1 / 50

Ventura County SELPA Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW) Model: Psych TOT T raining #3

This training session focuses on the Ventura County SELPA Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW) Model, specifically the Psych TOT Training #3. Topics covered include triennial assessments, two assessment approaches, cross-battery assessment, and Dehn's Processing Strengths and Weaknesses Model.

virginiabrown
Télécharger la présentation

Ventura County SELPA Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW) Model: Psych TOT T raining #3

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ventura County SELPAPattern of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW) Model: Psych TOT Training #3 Kim Charnofsky, Mental Health Facilitator, CVUSD Jenny Jones, Director, VCOE Robin Sakakini, School Psychologist, VCOE

  2. Agenda • Checking in • Moodle Access • Updates to Manual • Triennial Assessments • Two Assessment Approaches • Cross Battery Assessment • Dehn’s Processing Strengths and Weaknesses Model

  3. Number of Trainings

  4. Positive Outcomes • Buying in • On board • Receptive • Better understanding relationship between academics and processing

  5. Obstacles • Time to train • Not trained in XBA or Dehn’s model • Fear of presenting to the rest of the IEP team • Want to train all staff

  6. http://mymoodle.vcoe.org

  7. Changes to the Manual • Grammar, Spelling, Mechanics • COMPARES • Triennials/Reevaluations

  8. Changes to the Manual: Triennials/Reevaluations

  9. Changes to the Manual: Triennials/Reevaluations

  10. Changes to the Manual: Triennials/Reevaluations

  11. Changes to the Manual: Triennials/Reevaluations

  12. PowerPoint on SELPA Website

  13. Assessment Approaches • Review of both models • Overview • ONCAP • Processing Weakness • Software • Students who are gifted • Students with a General Learning Difficulty Profile • Similarities/Differences

  14. Training this information • What are some initial ideas your training team has for bringing this information to your school psychologists? • Districts • Adopting only one approach • Decision making for which approach to use • Experts

  15. Resources • Information for this presentation was taken from the following sources: • Flanagan, D. P., & Ortiz, S. O., Alfonso, V. C., (2013). Essentials of cross-battery assessment (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. • Dehn, M. J. (2014). Essentials of processing assessment (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. • 2014 VCASP Presentations: • Alfonso, V. CHC Theory, the Cross-Battery Assessment Method and Software, SLD Identification, and Assessment of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Individuals. VCASP: October 24, 2014 • Dehn, M. Identifying Processing Strengths and Weaknesses for SLD Eligiblity. VCASP: November 14, 2014.

  16. Agreement between Approaches

  17. What do both agree upon? • Based on several core research-based principles: • Specific Learning Disabilities are characterized by neurologically-based deficits in cognitive processing (NASP, 2007). This conclusion is supported by a meta-analysis that found significant processing differences between students with SLD and students without SLD (Johnson, Humphrey, Mellard, Woods, & Swanson, 2010). • Research has demonstrated the existence of specific cognitive processes (Flanagan, Ortiz & Alfonso, 2013; Hale & Fiorello, 2004). Researchers are also in agreement that sound tools and measures exist to assess these cognitive processing areas (LDA, 2010). • Research has also found links between various cognitive processes and specific areas of academic achievement .

  18. What do both agree upon? Having a Pattern of Strengths and Weakness does not always equal an eligibility of Specific Learning Disability.

  19. What do both agree upon? • A comprehensive assessment • ONCAP • Classifications of tests and processing areas may not be the same as test manuals • Limit the number of test batteries you take subtests from • Attempt to choose tests that were normed close in time • Composite scores are stronger than subtest scores • With composite scores, need to examine the cohesiveness of the scores or whether the scores are unitary.

  20. What do both agree upon? You can fake bad but you cannot fake good.

  21. Turn and Talk • What makes sense so far? • What questions are rolling around?

  22. Overviewof Models

  23. Overview:Cross Battery Assessment • Must assess in all 7 Broad Abilities • Fluid Reasoning • Crystallized Intelligence • Auditory Processing • Short-term Memory (includes working memory) • Long-term Storage and Retrieval • Visual Processing • Processing Speed

  24. Overview:Cross Battery Assessment • Top Four Most Important Abilities for Learning and Academic Success: • Fluid Reasoning • Crystallized Knowledge • Short-term Memory/Working Memory • Long-term Storage and Retrieval • Abilities Related to Reading • Phonological Processing • Visual Processing/Processing Speed – Orthographic Processing

  25. Appendices of Essentials book • CHC Narrow Ability Definitions and Task Examples • CHC Broad and Narrow Ability Classification Tables for Tests Published 2001-2012 • Descriptions of Cognitive, Achievement, and Neuropsychological Subtests by CHC Domain • Critical Values for Statistical Significance and Base Rate for Composites on Comprehensive Cognitive and Achievement Batteries • Variation in Task Demands and Task Characteristics of Subtests on Cognitive and Neuropsychological Batteries • Variation in Task Demands and Task Characteristics of Subtests on Achievement Batteries by IDEA Academic Area

  26. Appendices of Essentials book • Neuropsychological Domain Classifications • Understanding and Using the XBA PSW-A v1.0 Software Program Tab by Tab • Cognitive and Neuropsychological Battery-Specific Culture-Language Matrices • Cross-Battery assessment Case Reports • Eugene, Oregon, School District Integrated Model for SLD Identification • Summary of the Expert Consensus Study for Determining CHC Broad and Narrow Ability Classifications for Subtests New to This Edition • Criteria Use in XBA DMIA v2.0 for Follow-Up on a Two-Subtest Composite

  27. Overview: Dehn’s Processing Strengths and Weaknesses Model • Top 11 processing areas to examine • Attention • Auditory Processing • Executive Functions • Fine Motor • Fluid Reasoning • Long-Term Recall • Oral Language • Phonological Processing • Processing Speed • Visual-Spatial Process • Working Memory • Crystallized intelligence is not emphasized as a processing area

  28. Overview: DPSWM • Processing Clusters: Working Memory • Attention • Executive Functioning • Fluid Reasoning • Long-Term Recall • Processing Speed

  29. Overview: DPSWM • Processing Clusters: Executive Functions • Attention • Working Memory • Fluid Reasoning

  30. Overview: DPSWM • Processing Clusters: Oral Language • Auditory Processing • Long-term Recall • Phonological Processing • Working Memory

  31. Overview: DPSWM • Processing Clusters: Visual-Motor • Fine Motor • Visual-spatial processing

  32. Appendices of Essentials book • Selective Testing Tables for Processing/Memory • Specific Tests/Subtests for all 11 Processing Areas • Interview Items • Observation Items • Planning Sheet • Children's Psychological Processes Scale • Psychological Processing Analyzer (SOFTWARE) • Statistical Tables • Processing Assessment Report Template • Self-Monitoring Sheet

  33. Otherwise Normal Cognitive Ability Profile (ONCAP)

  34. ONCAP The Full Scale IQ score is not ALWAYS the same as ONCAP

  35. ONCAP XBA DPSWM FSIQ or equivalent at 90 or above Cross-battery mean of 90 or above One of the cognitive abilities (highly linked to g) at 90 or above • Must assess in all 7 areas • Choose the areas that are deemed “sufficient” • Software determines a g-Value (ONCAP) • ≥ .60 = ONCAP likely • .51-.59 = more information is needed • ≤ .50 = ONCAP is unlikely • g-Value determines an Intact Ability Estimate (IA-e)

  36. Turn and Talk • What makes sense so far? • What questions are rolling around?

  37. Processing Weakness

  38. Processing Weakness • Weaknesses are • specific not general or pervasive. • both normative and personal weakness. • statistically significant and unusual.

  39. Software Systems

  40. Software Systems • Use composite scores over subtest scores • Watch for cohesiveness of scores • Use the test composite score over the software composite score

  41. Software Systems • Each book provides software system on CD-ROM

  42. Students that are gifted • May have a personal weakness but not an official “deficit” because the score is in the average range. • Use clinical judgment • Ask, “is this student underachieving as much as a typical student with SLD?”

  43. Students that posses GLD GLD SLD • Overall cognitive ability in the 80s to low 90s range • Academic performance is in the 80s range • Pervasive below average performance • May have splinter skills (relative strengths)

  44. Thank you! • Kim Charnofsky kcharnofsky@conejousd.org • Jenny Jones jjones@vcoe.org • Robin Sakakini rsakakini@vcoe.org

More Related