te
Boxtel en omgeving
De rijschool
voor mensen met faalangst en leerproblemen
Uw kind laten testen? zie: www.intelligentietesten.com
|
te
Boxtel en omgeving
De rijschool
voor mensen met faalangst en leerproblemen
Uw kind laten testen? zie: www.intelligentietesten.com
|
|
| Information Processing/WISC-III PI Interpretive Guide Prepared by Amy Gabel, Ph.D. 1 This list is provided to assist practitioners in looking at patterns across a child’s performance; it is not meant as an exhaustive list of skills and subtests. Check off the subtest patterns that you see while scoring the PI; indicate those that are statistically significant with an asterisk. Look at the sections and see where you have a “preponderance of evidence” to suggest that the area is relevant to the student’s functioning. Use the information gathered on the checklist as a guide to think about primary and secondary deficits, as appropriate, and to develop interventions. Problem solving is not listed on this guide, as the child’s performance on the PI in total tells you about HOW the child solves various types of problems. Referral Question #1: Does the student experience difficulties with tasks that require attention? Look at the following: Arithmetic lower than Arithmetic Addendum Arithmetic lower than Written Arithmetic Spatial Span problems Letter Span difficulties Significant number of requests for repetition across subtests Interval data for Coding – sporadic, excessively slow Interval data for Coding – Symbol Copy – sporadic, excessively slow Low score on Block Design Multiple Choice vs. others (impulsive responses) Sentence Arrangement – read differently Supporting classroom data (Specify) Supporting test data (Specify) Supporting reports from student and/or parents (Specify) Referral Question #2: Does the student experience difficulties with tasks requiring Executive Functions? Look at the following: Elithorn Mazes Rule violations (high) Errors (high) Trial 1 Trial 2 Latency in planning (slow) Stimulus pull observed in Sentence Arrangement Multiple Choice Items (stimulus pull observed) Coding Intervals (unusual patterns of extreme slow or fast performance) Arithmetic vs. Written Arithmetic (can student pull relevant from irrelevant details – if no, Written Arithmetic may be higher)) Errors in Coding (evidence of breaking set?) Errors in Symbol Copy (evidence of breaking set?) Breaking set in Digit Span (go forward instead of back) Copyright © 2008 by Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliate(s). All rights reserved.Prepared by Amy Gabel, Ph.D. 2 Errors on Trial 1 of Spans (but do 2 nd one ok) Spatial Span – differences between forward and reverse conditions Evidence of breaking set? Supporting classroom data (Specify) Additional supporting test data (Specify) Additional data from parents or student (Specify) Referral Question 3: Does the student experience difficulties with tasks that require efficient motor functioning? Look at the following: Block Design Multiple Choice higher than regular Block Design Extra blocks used on Block Design PI Are both Symbol Copy and Coding impaired (look at speed issues – if higher on Symbol Copy, likely not a motor speed issue) Symbol Copy low score Errors on Symbol Copy Elithorn Mazes o Errors - high o Time to complete - long Supporting classroom data (Specify) Additional supporting test data (Specify) Additional data from parents or student (specify) Referral Question 4: Are there language-based difficulties that affect the child’s performance? Look at the following: No responses across verbally based items Information Multiple Choice higher than regular Information Vocabulary Multiple Choice higher than regular Vocabulary Picture Vocabulary may be higher than regular Vocabulary Grammatical errors observed on Sentence Arrangement Picture Completion pointing only responses Picture Completion NRs (no responses) High repetition requests across subtests Better score on Letter Span non-rhyming than rhyming (good readers often show less interference on non-rhyming trials) Supporting classroom data (Specify) Additional supporting test data (Specify) Additional data from parents or student (specify) Copyright © 2008 by Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliate(s). All rights reserved.Prepared by Amy Gabel, Ph.D. 3 Referral Question 5: How adequate does the child’s fund of knowledge appear to be? Look at- Information Multiple Choice sufficiently high o Category differences? (Specify) Arithmetic Comparisons (should be sufficiently high under at least 1 condition) o Regular vs. Addendum o vs. Written Arith o No Responses minimal Vocabulary Multiple Choice sufficiently high Knowledge expressed in categories on Picture Completion Supporting classroom data (Specify) Additional supporting test data (Specify) Additional data from parents or student (specify) Referral Question 6: Are there memory/learning weaknesses that affect the child’s learning? Written Arithmetic higher than regular Arithmetic Coding Incidental Learning low Paired Associate Symbol low Paired Associate Digit low Free Recall low Letter Span low Digit Span low Spatial Span low Retrieval vs. Recognition – Multiple Choice tasks higher (recognition stronger) o Information Multiple Choice higher than regular Information o Vocabulary Multiple Choice higher than regular Vocabulary Interval rates on coding – significantly slow, intervals static Referral Question 6a: Relative to other aspects of memory, are there working memory weaknesses that affect the child’s performance? Arithmetic vs. Arithmetic Addendum vs. Written Arithmetic (follows pattern of low to relatively higher) Spatial Span reverse lower than forward condition Digit Span reverse lower than forward condition Supporting classroom data (Specify) Additional supporting test data (Specify) Additional data from parents or student (specify) Copyright © 2008 by Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliate(s). All rights reserved.Prepared by Amy Gabel, Ph.D. 4 Referral Question 7: What are the child’s skills in regard to Spatial-Perceptual skills? They are likely to be poor if you see problems such as those below: Columns awry in Written Arithmetic Block Design PI and Regular Block Design: are problems noted? Block Design PI – Structured vs. Non-structured – unstructured lower Block Design Multiple Choice vs. Block Design PI (likely to see higher score on Multiple Choice) Breaks in configuration unusually high Use of extra blocks Differences in Paired Associates Symbols vs. Digits (greater difficulty with symbols over digits) Errors high o Coding o Symbol Copy Supporting classroom data (Specify) Additional supporting test data (Specify) Additional data from parents or student (specify) Copyright © 2008 by Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliate(s). All rights reserved. HOME (www.orthopedagogiek.com) |
|
Send mail to
jpm.voets@orthopedagogiek.com
with questions or comments about this web site.
|
