elizabeth o. lichtenberger, ph.d. [email protected] kabc-ii advanced interpretation casp...

Elizabeth O. Lichtenberger, Ph.D.

[email protected]

KABC-II Advanced Interpretation

CASP Annual Conference – February 18, 2006

©2005 E. O. Lichtenberger. All Rights Reserved

Overview• Theoretical Foundations of KABC-II• Review of the Scales• Step-by-Step Interpretation

– With integrated Case Studies

• Integrating KTEA-II into Interpretation– CHC & Luria Interpretations

• Integrating QIs into Interpretation• Using a Cross Battery Approach


Theoretical Foundations


Dual Theoretical Foundation

Luria TermLearning Ability

Sequential Processing

Simultaneous Processing

Planning Ability

Mental Processing

Index (MPI)

CHC TermLong-Term Storage & Retrieval (Glr)

Short-Term Memory (Gsm)

Fluid-Crystallized

Index (FCI)

KABC-II ScaleLearning/Glr

Sequential/Gsm

Simultaneous/Gv

Name of

Planning/Gf

Knowledge/GcCrystallized Ability (Gc)

Fluid Reasoning (Gf)

Visual Processing (Gv)


Stratum III: General ability is measured by the KABC-II

Fluid-Crystallized Index (FCI)

Stratum II: Broad

abilities are measured by KABC-II Scales

GlrLong-Term

Storage &Retrieval

GlrLong-Term

Storage &Retrieval

g

GsmShort-Term

Memory

GvVisual

Process-ing

GfFluid

Reason-ing

GcCrystal-

lizedAbility

CHC Theory Applied to KABC-II


Stratum I: Narrow Abilities—Blue abilities are measured by the KABC II Subtests

Associative Memory

LearningAbilities

Free RecallMemory

IdeationalFluency

Originality/Creativity

LexicalKnowledge

General Information

LanguageDevelopment

ListeningAbility

InformationAbout Culture

Induction

GeneralSequentialReasoning

QuantitativeReasoning

VisualMemory

SpatialRelations

Visualization

SpatialScanning

ClosureSpeed

Memory Span

WorkingMemory

GlrGlr GsmGsm GvGv GfGf GcGc


Abilities Not Measured by KABC-II

• Auditory Processing (Ga)

• Processing Speed (Gs)

• Reaction Time/Decision Speed (Gt)

• Reading & Writing (Grw)

• Quantitative Ability (Gq)

Achievement (Measured by

KTEA-II)

Not Sufficiently

Complex


Luria Theory Applied to KABC-II

Block 1 Maintai

ns Attentio

n

Block 2 Codes & Stores

Information

Block 3 Plans &

Organizes

Behavior

Planning/Gf

Sequential/Gsm

Simultaneous/Gv

Learning/Glr


Mediates attention and concentration.Allows focus of attention.

Regulates energy level and tone of cerebral cortex.

Recognizes significance of incoming stimuli.Allows receiving and processing of information.

Block 1—Maintains Arousal


Block 2—Codes & Stores Information

Establishes connections with Block 3.Integrates incoming sensory information.

Analyzes, codes, and stores incoming information via the senses.

Uses successive and simultaneous processing.


Block 3—Plans & Organizes Behavior

Involves decision making, generating hypotheses, planning, self-monitoring, and programming.

Concerned with overall efficiency of brain functions, and is involved in all complex behavior.

Though not directly involved with motor or speech functions, it represents the output or response

center of the brain.


Selecting the Model: Guidelines for

Administration vs. Interpretation


Selecting the Model: Guidelines for Administration

• Selection must be made before administering the KABC-II and should consider reasons for referral.

• The CHC model is given priority because Knowledge/Gc is an important aspect of cognitive functioning.

• The Luria model is preferred when the validity of the global composite would be compromised by including acquired knowledge.

• Models are selected primarily with “fairness” in mind.


Selecting the Model:Interpretation Based on Either Theory

Interpretation may be based on either theory, irrespective of which model was administered.

Administration Interpretation

Luria Model Luria or CHC

CHC Model CHC or Luria


Review of the Five Scales


Taking in and holding information, and then using it within a few seconds.

Sequential/GsmShort-Term Memory

6 – 3

2 – 5 – 9 – 4

8 – 9 – 3 – 5 – 2 – 10

Say these numbers just as I do.

Number RecallSequential/Gsm


Perceiving, storing, manipulating, and thinking with visual patterns.

Simultaneous/GvVisual Processing

Block CountingSimultaneous/Gv


Storing and efficiently retrieving newly-learned or previously learned information.

Learning/GlrLong-Term Retrieval

AtlantisLearning/Glr


Solving novel problems by using reasoning abilities such as induction and deduction.

Planning/GfFluid Reasoning

Pattern Reasoning Planning/Gf


Demonstrating the breadth and depth of knowledge acquired from one’s culture.

Knowledge/GcNot in Luria Model

Verbal Knowledge Knowledge/Gc


KABC-II Core Battery - Age 3

AtlantisWord OrderTrianglesConceptual ThinkingFace Recognition-----------------------------RiddlesExpressive Vocabulary

MPI or FCI composites only

Lu

ria

CH

C


KABC-II Core Battery - Ages 4-6

RiddlesExpressive Vocabulary



Knowledge/Gc

Planning/Gf

TrianglesConcept ThinkingPattern ReasoningRover

Triangles

Concept Thinking

Pattern Reasoning

Triangles

Concept Thinking

Face Recognition

Simultaneous/

Gv

Word Order

Number Recall

Word Order

Number Recall

Word Order

Number RecallSequential/Gsm

Atlantis

Rebus

Atlantis

Rebus

Atlantis

RebusLearning/Glr

Age 6Age 5Age 4Scale

7-9 tests 7-9 tests 8-10 testsLuria/CHC


KABC-II Core Battery - Ages 7-18

Riddles

Verbal Knowledge

Riddles

Verbal KnowledgeKnowledge/Gc

Pattern Reasoning

Story Completion

Pattern Reasoning

Story Completion

Planning/Gf

Rover

Block Counting

Rover

TrianglesSimultaneous/Gv

Word Order

Number Recall

Word Order

Number Recall

Sequential/Gsm

Atlantis

Rebus

Atlantis

RebusLearning/Glr

Ages 13-18Ages 7-12Scale

8-10 tests 8-10 testsLuria/CHC


Supplementary Subtests

• Administer after core subtests• Use to explore hypotheses (added measure of core

scales)

• Use for planned comparisons• Use as a substitute if a core subtest is spoiledNo prescribed sequence with one exception - Delayed Recall.

• At ages 5 and 13-18, you must administer a supplementary subtest to get the right delay interval.

• Knowledge/Gc tests are never used to obtain delay interval


Supplementary Subtests

• Provide additional measures that have been normed and validated

• Do not contribute to scores for scales (except to substitute for a spoiled core subtest)

• Do contribute to the interpretive system and are useful for hypothesis testing (as in cross-battery assessment)


Supplementary Tests

Gestalt Closure

Number Recall

Verbal Knowledge

3 4 5 6 7-12 13-18

Gestalt Closure

Hand Movements

Verbal Knowledge

Face Recognition

Hand Movements Verbal Knowledge

Block Counting

Gestalt Closure

Atlantis Delayed

Rebus Delayed

Story Completion

Hand Movements

Verbal Knowledge

Block Counting

Gestalt Closure

Atlantis Delayed

Rebus Delayed

Hand Movements

Block Counting

Gestalt Closure

Expressive Vocabulary

Atlantis Delayed

Rebus Delayed

Hand Movements

Triangles

Gestalt Closure


Atlantis Delayed

Rebus Delayed


How to Interpret the KABC-II:

Step-by-Step


Essentials of KABC-II Assessment

By Kaufman, Lichtenberger, Fletcher-Janzen, & Kaufman

Essentials Pages 345-357

The KABC-II Interpretive Worksheet in Appendix A provides a place to record all 6 interpretive steps:

Manual Pages 43-55

KABC-II Manual covers first 3 steps in detail (& KABC-II Assist™).© 2005 Wiley


• Two Essential Steps

• Two Optional Steps

Interpreting KABC-II: Steps from Manual vs. Essentials Book

KABC-II Manual & Record Form

Essentials of KABC-II Assessment

• Essentials further explains the Fourth Step (Supplemental Subtest Analysis)

• Essentials adds Step 5 with 5 Clinical Comparisons

• Essentials adds Step 6 which helps generate further interpretive hypotheses


Summary of KABC-II Interpretive Steps

ESSENTIAL STEPS

Step 1. Interpret the global scale index, whether the FCI (CHC model), MPI (Luria model), or Nonverbal Index (NVI) (ages 3-18)

Step 2. Interpret the child’s profile of scale indexes to identify strengths and weaknesses, both personal (relative to the child’s overall ability) and normative (compared to children about the same age) (ages 4-18)

Essentials Pages 85-87Record Form Pages 3 & 23


Summary cont.

Step 3A: Initial Learning vs. Delayed Recall—Learning/Glr (Initial) vs. Delayed Recall (ages 5-18)

Step 3B: Learning vs. Acquired Knowledge—Learning/Glr vs. Knowledge/Gc (ages 4 –18)

Step 3. Planned Scale Comparisons

Step 4. Supplementary Subtest Analysis

OPTIONAL STEPS


Summary cont.

Step 5A: Nonverbal Ability (NVI) vs. Verbal Ability (ages 3-18)

Step 5B: Problem-Solving Ability vs. Memory & Learning (ages 3-18)

Step 5C: Visual Perception of Meaningful Stimuli vs. Abstract Stimuli (ages 4-18)

Step 5D: Verbal Response vs. Pointing Response (ages 4 –18)

Step 5E: Little or No Motor Response vs. Gross-Motor Response (ages 4 –18)

Step 5. Planned Clinical ComparisonsOPTIONAL STEPS


Summary cont.

Step 6. Generate Hypotheses to Explain Fluctuations in Two Circumstances:

Step 6A: Scales that Are Not Interpretable (ages 4 –18)

Step 6B: Supplementary Subtests that Are Inconsistent with Pertinent Core

OPTIONAL STEPS


KABC-II Interpretive Worksheet


• Record Form & KABC-II Assist printout provides a place to record first 3 steps

• Appendix A of Essentials provides a place to record all 6 steps


Step 1. Interpret the global scale index (FCI, MPI, or NVI)

DON’T FORGET

Calculate Range of All Index Scores Before Interpreting FCI or MPI

• Subtract the highest from the lowest Index

standard scores• If the difference is greater than or equal to 23

points (1 ½ SD)• Then do not interpret the FCI or MPI• Rather focus interpretation on the four or five

indexes

For ages 4-18




For Age 3, Rule is Different

Do not evaluate the interpretability of MPI or FCI During Step 1

• Why? No profile of scores is offered before age

4, so global score is the only score to interpret• However, if considerable variability exists,

consider supplementing KABC-II with other tasks to better determine the child’s diverse cognitive strengths and weaknesses.



•31

STEP 1. INTERPRET THE GLOBAL SCALE INDEX

Scale Used Scale Index

Confidence

Interval

(circle one) Is Global Scale Interpretable? (Ages 4-18) Descriptive Category

(Circle one)

(Standard

Score) 90% or 95%

Highest Index

Lowest Index Range

Less than 23 pts or Categories

Percentile Rank

FCI (CHC Model)

MPI (Luria Model)

NVI

(

-

)

Y N

If NO, do not

interpret

87

89 98 118 80 38 Y N

“If no (not less than 23 points), then do not

interpret”

“Less than 23 pts?”

93

Case Note: Sophia is a fifth grader (age 11:2) with difficulties

in writing




A. Consult Table D.2 to obtain SS and 90% or 95% confidence interval. Use Table D.4 for PR and Table 5.1 for category.

B. If using NVI do not conduct any other interpretive steps.

FCI 93 89-99 34 Average

Global Scale Index

Standard Score

95% confidence interval

Percentile Rank

Descriptive Category

In Sophia’s case, the extreme

variability between

scales means FCI does not meaningfully summarize

global ability


Interpretive Statement:

• Sophia displayed considerable variability in her standard scores on the five scales that compose the FCI, with indexes ranging from 80 on Simultaneous/Gv to 118 on Sequential/Gsm.

• This wide variation in indexes (38 points, which equals more than 2 ½ SDs) renders her FCI meaningless as an estimate of global ability;

• it is merely the midpoint of greatly varying abilities.


Ground Rules for Interpreting the KABC-II

• Interpret a scale index only if performance is consistent on subtests that compose scale (base rate rule <10%)

• Use .05 level of statistical significance when determining personal strengths/weaknesses

• Consider differences that are both statistically significant and uncommon (<10%) to be potentially valuable for diagnosis and educational purposes

Essentials Page 88


Interpreting the Results

Step 2. Interpret the profile of scale indexes to identify

strengths and weaknesses (personal/relative and normative)

A. Determine whether each scale is interpretable (unitary).

B. Conduct normative analysis (relative to Average range of 85-115)

C. Conduct ipsative analysis (relative to child’s mean score)

D. Determine if any scales that are personal strengths or weaknesses are infrequent.

Essentials pp. 89-90



pp. 93-96


AGES 7-18 CALCULATION OF SCALE INDEXES

Sequential/Gsm Planning/Gf Learning/Glr

Scaled Scores

Scaled Scores

Scaled Scores

15 5. Number Recall

7 4. Story Completion

6 1. Atlantis

11 14. Word Order

10 15. Pattern Reasoning

13 11. Rebus

Sum Sum Sum

Simultaneous/Gv Knowledge/Gc

Scaled Scores

Scaled Scores

7-12 13-18 7 10. Verbal Knowledge

7 7. Rover 11 18. Riddles

6 12. Triangles

13. Block Counting

Sum

Sum

26 17

18

19

13 18

Sophia’s subtest scaled scores grouped by scale


Scale Index Subtest Scaled

Scores

Scale (Standard Score) High Low Range Interpretable?

Range

Occurring

< 10%a

Sequential/Gsm 15 11 4 Y N 5

Simultaneous/Gv 7 6 1 Y N 6

Learning/Glr 13 6 7 Y N 6

Planning/Gf 10 7 3 Y N 6

Knowledge/Gc 11 7 4 Y N 5

118

80

97

90

95

Analysis of the interpretability of Sophia’s scale indexes

Essentials Page 91

Step 2A: Use base rate rule of <10%.See Appendix A or Record Form p. 3 for

ages 7-18


What to Do with an Uninterpretable Index

• Provides rich, diagnostic information• Identifies uncommon variability • Provides divergent vs. convergent data

• Consider narrow abilities or task differences

• Use cross-battery assessment to explore

• Optional Step 6 provides examiners with Guidelines to generate hypotheses about why the subtest scores varied

Meaningfulness of Scale may be diminished, but the tests are not invalid.

Essentials Page 90

Don’t Forget


STEP 2. INTERPRET PROFILE OF SCALE INDEXES TO IDENTIFY STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES

Scale Index

Subtest Scaled Scores *See critical values for Step 2A

Normative Weakness (NW) or Normative

Strength (NS)

Personal Weakness (PW) or Personal Strength (PS)

Scale (Standard Score)

High Low Range Interpretable? <85 >115 Diff from

Mean PW or PS

(p<.05) Infrequent

(<10%)

Sequential/Gsm Y N NW NS PW PS

Simultaneous/Gv Y N NW NS PW PS

Learning/Glr Y N NW NS PW PS

Planning/Gf Y N NW NS PW PS

Knowledge/Gc Y N NW NS PW PS

Index Mean

(rounded)

CHC model (include Knowledge/Gc)

Luria model (omit Knowledge/Gc)

11880

9095

15713

11

1166

7

417

4

Step 2B: Identify if any of the scales are a normative weakness or a normative strength

Computation of Sophia’s Normative Strengths and Weaknesses

97

96

10

7 3

Not Interp.



Scale Index



Strength (NS)




Mean PW or PS

(p<.05) Infrequent

(<10%)






Index Mean

(rounded)



11880

9095

15713

11

1166

7

417

4

Step 2C: Identify personal weaknesses or strengths in the scale profile

Computation of Sophia’s Personal Strengths and Weaknesses

97

96

10

7 3

Not Interp.

Calculate mean and difference from mean for each interpretable scale.

+22-16

-1

-6



Scale Index



Strength (NS)




Mean PW or PS

(p<.05) Infrequent

(<10%)






Index Mean

(rounded)



11880

9095

15713

11

1166

7

417

4

Step 2D: Consult statistical significance and frequency table in Record Form (p. 3) or Manual (p. 23) or Essentials Appendix A (p.346)

97

96

10

7 3

Not Interp.

+22-16

-1

-6


Don’t Forget 3.4Definitions of Indexes that are Key Assets and High

Priority Concerns

Three Conditions needed for Key Assets

Three Conditions needed for High Priority Concerns

1. Normative Strength 1. Normative Weakness

2. Personal Strength 2. Personal Weakness

3. Infrequent (<10%) Occurrence 3. Infrequent (<10%) Occurrence

Essentials Page 95

Summarizing Step 2 Findings


CAUTION Even if some statistically differences prove to be unusually large —all findings from Steps 3 and 5 should be verified with other data to be considered potentially valuable for diagnostic or educational purposes.

Essentials Page 99

Key Point for Optional Steps


Interpreting the Results Optional Steps

Step 3. Scale Comparisons

A. Learning/Glr to Delayed Recall (5-18)

B. Learning/Glr to Knowledge/Gc

Essentials p. 99-103

Essentials p. 103-104


STEP 3A INITIAL LEARNING VS DELAYED RECALL Learning/Glr (Initial) vs. Delayed Recall

Subtest Scaled

Scores

Interpre-table? (<10%)

Index Standard Score

Scale High Low Range

Learning/Glr 13 6 7 Y N

Delayed Recall 12 6 6 Y N

Only calculate the difference if both scales

are interpretable

Difference

Sig? Infre-quent?

Y N

Y N

Neither Learning/Glr or the Delayed recall score is interpretable

Significance & Infrequency are irrelevant in this case

Thus, the difference is not calculated

Essentials Page 102


STEP 3B LEARNING VS ACQUIRED KNOWLEDGE Learning/Glr (Initial) vs. Knowledge/Gc

Subtest Scaled

Scores

Interpre-table? (<10%)

Index Standard Score

Scale High Low Range

Learning/Glr 13 6 7 Y N

Knowledge/Gc 11 7 4 Y N

Only calculate the difference if both scales

are interpretable

Difference

Sig? Infre-quent?

Y N

Y N

97

95

Learning/Glr is not interpretable

Significance & Infrequency are irrelevant in this case

Thus, the difference is not calculated

Essentials Page 102


For this optional step, you can compare each supplementary subtest that was administered with the mean scaled score of the Core subtests on that scale, if the scale is interpretable (see Table 3.6).

If a scale is not interpretable (as determined in Step 2A), do not make any comparisons involving supplementary subtests for that scale.

Optional Step 4: Supplementary Subtest Analysis (ages 3-18)

Essentials Page 104


The difference scores listed in Table 3.5 provide base rates at the <10% level (discrepancies that are uncommonly large—occurring in less than 10% of the sample).

However, if you are interested in applying more stringent base rates to these comparisons, refer to D.10 in the KABC-II manual. This table in the manual lists base rates at the <5% and <1% levels.

Essentials Page 106

Tables for Supplementary

Score Analysis


STEP 4. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBTEST ANALYSIS FOR AGES 7-12

Differences between supplemental subtest & mean scaled score that are

significant or infrequent

Scale

Scale Interpret-

able in Step 2?

Sum of Scaled Scores

Mean Scaled Score

Supplemental Subtest

Scaled Score

Diff from Mean

Sig. .(p<.05) Sig?

Infrequent (<10%)

Infreq?

Sequential/Gsm Y N 2 = Hand Movements 6 7 3.5 Y N 5.0 Y N

Simultaneous/Gv Y N 2 = Gestalt Closure 6 .5 3.7 Y N 5.5 Y N

Simultaneous/Gv Block Counting 7 1.5 3.2 Y N 5.5 Y N

Knowledge/Gc Y N 2 = Expressive Vocab. 10 1 3.1 Y N 3.5 Y N

14.5

29

13

6.5

15

7.5

Step 6B will help develop and verify hypotheses to explain the difference between the core and supplemental

Gsm subtests

Essentials Page 107

26

13

18

6.5

13

9


Step 5A: Nonverbal Ability (NVI) vs. Verbal Ability (ages 3-18)Step 5B: Problem-Solving Ability vs. Memory & Learning (ages 3-18)

Step 5C: Visual Perception of Meaningful Stimuli vs. Abstract Stimuli (ages 4-18)

Step 5D: Verbal Response vs. Pointing Response (ages 4 –18)Step 5E: Little or No Motor Response vs. Gross-Motor Response

(ages 4 –18)

Optional Step 5. Planned Clinical Comparisons

Information Processing Domain: Integration & Storage

Information Processing Domain: Input & Output

Essentials Page 107


Appendix B provides tables to calculate standard scores corresponding to sums of subtest scaled scores for the following planned comparison clusters: Delayed Recall,

Verbal Ability, Meaningful Stimuli, and Abstract Stimuli.

Appendix C provides the necessary data to calculate standard scores for the Problem Solving and Memory and Learning clusters.

Appendix D provides the necessary data to calculate standard scores for the Verbal Response, Pointing Response, Little Motor, and Gross Motor clusters.

Essentials Appendices


Values for minimum difference between highest and lowest subtest scaled scores that occurred in <10% of sample for each cluster

Values for differences between cluster scores that are statistically sig. or infrequent (also on p. 108)

Appendix A The KABC-II Interpretive Worksheet provides


Sophia’s Step 5A Comparison between Verbal and Nonverbal Ability

Step 5A. PLANNED CLINICAL COMPARISONS

VERBAL ABILITY VS. NONVERBAL ABILITY Scaled Scores Scaled Scores

3-18 3-4 5 6 7-18 ____ Riddles ____ ____ ____ Conceptual Thinking ____ Expressive Vocabulary ____ ____ Face Recognition ____ Verbal Knowledge ____ ____ Story Completion

____ ____ ____ ____ Triangles ____ ____ ____ Pattern Reasoning ____ ____ ____ ____ Hand Movements ____ Block Counting

Range of Scaled Scores


Y N

Uncommonly Large Range?

Y N




Standard Score

Standard Score

Difference Is Difference

significant? Y N

Is Difference uncommonly large?

Y N

St op

stop

11107

4

28

96

7

6

6107

4

36811

5Sophia’s verbal abilities are significantly stronger than her nonverbal abilities, although not uncommonly so.

Sophia’s nonverbal abilities fell within the Below Average range of functioning & represent a Normative Weakness


Sophia’s Step 5B comparison

Step 5B. PLANNED CLINICAL COMPARISONS

MEMORY & LEARNING VS. PROBLEM SOLVING ABILITY Scaled Scores Scaled Scores

3 4 5-18 3-4 5 6 7-12 13-18

____ ____ ____ Word Order ____ ____ ____ Conceptual Thinking

____ ____ Face Recognition

____ ____ ____ ____ Triangles

____ ____ ____ Atlantis ____ ____ ____ ____ Pattern Reasoning

____ ____ Number Recall ____ ____ ____ Rover ____ ____ Rebus ____ ____ Story

Completion ____ Block

Counting



Y N


Y N




Standard Score

Standard Score

Difference

Is Difference significant?

Y N

Is Difference uncommonly

large?

Y N

stop stop

11

6

13

15

9

7

610

4

3083

Sophia’s problem solving skills are in the below average range, a normative weakness

Memory & Learning was not a unitary cluster, so the comparison could not be

conducted.

STOP

7


Sophia’s Step 5C Comparison- Cannot be conducted

Step 5C. PLANNED CLINICAL COMPARISONS

MEANINGFUL STIMULI VS. ABSTRACT STIMULI Scaled Scores Scaled Scores 4 5-18 4 5-12 13-18 ____ ____ Atlantis ____ ____ Triangles ____ Face Recognition ____ ____ ____ Rebus ____ Story Completion ____ ____ Pattern Reasoning



Y N


Y N




Standard Score

Standard Score

Difference

Is Difference significant?

Y N

Is Difference uncommonly

large?

Y N

stop stop

6

79

613107

1

13

7

Abstract Stimuli was not a unitary cluster, so the comparison could not

be conducted.

STOP

Sophia’s ability to utilize meaningful stimuli is in the below average range, a normative weakness


Sophia’s Step 5D Comparison

Step 5D. PLANNED CLINICAL COMPARISONS

VERBAL RESPONSE VS. POINTING RESPONSE Scaled Scores Scaled

Scores

4-6 7-18 4 5-18 ____ ____ Number Recall ____ ____ Word Order ____ ____ Rebus ____ Face Recognition ____ Expressive Vocabulary ____ ____ Atlantis

____ Riddles ____ ____ Verbal Knowledge



Y N


Y N




Standard Score

Standard Score

Difference Is Difference significant? Y N


Y N

stop stop

151310

5

Sophia’s ability to respond

verbally was in the above

average range – a normative

strength

STOP 38

117

1167

5

24

87

STOP

30

Sophia’s ability to respond by

pointing was at the low end of the average

range


Sophia’s Step 5E Comparison

Step 5E. PLANNED CLINICAL COMPARISONS

LITTLE MOTOR RESPONSE VS. GROSS MOTOR RESPONSE Scaled Scores Scaled

Scores

4 5-6 7-18 4 5-6 7-12 13-18

____ ____ Conceptual Thinking ____ Hand Movements ____ Face Recognition ____ ____ ____ Triangles

____ ____ Pattern Reasoning ____ ____ ____ Rover ____ Block Counting ____ ____ Story Completion



Y N


Y N




Standard Score

Standard Score

Difference Is Difference

significant? Y N


Y N

stop stop

6710

7

3

Sophia’s gross motor response is in the

below average range– a normative weakness

7

1

20

78

STOP STOP17

9113

Sophia performed

in the average range on tasks that required

little or no motor

response


Step 6A: Scales that Are Not Interpretable (ages 4 –18)

Step 6B: Supplementary Subtests that Are Inconsistent with Pertinent Core Subtests (ages 3-18)

Step 6. Generate Hypotheses to Explain Fluctuations in Two Circumstances:


• Review the findings in Step 2A, in which you determined whether each of the scales was interpretable.

• If all scales are interpretable, proceed directly to Step 6B.

• However, if one or more of the Scale Index were found to be uninterpretable in Step 2A (i.e., uncommonly large subtest variability within the scale), then proceed with Step 6A.

Determine if Step 6A needs to be conducted


•First line of attack: Examine the results of Step 5—planned clinical comparisons—to identify possible hypotheses.

•Second line of attack: Determine how the Core subtests in each scale complement each other (e.g., if they measure different CHC Narrow Abilities, that might help explain why the child scored at different levels on them)

•Third line of attack: Examine QIs, behavioral observations in general, and pertinent background information to generate possible hypotheses.

Three approaches for developing hypotheses to explain the substantial intra-scale variability:

Essentials Page 121


Step 6A. GENERATE HYPOTHESES TO EXPLAIN FLUCTUATIONS IN SCALES THAT ARE NOT INTERPRETABLE

First Line of Attack: Examine Planned Clinical Comparisons (from Step 5) to identify possible hypotheses Was Index found uninterpretable in Step 2? (check box if yes)

Cluster that may provide hypotheses for the subtest variability in the index

Age Core Subtests Relevant to the Clusters

Sequential/Gsm

Verbal Response vs. Pointing Response 4-18 Number Recall (Verbal) vs. Word Order (Pointing)

Abstract vs. Meaningful Stimuli 4 Face Recognition (Meaningful) vs. Triangles (Abstract)

Memory & Learning vs. Problem Solving Ability 3-4 Face Rec. (Mem. & Learn.) vs. Triangles/Concep. Th. (Prob Slv) Little Motor vs. Gross Motor Response 4 Face Recognition/Concept. Thinkg. (Little) vs. Triangles (Gross)

Little Motor vs. Gross Motor Response 5 Concept Thinking/Pattern Reason. (Little) vs. Triangles

(Gross)

Little Motor vs. Gross Motor Response 6 Concept Th./Pattern Reason. (Little) vs. Triangles/Rover

(Gross)

Simultaneous/Gv

Little Motor vs. Gross Motor Response 13-18 Block Counting (Little) vs. Rover (Gross)

Verbal Response vs. Pointing Response 4-18 Rebus (Verbal) vs. Atlantis (Pointing)

Learning/Glr

Abstract vs. Meaningful Stimuli 4-18 Rebus (Abstract) vs. Atlantis (Meaningful)

Abstract vs. Meaningful Stimuli 7-18 Pattern Reasoning (Abstract) vs. Story Completion (Meaningful)

Planning/Gf

Little Motor vs. Gross Motor Response 7-18 Pattern Reasoning (Little) vs. Story Completion (Gross)

Knowledge/Gc

Verbal Response vs. Pointing Response 7-18

Riddles (Verbal) vs. Verbal Knowledge (Pointing)


Sophia’s Learning/Glr Index was uninterpretable due to the

extreme discrepancy between Rebus (13) and Atlantis (6).

Two planned clinical comparisons may provide hypotheses for the Atlantis-Rebus variability:

1) Meaningful vs. Abstract Stimuli

2) Verbal Response versus Pointing Response.


1) Meaningful vs. Abstract Stimuli – Meaningful Stimulus cluster comprises

• Atlantis (6) and

• Story Completion (7)

– Abstract Stimulus cluster comprises • Triangles (6)

• Rebus (13) and

• Pattern Reasoning (10)Abstract Stimuli was not a unitary cluster, so the comparison

could not be conducted.

Sophia’s ability to utilize meaningful stimuli is in

the below average range (79), a normative

weakness


2. Verbal Response vs. Pointing Response

• Verbal Response cluster (117) comprises– Rebus (13), Number Recall (15), and Riddles (11)

• Pointing response cluster (87) comprises – Atlantis (6), Word Order (11), and Verbal Knowledge (7)

Sophia’s ability to respond verbally was in the above

average range – a normative strength

Sophia’s ability to respond by pointing was

at the low end of the average range


Steps 6A and 6B rely mostly on:•detective work•observational skills•theoretical understanding of what the scales measure

The generation of hypotheses and support for these hypotheses from multiple sources of data, therefore, are necessarily more clinical than empirical.

Always keep in mind


•Provide Information for the Second Line of Attack

•See Pages 124-127

Rapid References 3.3-3.7


How the Learning/Glr Subtests Complement Each Other (Ages 4–18)

YESNODoes sequence of stimuli matter?

YESNOContext important for success?

YESNOUses meaningful auditory stimuli?

NOYESUses meaningful visual stimuli?

NOYESProvides feedback for errors?

RebusAtlantis


Sequential/Gsm Scale—How the Core Subtests Complement Each Other (Ages 4–18)

NOYESIntegration of auditory & visual stimuli?

Long Number Series

Interference TaskAchieves Difficulty?

NumbersWordsNature of Content?

VocalPointingNature of Output?

Number RecallWord Order


NOYESRequires flexibility to shift tasks?

NOYES

(interference task)

Measures the CHC Gsm narrow ability—Working Memory (MW)?

Number RecallWord Order

Sequential/Gsm Scale—How the Core Subtests Complement Each Other (Ages 4–18)


CHC Narrow Abilities for the Sequential/Gsm Scale

Hand Movements

Number Recall

Word OrderCHC Narrow Ability

Gv Visual Memory (MV)

Working Memory (MW)

Gsm Memory Span (MS)


Simultaneous/Gv Scale—How the Subtests Complement Each Other (Ages 3–4)

MemoryProblem solving

Problem solving

Problem Solving or Memory?

PointingPointingGross-Motor

Nature of Response?

MeaningfulAbstract & Meaningful

AbstractNature of Visual

Stimuli?

Face Recognition

Conceptual ThinkingTriangles


Face Recognition

Conceptual ThinkingTrianglesCHC Narrow Ability

Gf Induction (I)

Visual Memory (VM)

Spatial Relations (SR)

Gv

Visualization (VZ)

CHC Narrow Abilities for the Simultaneous/Gv Scale (3-4)


Rover

(age 6)Pattern

ReasoningConceptual

ThinkingTrianglesCHC Narrow Ability

General Sequential Reasoning (RG)

GfInduction (I)

Spatial Scanning (SS)


GvVisualization (VZ)



Gestalt Closure

Block CountingTrianglesRoverCHC Narrow Ability

GqMath Achievement (A3)

GfGeneral Sequential Reasoning (RG)

Closure Speed (CS)




SupplementaryCore Battery



Gestalt ClosureTriangles

Block CountingRoverCHC Narrow Ability

GqMath Achievement (A3)


Closure Speed (CS)




SupplementaryCore Battery



Planning/Gf Scale—How the Subtests Complement Each Other (Ages 7–18)

YESNOUses manipulatives?

YESNOVisual-motor response?

YESNOMeaningful visual stimuli?

Story CompletionPattern

Reasoning



GcGeneral Information (K0)

GfInduction (I)

General Sequential Reasoning (RG)

Story CompletionPattern ReasoningCHC Narrow Ability

CHC Narrow Abilities for the Planning/Gf Scale (7-18)


Knowledge/Gc Scale—How the Core Subtests Complement Each Other (Ages 3–6)

Note—Riddles has verbal and pictorial stimuli for its easiest items.

Visual-vocalAuditory-visualChannel of communication?

PictorialVerbalType of stimuli?

Expressive VocabularyRiddles


Knowledge/Gc Scale—How the Core Subtests Complement Each Other (Ages 7–18)

PointingVocalType of response?

YESNOMeasures auditory-visual integration?

Visual + auditory

AuditoryType of stimuli?

Verbal KnowledgeRiddles



General Information (KO)

Language Development (LD)

GcLexical Knowledge (VL)


Verbal Knowledge Riddles

CHC Narrow Ability

CHC Narrow Abilities for the Knowledge/Gc Scale


Sophia’s Uninterpretable Learning/Glr Scale

YESNODoes sequence of stimuli matter?

YESNOContext important for success?

YESNOUses meaningful auditory stimuli?

NOYESUses meaningful visual stimuli?

NOYESProvides feedback for errors?

Rebus: 13Atlantis: 6

Step 5C Meaningful

vs. Abstract stimuli wasn’t

fruitful, but

CHC narrow abilities are the same for Atlantis and Rebus—they are both measures of Associative Memory—so CHC theory will not provide any useful hypotheses for explaining Sophia’s uninterpretable Learning/Glr Index.


When conducting the third line of attack to help explain an uninterpretable Index:

• Review the Qualitative Indictors for the highest and lowest subtests in the scale

• see if there is evidence that noncognitive or extraneous behaviors differentially influenced performance on the two subtests.

Step 6A: Third Line Of Attack

Essentials Page 131


• Review your notes in the margins of the record form

• Identify any disruptive behaviors that were evident during the administration of the subtests that yielded the lowest scaled scores

• Identify any enhancing behaviors during the subtests on which the child performed well

•perseverance, •extremely focused attention


Essentials Page 131


• The goal:•generate as many hypotheses as possible to explain uninterpretable Indexes.

• After generating numerous hypotheses,

•try to identify the best ones based on multiple pieces of corroborating data.

• When necessary,

•administer additional tests or subtests.


Essentials Page 131


Third Line of Attack: Sophia’s Glr

• QI’s do not help reveal any noticeable explanations for the differences between Rebus and Atlantis. On both subtests:– Very focused, and didn’t hesitate to respond when

uncertain. – Not impulsive during either test, and seemed to

sustain attention.



• Unique Beh. Observation:– Sophia appeared to enjoy Rebus, making

comments such as “This is fun, it’s like cracking a code.”

– She used the context in the Rebus items as part of her strategy for solving the problems: “If I can’t remember the word, is it okay if I guess from the other words?”

– Sophia seemed overwhelmed by the multiple unorganized stimuli in Atlantis



• Background information also reveals – Sophia loves detective stories. – Plays a CSI game often at home. – Enjoys typing “secret code emails” to her friends

(although she does not like hand-writing notes or letters).


• The process of conducting Step 6B is similar to that of conducting Step 6A.

• To determine if Step 6B needs be conducted, review the findings in Step 4, which determined whether each of the supplemental subtests was significantly different than the mean of the core subtests.

Step 6B: Generate Hypotheses to Explain Supplementary Subtests that Are Inconsistent with Pertinent Core Subtests (ages 3-18)

Essentials Page 132


Step 6B. GENERATE HYPOTHESES TO EXPLAIN SUPPLEMENTARY SUBTESTS THAT ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE MEAN OF CORE SUBTESTS

First Line of Attack: Determine which supplemental subtests are significantly different from the Core Subtests

a. Check box if supplemental subtest is significantly different from mean of core subtests (See Step 4 results)

b. Conduct only an informal examination of the Planned Clinical comparisons, as most Supplemental subtests are excluded from the planned comparisons

Age Supplemental Subtest 3 4 5 6 7-12 13-18 Number Recall Gestalt Closure Hand Movements Verbal Knowledge Face Recognition Block Counting Story Completing Expressive Vocabulary Triangles

The following supplemental tests are included in Step 5’s clusters:

- Expressive Vocabulary (Gc subtest) is in the Verbal Ability cluster.

- Verbal Knowledge (Gc subtest) is in the Verbal Ability and Pointing Response clusters.

- Hand Movements (Gsm Subtest) is in the Gross motor response & nonverbal ability clusters.

- Block Counting (Gv subtest) is in the Little Motor cluster.

Second Line of Attack: Examine how Supplemental & Core subtests within each scale complement each other

Step 6B: Generate Hypotheses to Explain Supplementary Subtests that are Inconsistent with the mean of Core Subtests

First Line of Attack: Determine which supplemental subtests are significantly

different from the Core Subtests


Step 6B: First Line of Attack for Sophia’s Supplementary Subtests that were

inconsistent with the Core

• Hand Movements (6 lower than Core of 13)– Examine Step 5E: Gross Motor ability (78)

significantly lower than Little Motor Response (91)


• Why a supplementary subtest differs significantly from its core subtests:

• See Rapid References 3.4, 3.5, and 3.7 (in second line of attack).

• Rapid References 3.3 and 3.6 are not needed for this step because Learning/Glr and Planning/Gf do not have any supplementary subtests.

Step 6BThe second and third lines of attack that are of primary importance for

generating hypotheses

Essentials Page 133


Step 6BSecond and third lines of attack

• Sophia’s Hand Movements scaled score of 6 significantly below pertinent Core subtests

• HM is within the Below Average Range, • but her Sequential/Gsm Index of 118

was a Key Asset for her.


Step 6BSecond and third lines of attackSophia’s Hand Movements scaled score of 6 significantly below pertinent Core subtests

• Consider that she had a High Priority Concern in visual processing,

• Evidenced by Simultaneous/Gv Index of 80,

• Hypothesis: • Hand Movements measures the Gv

Narrow Ability of Visual Memory.


Step 6BSecond and third lines of attack

Sophia’s Hand Movements scaled score of 6 significantly below pertinent Core subtests

• Sophia undoubtedly scored significantly lower on Hand Movements than on other short-term memory tasks

• because her deficit in visual processing prevented her from performing at an Above Average level in her area of strength.


How to Interpret the KABC-II:

Qualitative Indicators


Evidence-based Background for QIs observed during testing and other clinical situations

Effects of AnxietyCognitive Domain Affected

KABC-II Subtests Affected

Working memoryShort term memoryStrategy formation

Number RecallHand MovementsWord OrderAtlantis Rebus

Note. Although Anxiety may affect these KABC-II subtests, poor performance on these subtests is not necessarily indicative of problems with anxiety.

Essentials Page 149



Effects of Executive Functioning & Attention

Cognitive Domain Affected KABC-II Subtests Affected

AttentionExecutive FunctioningWorking memory

Number RecallRoverConcept FormationPattern ReasoningStory Completion

Riddles Note. Although problems with executive functioning and attention may affect these KABC-II subtests, poor performance on these subtests is not necessarily indicative of disorders associated with poor executive functioning and attention.

Essentials Page 152

Word Order

Rebus

Atlantis

Hand Movements



Effects of Cultural IssuesCognitive Domain Affected

KABC-II Subtests Affected

Crystallized abilities Verbal KnowledgeRiddlesExpressive Vocabulary

Note. Although cultural issues may affect these KABC-II subtests, poor performance on these subtests does not necessarily indicate that cultural issues have depressed scores on these subtests.

Essentials Page 155


• The lists of abilities and processes in Rapid References 4.3-4.20 are not intended to be limiting.

• They are intended to stimulate original observations about the child you are assessing.

• Other plausible abilities can easily be enumerated for each subtest based on a variety of armchair, clinical, and empirical analyses of the original K-ABC tasks, Wechsler subtests, and related cognitive tasks.

• The lists for each subtest are geared toward the two theories—Luria and CHC—that form the foundation of the KABC-II, have empirical validation, or provide potentially valuable clinical information about the influence of behavior on test performance.

Subtest-By-Subtest Qualitative/Process Analysis of the

18 Subtests



Chapter 6Clinical Applications

Comprehensive Picture of Child’s

Processing


KABC-II & KTEA-II:Like Hand and Glove

• Conormed

• Similar, cohesive theoretical basis

• Similar interpretive strategies

• Tests complement each other

• Together provide the foundation of a comprehensive assessment


Quantitative Analysis Coupled with Theoretical Analysis

• Correlational analyses offer valuable information about the integration of the tests

• CHC theory also provides valuable ways of integrating KABC-II and KTEA-II

• Finally, a second theoretical approach – Luria’s model -- offers another mechanism for analyzing and integrating the tests.


KABC-II Scale Index Correlations with KTEA-II Composites (ages 7-18)

KTEA-II Composite

KABC-II ScaleTotal Reading Math

Written Language

Oral Language

Learning/Glr .58 .55 .49 .53 .48

Sequential/Gsm .50 .48 .44 .44 .44

Simultaneous/Gv .54 .47 .53 .40 .43

Planning/Gf .63 .56 .59 .51 .51

Knowledge/Gc .75 .71 .53 .59 .68Highest correlate of each KTEA-II Achievement CompositeSecond-Highest correlate of each KTEA-II Achievement Composite


• The strong relationship between the Knowledge/Gc Index and all areas of achievement for school-age children and adolescents was anticipated, given that the scale is designed to measure the depth and breadth of knowledge acquired from one’s culture (including schooling).

• The good correlations with achievement for the new KABC-II scales—Planning/Gf and Learning/Glr—attest to the importance in the classroom of the ability to solve problems and learn new material during a clinical evaluation of general cognitive ability.

Meaning of the KABC-II – KTEA-II Correlations


• Simultaneous/Gv Index had the highest correlation (r = .65) with KTEA-II Comprehensive Achievement.

• Knowledge/Gc (.60) and Sequential/Gsm (.59) in a virtual deadlock for second best.

• For ages 4 ½ - 6, when school skills are emerging, the amount of knowledge a child has already acquired is secondary to the cognitive processes that are needed to learn to read, write, compute, and speak

KABC-II – KTEA-II Correlations Under Age 7


• The KABC-II and KTEA-II were designed to sample a number of Broad and Narrow Abilities defined by the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model

• These tests together measure 8 of the 10 CHC Broad Abilities and about 33 Narrow Abilities (Flanagan & Ortiz, 2001).

Integrating the KABC-II & KTEA-II: Theory


Stratum III: General ability is measured by the KABC-II

Fluid-Crystallized Index (FCI)

Stratum II: Broad

abilities are measured by KABC-II Scales

GlrLong-Term

Storage &Retrieval

GlrLong-Term

Storage &Retrieval

g

GsmShort-Term

Memory

GvVisual

Process-ing

GfFluid

Reason-ing

GcCrystal-

lizedAbility

CHC Theory Applied to KABC-II


Stratum II: Broad abilities are measured by KTEA-II

Scales

GqQuantitative Knowledge

Three Additional Broad Abilities Measured with KTEA-II

GaAuditory

Processing

GrwReading and

Writing


Stratum I: Narrow Abilities—measured by the KABC II Subtests

Associative Memory

LearningAbilities

LexicalKnowledge

General Information

LanguageDevelopment

Induction

GeneralSequentialReasoning

VisualMemory

SpatialRelations

Visualization

SpatialScanning

ClosureSpeed

Memory Span

WorkingMemory

GlrGlr GsmGsm GvGv GfGf GcGc


Stratum I: Narrow Abilities—measured by KTEA II Subtests

Naming Facility

Word Fluency

Associat. Fluency

Meaningful Memory

GlrGlr

Listening Ability

Oral Production & Fluency

Grammatical Sensitivity

GcGc

Quantitative Reasoning

GfGf

Math Achievement

Math Knowledge

GqGq

Reading Decoding

Reading Compreh.

Verbal Language Compreh.

Spelling Ability

Writing Ability

GrwGrw

Phonetic Cdg-

Analysis

Phonetic Cdg-

Synth.

GaGa

Engl. Usage Knowledge

Reading Speed


Lurian Process Approach to

Integrating KABC-II & KTEA-II


Sequential Processing, Short-Term Memory, Phonological Awareness, and Listening

Comprehension

• KABC-II Sequential/Gsm Core subtests: As a primary measure of auditory short-term memory, these subtests help the examiner evaluate the critical listening skills that children need in the classroom.

• KTEA-II Phonological Awareness measures sound-symbol connections but because of the way it is set up, also measures auditory short-term memory and sequencing skills.

• KTEA-II Listening Comprehension also supports the Sequential/Gsm scale because it straddles auditory short-term memory, auditory working memory, and auditory long-term encoding.


The Simultaneous/Gv Scale and Written Expression

• KTEA-II Written Expression can be used to supplement the KABC-II Simultaneous/Gv scale

• Contrast performance on KABC-II Simultaneous/Gv subtests to the visual motor aspects of written expression activities. The visual motor activities on the KABC-II subtests like Rover or Triangles may be related to aspects of written expression.

• These comparisons may help you figure out why a child has poor handwriting, or poor visual organization on writing tasks.


Planning, Reasoning, and Executive Functions: How They Apply to Rover and Rebus and to

Several KTEA-II Subtests • Rover measures both Gf and Gv Narrow Abilities, and demands

intact executive functions for success. If a child has poor planning or executive functions, performance on this subtest is severely impacted.

• Rebus factorially belongs on the Glr/Learning Scale of the KABC-II, it can also assist in the exploration of the child’s fluid reasoning ability measured on the Planning/Gf scale.

• Written Expression, Reading Comprehension, Oral Expression, and Listening Comprehension all require "higher levels of cognition" (Sattler, 2001), "cognitive load" (Raney, 1993), or "higher-complex abilities."


Auditory Processing (Ga) and Several Auditory Tasks on the KABC-II and KTEA-II

• KTEA-II Listening Comprehension and three KABC-II subtests (Riddles, Number Recall, Word Order) are dependent, to some extent, on the CHC Ga Broad Ability.

• These subtests still all use auditory input as the main processing vehicle and that, by nature, is serial and sequential (but are not primarily Ga subtests).

• Listening Comprehension, in particular, is a supportive subtest for Ga because it measures the kind of listening comprehension that students must do in school


Summary

• Strong theoretical and correlational links between KABC-II and KTEA-II

• Using both with yield a fruitful examination of a child’s cognitive abilities and how they translate into academic skills



Composite/Subtest Standard Score

Percentile Rank

Reading Composite 92 30

Letter & Word Recognition 94 34

Reading Comprehension 90 25

Decoding Composite 91 27

Nonsense Word Decoding 87 19

Sound-Symbol Composite 88 21

Phonological Awareness 89 23

Reading Fluency Composite 89 23

Word Recognition Fluency 90 25

Decoding Fluency 88 21

Sophia’s KTEA-II Scores


Composite/Subtest Standard Score

Percentile Rank

Mathematics Composite 91 27

Math Concepts & Applications 94 34

Math Computation 89 23

Oral Language Composite 96 39

Listening Comprehension 94 34

Oral Expression 98 45

Written Language Composite 70 2

Written Expression 71 3

Spelling 74 4

Sophia’s KTEA-II Scores


Diagnostic Impressions of Sophia

• Sophia displays significant deficits in the area of visual processing

• Her deficit in this basic psychological process, coupled with her deficits in the area of written expression and spelling, have led to the development of a Disorder of Written Expression.


Diagnostic Impressions of Sophia

• Throughout the testing, Sophia’s written expression was sparse, she wrote in a labored manner, and made vocabulary, punctuation, and grammatical errors.

• Although her oral language appeared intact, her deficits in writing have greatly impacted her motivation & school achievement.


Diagnostic Impressions of Sophia• Her area of deficit requires intense and

immediate intervention, both to keep her from falling further behind her peers, and to limit the damaging effects of low self esteem and poor motivation. – Word processing

– Decrease visual-motor demands

– Extra time for written assignments

– Don’t requiring copying assignment from board

– Incentive program to motivate Sophia to increase writing quantity

– Other specific recs from Mather & Jaffe (2002)


Supplementing the KABC-II with the Cross Battery

Approach


Supplementing the KABC-II Using Cross-Battery Methods


Using CHC Cross Battery approach, you can approximate the total range of broad abilities more adequately than any single intelligence battery (Carroll, 1997)

Kaufman (2000): The CHC CB approach can serve to elevate test interpretation to a higher level, to add theory to psychometrics and to thereby improve the quality of the psychometric assessment of intelligence


Supplementing the KABC-II Using Cross-Battery Methods


Cross-Battery approach is used to augment KABC-II assessments by allowing for:

1) greater breadth in the measurement of broad abilities (e.g., adding Ga and Gs to KABC-II assessments) and

2) greater depth in the measurement of broad abilities (e.g., adding qualitatively different measures of narrow abilities within broad ability domains).


3 Pillars of CB Approach

• CHC Theory

• Broad CHC Ability Classifications of Tests

• Narrow CHC Ability Classifications of Tests


5 Guiding Principles of CB Approach1. Select tests that have been classified through an

acceptable method

2. Include two or more qualitatively different narrow ability indicators for each CHC domain to ensure proper construct representation

3. Select tests that were developed and normed with in a few years of one another to minimize the effects of spurious differences between tests scores attributable to the Flynn effect


5 Guiding Principles of CB Approach

4. Select tests from the smallest number of batteries to minimize the effect of spurious differences between test scores that may be attributable to difft norm samples

5. Use clusters from a single battery whenever possible


The Steps of KABC-II Cross-Battery Assessment

Step 1. Determine whether assessment of Ga and Gs is

necessary or desired.

Step 2. Determine whether there is a need to administer supplemental KABC-II subtests.

Step 3. Determine whether it is necessary or desirable to achieve more in-depth measurement of broad cognitive abilities assessed by the KABC-II.

Step 4. Determine whether the measurement of a specific or narrow ability is necessary or desirable.

Essentials Page 274


• If Ga is necessary to assess, such as in a referral for reading difficulties in a young child, then the KTEA-II phonological processing test may be administered.

• If Gs is necessary to assess, then you may administer the Gs subtests from the WJ III or WISC-IV

Cross-Battery Step 1. Determine whether assessment of Ga and Gs

is necessary or desired.



• Interpret a cluster only when the child’s performance on the subtests comprising the cluster is consistent (or common) indicating a unitary ability

• For subtests derived from actual norms, use existing test’s guidelines

• For subtests derived from averaging subtests use McGrew & Flanagan (1998) and Flanagan & Ortiz’s (2001) guidelines (next slide)

Cross-Battery Step 1. Guidelines for deriving and interpreting CHC Clusters



• McGrew & Flanagan (1998) and Flanagan & Ortiz’s (2001) guidelines



1. Convert subtest scores to scale having mean of 100 & SD of 15

2. Report subtest scores with CI of ± 7 (McGrew & Flanagan, 1998)

3. If the CI for the subtests overlap, then the ability presumed to underlie the cluster is considered unitary. If they do not touch or overlap, then the ability is considered nonunitary, and shouldn’t be interpreted.

4. Report clusters (both broad & narrow) with a CI of ± 5


• McGrew & Flanagan (1998) and Flanagan & Ortiz’s (2001) guidelines



1. If an index is uninterpretable, determine whether a general conclusion may be made about the child’s performance

2. If all subtest scaled scores are ≤ 8 or ≥ 12, a statement may be made about performance

3. For example, Rover = 8; Triangles = 18

….However, it is clear that Andrea’s Gv ability is a notable integrity for her because her performance on the tasks that comprise the Simultaneous/Gv index ranged from Average/Normal Limits to Upper Extreme/Normative Weakness


• Whenever the lower of the two subtest scaled scores comprising an index is a normative weakness (i.e., a scaled score < 7) and the higher of the two subtest scores is well within the average range of ability or higher (i.e., a scaled score > 10),

• regardless of whether the Index represents a unitary ability.

Cross-Battery Step 2. Determine whether there is a need to administer

supplemental KABC-II subtests.



• John (age 8): Riddles = 5; Verbal Knowledge = 13• 8-point variability in Knowledge/Gc subtests• Thus, administer the Supplemental Expressive Vocabulary

Cross-Battery Step 2. Determine whether there is a need to administer

supplemental KABC-II subtests.


1. Determine whether Riddles and Expressive Vocabulary are a unitary construct

2. If unitary, calculate the Knowledge/Gc Index based on these two subtests (Table D.2)

3. If not unitary, determine whether Expressive Vocabulary and Verbal Knowledge represent a unitary construct

4. If Verb. Knowledge & Expressive Vocab. Unitary, then calculate the Knowledge/Gc index based on those


• Glr is underrepresented on the core battery.

• You may administer the KABC-II delayed recall subtests (see interpretive Step 3A in Chapter 3)

• Or the KTEA-II Glr subtests (e.g., Listening Comprehension, Naming Facility/RAN, and Associational Fluency).

• You may also administer Glr tests from the WJ III or from other more specialized batteries, such as the Children’s Memory Scale (Cohen, 1997) or the CTOPP

Cross-Battery Step 3. Determine whether it is necessary or desirable

to achieve more in-depth measurement of broad cognitive abilities assessed by the KABC-II.

Essentials Page 278


• Naming Facility, a narrow Glr ability, • and Phonetic Coding, a narrow Ga ability, • show substantial and consistent, positive correlations with

basic reading skills

Cross-Battery Step 4. Determine whether the measurement

of a specific or narrow ability is necessary or desirable.



• A Visual Memory Cluster may be particularly informative when there is an observed reading difficulty that is not explained by difficulties in phonemic awareness or rapid automatized naming.





• Calculation of a Reading Fluency cluster may provide an indication of the degree to which an individual has automatized basic reading skills (e.g., decoding).

• Deficient reading fluency can be compared to other fluency ability to determine whether fluency is impaired more globally or only as it related to reading decoding.

• A deficit in the basic psychological process of Processing Speed/Gs may be suggested with poor performance on Glr-Naming Facility tasks





Cross-Battery Summary

• The Cross-Battery Steps for supplementing the Core KABC-II Subtests with additional subtests can improve upon the breadth and depth of measurement of cognitive abilities

• These additional supplements can be deemed necessary upon review of additional KABC-II data

• The steps will help further test hypotheses about variation in a child’s KABC-II score profile.

Summary of what the Essentials of KABC-II Assessment provides:• Chapter 2 – Administration and Scoring: a

highlight of solutions to key pitfalls

•Chapter 3 – Step-by-Step Interpretation: In depth explanation of the first 4 steps (also in the manual), plus two further steps for hypotheses testing

•Chapter 4 – Interpretation with QIs: An analysis of what typically observed behaviors may be related to.

•Chapter 5 – Strengths and Weaknesses: Good for marketing the test and providing comparisons to other tests

•Chapter 6 – Clinical Applications: Info about KTEA-II integration with the test and a CB Approach

elizabeth o. lichtenberger, ph.d. [email protected] kabc-ii advanced interpretation casp...

Documents

rights reserved block

rights reserved abilities

processing of information

rights reserved stratum

complex slide

rights reserved luria

arousal slide

theoretical foundations