test taker

Be planned in advance

Maintain the basic concept and level
of difficulty of items

Be documented in final report
26
ACCOMMODATION OR
MODIFICATION?

Accommodations do not affect basic
concept or level of difficulty, e.g. braille or
LP

Modifications affect basic concept or level
of difficulty, e.g. use of calculator

Either change increases the need for
caution in interpretation of results
27
SYMBOLIC
REPRESENTATIONS
Guideline 7: Symbols, tactile
graphics, and miniature objects
must be carefully considered and
used with caution to represent
pictorial or graphical information.
Real objects should be used
whenever feasible.
28
Visual stimuli must be carefully
analyzed to determine

Relevance to the concept being assessed

Stimuli that can be made accessible


Any changes or eliminations
Appropriate use of miniature objects if
familiarity with both the real object and the
miniature is ensured
29
ISSUE 8: DIRECT
OBSERVATION
Guideline: The assessment
should include direct
observation in multiple
situations.
30
Suggested behaviors for
observation include:

Visual efficiency

Visual fatigue

Organizational abilities required in
problem-solving

Application of O&M skills in new
environments

Presence of self-stimulatory behaviors
31
Additional information should
include:

Social integration with peers

Independent initiation of activities

Organization of tasks for successful
management and completion

Self-advocacy skills

Self-management of technology
32
ISSUE 9: QUALITATIVE
INTERPRETATION
Guideline: When visual-spatial items or tests are
administered, these results should be used only
for clinical purposes and to identify appropriate
modifications of educational or vocational
materials and instructional methods. Results
obtained from visual-spatial evaluations must
never be reported as scores or used to
determine the presence of other disabilities.
Important exceptions to this guideline exist, and
are documented below.
33
Visual-Spatial items or tests may
be administered if:

The individual uses vision for learning

The FV and LMA support the presence of
adequate vision for specific items

Both the VI professional and Evaluator
agree that results provide meaningful
information AND support the referral
question
34
Accommodations made to VisualSpatial items/test must be:

Supported by the FV/LMA

Endorsed by both vision professional and
evaluator

Noted in the final report

Include such things as extended time and
use of CCTV during administration
35
Results of performance on VisualSpatial items or tests should be:

Reported qualitatively rather than as
a score

Used as a source to determine
learning strengths

Used to plan meaningful
accommodations in different
environments
36
ISSUE 10: REPORTING
RESULTS
Guideline: Reports of assessments of
individuals with visual impairments
need to be expanded to include an
explanation of the procedures
followed, changes in standardized
administration, and the description of
performance observed.
37
GENERAL CAUTIONS
All reports should reflect that tests
represent an estimate of abilities
Standardization of most-frequentlyadministered tests did not include
persons with visual impairments
38
Test results should be reported
with the Evaluator specifying:

Intervals around the obtained score as well as
specific score

Confidence intervals at 90% level

Specific concerns relating to validity of scores

Any adaptations in procedures and/or materials

Lack of norms for individuals who are blind or
visually impaired and corresponding cautions

Accommodations to provide access are
specified
39
REPORTING RESULTS OF
VISUAL SPATIAL TESTS
Extreme caution must be used in reporting
scores on visual spatial tests
Generally these must be reported
qualitatively, i.e. as strengths and
weaknesses, with implications for
materials and instruction
40
Further Information:

www.aph.org/tests/intelligencetesting.html

Marnee Loftin [email protected] or
[email protected]

Carol Evans [email protected] or
[email protected]

Debbie Willis [email protected]
41