cognitive assessment of cld students · (iv) are administered by trained and knowledgeable...

Cognitive Assessment of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students

Gloria Maccow, Ph.D., Assessment Training Consultant

Copyright © 2018. Pearson Education and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. 1

Cognitive

Assessment of

Culturally and

Linguistically

Diverse Students

Gloria Maccow, PhD

Assessment Training Consultant

CLD Students

Disclosure

Financial

Gloria Maccow is employed by Pearson.

Non-Financial

There is no relevant non-financial information to disclose.

Pearson Clinical Assessment is the sponsor of this

presentation and the publisher of the assessments

referenced during the presentation.




CLD Students

Agenda

• List characteristics of CLD

students

• Discuss the importance of

assessing cognitive abilities

• Describe factors to consider

when assessing cognitive

abilities of CLD Students

CLD Students

Terminology

• ESL

• ELL

• CLD

• Linguistically and Culturally Diverse




CLD Students

2014-15: 4.6 million ELL Students in US Schools (9.4% of All Students)

(https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=96)

CLD Students

Spanish is the Home Language of 77.1% of ELL Students

(https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=96)




CLD Students

ELL Students With Disabilities (2014-15)

2014-15

13.8%

13.8%

ELL Students with

Disabilities

4.6 million ELL Students

CLD Students

Agenda


students









CLD Students

Why do we

assess cognitive

abilities?

CLD Students

What We Measure With Intelligence Tests

. . . individual’s ability to understand

the world around him/her and his/her

resourcefulness to cope with its

challenges (Wechsler, 1975).




CLD Students

Identify Educational Needs

• Developmental Delay

• Emotional Disturbance

• Intellectual Disabilities

• Specific Learning Disability

CLD Students

http://braingym.lt/en/what-are-cognitive-skills/




CLD Students

How do we

assess cognitive

abilities?

CLD Students

What Makes a Test Standardized?

In order to determine how a student is performing

a given ability or skill, we must first find out how

his/her peers are doing.




CLD Students


Normative Sample

(people tested)

Norms (the data)

In order to determine how a student is performing

a given ability or skill, we must first find out how

his/her peers are doing.

CLD Students


Once we have collected the data, we can

accurately identify relative strengths and

weaknesses compared to other peers and to

one’s own abilities.

ASSUMPTION

Test takers are similar to

individuals in standardization sample




CLD Students

Accuracy of Results

But what if a child’s general

background experiences differ from

those of the children on whom the

test was standardized?

CLD Students

Agenda


students









CLD Students

IDEA Sec. 300.304 Evaluation Procedures

Assessments and other evaluation materials used to assess a child under

this part—

(i) Are selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a

racial or cultural basis;

(ii) Are provided and administered in the child’s native language or other

mode of communication and in the form most likely to yield accurate

information on what the child knows and can do academically,

developmentally, and functionally, unless it is clearly not feasible to so

provide or administer;

(iii) Are used for the purposes for which the assessments or measures are

valid and reliable;

(iv) Are administered by trained and knowledgeable personnel; and

(v) Are administered in accordance with any instructions provided by the

producer of the assessments.

CLD Students

Main Threats to Test Score Validity for

CLD Students

Acculturative

Knowledge Acquisition

Developmental

Language Proficiency




CLD Students

Cognitive Abilities and Processes

Fluid Reasoning (Gf)

Crystallized Intelligence (Gc)

Visual-Spatial Processing (Gv)

Short-Term Memory (Gsm)

Long-Term Storage and Retrieval (Glr)

Processing Speed (Gs)

Auditory Processing (Ga)

CLD Students

Acculturation




CLD Students

Language Proficiency

Monolingual

Other

Language

Monolingual

English

BilingualLow Mixed

Other

Language/

English

Other

Language

Dominant

English

Dominant

Low Mixed

English/

Other

Language

L1 L2

L1 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2

Continuum of Proficiency

L1 L2 L1 L2 L2

BICS CALP

CLD Students

Methods to Address Test Score Validity for

CLD Learners

Dominant Language Evaluation (L2)

English Language

Assessment


Native Language

Assessment

Modified Methods

Modified or Altered

Assessment

Nonverbal Methods

Language-Reduced

Assessment

Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., & Alfonso, V. C. (2013). Essentials of cross-battery assessment. Wiley.




CLD Students

Correlations Between WPPSI-IV and WIAT-III

WPPSI-IV ScoresWIAT-III Total Achievement

Verbal Comprehension Index (Gc) .74

Visual-Spatial Index (Gv) .68

Fluid Reasoning Index (Gf) .56

Working Memory Index (Gsm) .42

Processing Speed Index (Gs) .42

Full Scale IQ .75

VAI .70

NVI .67

GAI .78

CPI .50

CLD Students

Language-Reduced (Raven’s 2)

Special Group Mean

Matched Control Mean Diff.

pvalue

Standard Diff.

Digital Long Form

ELL 98.9 97.1 -1.71 0.24 -0.13

Digital Short Form

ELL 98.8 96.7 -2.13 0.16 -0.14

Paper Form

ELL 98.8 96.7 -2.13 0.17 -0.15




CLD Students

Summary of Methods

Evaluation Method

Norm sample representative

of bilingual development

Measures full range of ability

constructs

Does not require

bilingual examiner

Adheres to test’s

standardized protocol

Substantial research base on bilingual

performance

Modified or altered environment

X a a X X

Reduced-language testing

X X a a X

Native-language assessment

X a X a X

English-languageassessment

X a a a a


CLD Students

Pattern of Expected Performance for Individuals from Diverse Cultural and Linguistic Backgrounds

Degree of Linguistic Demand

LOW MODERATE HIGH

LOWPERFORMANCE LEAST AFFECTED

INCREASING EFFECT OF LANGUAGE

DIFFERENCE

MODERATE

HIGHINCREASING EFFECT

OF CULTURAL DIFFERENCE

PERFORMANCE MOST AFFECTED

(COMBINED EFFECT OF CULTURAL AND

LANGUAGE DIFFERENCES

De

gre

e o

f C

ult

ura

l Lo

adin

g





CLD Students

English Language Learners and WPPSI-IV

Composite Score ELL Mean

Verbal Comprehension Index (Gc) 87.6

Visual-Spatial Index (Gv) 102.8

Fluid Reasoning Index (Gf) 98.6

Working Memory Index (Gsm) 98.7

Processing Speed Index (Gs) 104.0

Full Scale IQ 95.2

Vocabulary Acquisition 88.5

Nonverbal Index 100.6

General Ability Index 92.5

Cognitive Proficiency Index 102.4

CLD Students

English Language Learners and WPPSI-IV

Subtest Score ELL Mean

Information 7.5

Similarities 8.1

Vocabulary 8.0

Comprehension 6.8

Receptive Vocabulary 8.3

Picture Naming 7.6

Block Design 10.2

Object Assembly 10.7

Subtest Score ELL Mean

Matrix Reasoning 9.7

Picture Concepts 9.8

Picture Memory 9.6

Zoo Locations 10.0

Bug Search 11.3

Cancellation 10.0

Animal Coding 10.0




CLD Students

J. L. Age 5:7

• Born in FL to

parents who

moved to the

US mainland

from Puerto

Rico.

• Attends “La

Iglesia Católica”

within walking

distance from

his home.

• First

educational

experience was

enrollment in K

schoolyear

2017-2018.

• English is

language

spoken in

current school.

• Lives with

parents,

younger sister,

and maternal

grandparents.

• Grandparents

speak Spanish

only; parents

understand

some English,

and speak

Spanish in the

home.

CLD Students

FSIQ and Primary Index Scores

Composite/ Index/Subtest Scaled Score

Composite/ Index/Subtest Scaled Score

Verbal Comprehension 79 Working Memory 97

Information 6 Picture Memory 9

Similarities 6 (Zoo Locations) 10

Visual Spatial 103 Processing Speed 103

Block Design 11 Bug Search 11

Object Assembly 10 (Cancellation) 10

Fluid Reasoning 103

Full Scale IQ = 96

Matrix Reasoning 13

(Picture Concepts) 8




CLD Students

Index-Level Strengths and Weaknesses

Index ScoreComparison

Score Diff.Critical Value

Strength/ Weakness

Base Rate

VCI 79 97.0 -18.0 9.08 W 1%-2%

VSI 103 97.0 6.0 10.87

FRI 103 97.0 6.0 9.57

WMI 97 97.0 0.0 11.27

PSI 103 97.0 6.0 12.76

Comparison score mean derived from the five index scores.

Statistical significance (critical values) at the 0.05 level.

Base rates are reported by ability level.

CLD Students

Index-Level Pairwise Difference Comparisons

Index

Comparison Score1 Score2 Diff.

Critical

Value Sign. Diff.

Base

Rate

VCI-VSI 79 103 -24 11.75 Y 4.7%

VCI-FRI 79 103 -24 10.60 Y 4.2%

VCI-WMI 79 97 -18 12.11 Y 12.1%

VCI-PSI 79 103 -24 13.47 Y 8.6%

VSI-FRI 103 103 0 12.12 N

VSI-WMI 103 97 6 13.46 N

VSI-PSI 103 103 0 14.70 N

FRI-WMI 103 97 6 12.47 N

FRI-PSI 103 103 0 13.79 N

WMI-PSI 97 103 -6 14.99 N




CLD Students

Subtest-Level Strengths and Weaknesses

Subtest Score

Comparison

Score Diff.

Critical

Value

Strength/

Weakness

Base

Rate

IN 6 9.4 -3.4 2.88 W 5%

SI 6 9.4 -3.4 2.34 W 5%-10%

BD 11 9.4 1.6 2.97

OA 10 9.4 0.6 2.88

MR 13 9.4 3.6 2.57 S 2%-5%

PC 8 9.4 -1.4 2.46

PM 9 9.4 -0.4 2.67

ZL 10 9.4 0.6 3.33

BS 11 9.4 1.6 3.42

CA 10 9.4 0.6 3.67

Comparison score mean derived from the ten core subtest scores.


CLD Students

Subtest-Level Pairwise Difference Comparisons

Subtest

Comparison Score1 Score2 Diff.

Critical

Value Sign. Diff.

Base

Rate

IN-SI 6 6 0 2.49 N

BD-OA 11 10 1 3.26 N

MR-PC 13 8 5 2.73 Y 8.5%

PM-ZL 9 10 -1 2.87 N

BS-CA 11 10 1 3.79 N





CLD Students

Index/SubtestComposite/ Scaled Score

Vocabulary Acquisition 78

Receptive Vocabulary 6

Picture Naming 6

Ancillary Analysis

Index/SubtestComposite/Scaled Score

Nonverbal 103

Block Design 11

Matrix Reasoning 13

Bug Search 11

Picture Memory 9

Picture Concepts 8

(Cancellation) (10)

(Zoo Locations) (10)

(Object Assembly) (10)

CLD Students

Recommendations

• Verbal skills emerged are one of his weakest areas

of performance. He will benefit from support with

verbally based tasks and interventions aimed at

strengthening verbal skills.

• Use native-language assessments to identify his

level of knowledge learned from his environment,

his ability to verbalize meaningful concepts, and his

ability to reason with language-based information.




CLD Students

Conclusion

When assessing cognitive abilities of CLD

students, choose a method that will provide

accurate information to address the referral

concerns.



Modified Methods Nonverbal Methods

[email protected]

pearsonclinical.com

cognitive assessment of cld students · (iv) are administered by trained and knowledgeable...

Documents