Diagnostic Procedures (PSY 435)
Illinois State University
Spring 2010
Professor: Gary L. Cates, Ph.D., NCSP Office Hours: Mon10:30-11:30; TH: 8:30-9:30
Office: 443 DeGarmo Phone: 438-3123
Email: Web: http://www.ilstu.edu/~glcates
Course Description: This course will focus on the assessment, treatment, and prevention of academic skills deficits and learning problems. This course will provide you with an opportunity to develop skills in the areas of academic assessment, empirical treatment of learning problems, analysis of research, and report writing.
NASP Standards Addressed
STANDARD 1: Data-Based Decision Making & Accountability
STANDARD 2: Consultation & Collaboration
STANDARD 3: Learning & Instruction
STANDARD 5: Student Diversity in Development & Learning
STANDARD 6: School & Systems Organization, Policy Development, & Climate
STANDARD 11: Technology
Course Objectives:
Upon successful completion of this course you will be able to:
1. Conduct a norm reference standardized assessment of academic skills
2. Conduct a curriculum based assessment
3. Link an academic assessment to an intervention
4. Demonstrate the ability to utilize assessment and intervention procedures that encompass individual differences in student learning.
5. Present results of an assessment to other school psychologists and/or school psychology students
6. Write an achievement assessment report
7. Utilize technology in the management and presentation of data
8. Review and critique an academic achievement test
9. Demonstrate an understanding of a response to intervention model
Required Texts:
Shapiro, E. S. (2004). Academic Skills Problems (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
Shapiro, E. S. (2004). Academic Skills Problems Workbook (Revised Edition). Guilford
Press.
Howell, K. W. & Nolet, V. (2000). Curriculum-Based Evaluation: Teaching and Decision Making (3rd ed.).
Belmont CA: Wadsworth.
Other Materials: Stop watch, clipboard, three ring binder
Course Topics
Learning Disabilities and Learning Deficits Generic Model of Learning
Assessment of the Learning Environment Curriculum Based Asses/Measure/Eval
Measuring Response to intervention Functional Assessment of Academic Responding
Collaborative Problem Solving Academic Interventions
Achievement testing (administration and scoring) Ethical/legal issues regarding special education
Special education eligibility & services Writing integrated assessment reports
Reviewing/critiquing measures of academic achievement Developing an assessment plan based on a referral
Making treatment decisions based on data Implementing and evaluating interventions
Utilizing computer programs to monitor progress Presenting results of assessment
Websites relevant to the school psychology profession Future directions in assessment
Single case research design Developing IEP/non-IEP goals
Course Requirements
Exams (100 points; 20%)
You will be administered two take home exams. You will have two weeks to complete the exams. Your answers should be your own. Responses should be typed in times new roman 12 point font double spaced. All citations should be referenced in a separate section. Each exam is worth 50 points. Details are important.
Norm Referenced Standardized Achievement Measures (120 points; 24%)
Each student in the course will sign up to administer the Woodcock Johnson Test of Achievement – III (WJTA-III), the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test- II (WIAT-II), and the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (KTEA). One of the other three tests (WJTA-III, KTEA, or WIATII) will be given to your comprehensive evaluation case (see below). You will complete a protocol for each of these administrations. You will also video tape each administration. The protocols will be graded and the video tapes reviewed by a GA. Each protocol will be evaluated for the accuracy of scoring judgments as well as clerical calculations. Errors on any of the following will result in deduction of 1 point per error:
Standard procedures followed (basal & ceilings, discontinuations, etc.)
Responses recorded verbatim and scored accurately
Credit complete & accurate
Front page of protocol complete & accurate clerically
Calculations, transfer of scores, and tables read correctly
Scoring judgments match standards and criteria in manual
When protocols are returned to you, you will be asked to correct scores that were affected by your errors.
You will turn in protocols within one week of administration along with behavioral observations, a description of child strengths and weaknesses (both inter and intra), and recommendations Note: 1 point is subtracted for each error. Errors that change the standard score beyond the standard error of measurement will require re-administration for credit.
The purpose of this task is to familiarize and prepare you to conduct such assessments.
Curriculum Based Measurement Probe Proficiency (40 points; 8%)
You will administer and score a reading (R), writing (WE), spelling (S), and math (M) curriculum based measurement probe. You will administer 3 of each at the correct grade level and the median score will be reflected in your respective brief report. These probes will be turned in to be checked by a GA within one week of their completion.
The purpose of this task is to familiarize and prepare you to conduct such assessments.
Brief Assessment Reports (40 Points; 8%)
You will be required to write 3 brief reports. These reports will be written on your administration of the two standard tests (WJTA-III, WIAT-II, KTEA) that you do not administer to a real child (i.e. your comprehensive evaluation case) and one CBA. Your reports are expected to be technically correct (i.e., classification ranges, percentile ranges, strengths & weaknesses, & interpretation). You will also integrate fictitious background information, test observations, and recommendations in the interpretation. You will be asked to make corrections to your reports after grading. Note: Errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation, & word usage will result in a deduction of points.
The purpose of this task is to prepare you to write like a psychologist.
Test Critique (15 points; 3%)
1. You will do a critique of assessment instrument of your choice. You will gather information from other reviewers (e.g. test critiques, tests in print, burros mental measurement yearbook etc.) and journal articles. You will provide your classmates with a copy of your respective critique.
The purpose of this task is to prompt your awareness of the importance of the technical adequacy of assessment instruments in addition to the resources for which you may find such information.
Article Critiques (15 points; 3%)
1. You will provide a critique of 3 research articles on the topics for discussion (on the due date) as indicated on the syllabus. Each article critique will not exceed a single page and will include an APA citation followed by: a) purpose of article, b) population assessed or intervened with, c) independent variable(s), d) dependent variable(s), e) results, f) limitations, and g) potential implications for research or practice. You will provide your peers with an electronic copy of these test critiques via email by the due date. You may not critique an article already critiqued and submitted to you by one of your peers. Be prepared to lead a brief discussion about your article on its due date.
The purpose of this task is to provide you increased opportunities to become a better consumer of empirical literature related to academic assessment and intervention.
Research Proposal (50 points; 10%)
1. You will conduct a literature review and write a research paper on academic intervention for a specific area of your choosing. The area you choose however cannot be one already chosen by one of your peers. This will be written in APA format and be 12-15 pages long. The paper should include a title page, abstract, introduction, method section, and reference section. The purpose of this task is to provide you an opportunity to read more extensively about academic intervention research and to think critically about current research in addition directions for future research.
Presentation (20 points; 4%)
You will provide a presentation to your peers on your assessment and your respective test critique. Handouts or access to your materials is encouraged as is the use of technology.
The purpose of this task is to provide you an opportunity to a) present in front of a live audience, b) describe evaluation findings to others, and c) provide a learning experience related to your test critique to your peers.
Comprehensive Academic Evaluation (100 Points; 20%)
1. Comprehensive evaluation (CE). Students will conduct a comprehensive evaluation of a child (age 6-0 to 17-0). You may complete the components of this evaluation at any time before the deadlines detailed in the course outline (see below) once you have learned how to administer them. The following components should be included in your evaluation: Clinical Interview, Full Academic Achievement Test, Curriculum Based Assessment/Evaluation in reading, written expression, spelling, and mathematics, LBS, and PPC.
2. Comprehensive Evaluation Report. You will integrate all of the information you have gathered about the student into one formal report. This report should include information on the following: student background information, fictitious referral concern, assessments administered, results of all assessments, recommendations, and where appropriate citations to the relevant literature. If appropriate, provide information in the text that addresses the criteria for eligibility for special education services under IDEA. This assignment is to be completed individually, without consultation with any other person (except the instructor). All psychological reports must be typed and double-spaced. This integrative report may include evidence of reading the course material and the relevant literature beyond your assigned readings. All reports must be typed and double-spaced. Be sure to include your signature and the date of the report. Reports received in other forms will be returned ungraded. All consents, original test protocols, profile sheets, summary forms, and raw data are to be submitted with the integrative report in a cardstock pocket folder with your name on the outside. More details on report writing will be provided in class. You should write these reports for a general audience (parents, teachers, non-psychologist professionals); thus, you will need to keep the use of technical jargon to a minimum and add qualifiers and descriptions as appropriate. The purpose of this task is to integrate learning, gain report writing skills, and practice linking assessment to intervention
GRADING Points
Skill Development 200
WIAT Proficiency 40
-Brief Report 10
WJTA Proficiency 40
- Brief Report 10
KTEA Proficiency 40
- Brief Report 10
CBE Probe Proficiency (R, WE, S, & M) 40
- Brief Report 10
Scholarly 200
3 Article Critiques 15
Test Critique 15
Presentation 20
Research Proposal 50
Mid-term Take Home Exam 50
Final Take Home Exam 50
Skill Proficiency 100
Comprehensive Academic Evaluation
A. Psychological Processing Checklist 10
B. Learning Behavior Scales 10
C. Achievement Test (One of the big 3) *
D. CBA 25
E. Report 50
Participation 5
_____________________________________________
Total 500
A = 90 – 100% B = 80 – 89% C = 70 – 79% D = 60 – 69%
Additional information and class policy:
The GA will evaluate CBM and test administration as well as score protocols and probes. The instructor will review them before they are returned to you. The instructor will evaluate your reports. Work is due at the beginning of the period on the date noted in the syllabus. Late work will only be accepted if approved by the instructor, and then at a 10% penalty per day. You are encouraged to bring your laptop to class for note taking or to access internet information provided in class. However, texting/instant messaging/emailing and/or working on other work is not allowed during class. The first time you will be asked to quit be rude. The next time the issue will be directed to your advisor with documentation filed in your permanent record. Don’t even attempt it a third time. Cell phones for emergency purposes should be set to vibrate only. If you are caught cheating, you will earn a zero on the assignment in question, an F for the course, reported to the school psychology curriculum committee (SPCC) and I will vigorously seek to have you expelled. If you have a disability that requires accommodations please contact the office of disability concerns at 305 Fell Hall or call 309-438-5853/8620 (TTY).
Supplemental Readings
1. Skinner, B. F. (1984). The shame of American education. American Psychologist, 39, 947-954.
2. Shinn, M. (2007). Identifying students at risk, monitoring performance and determining eligibility within
response to intervention: Research on Educational Need and Benefit from Academic Intervention.
School Psychology Review, 36, 601-617.
3. Haring, N. G., & Eaton, M. D. (1978). Systematic instructional technology: An instructional
hierarchy. In N. G. Haring, T. C. Lovitt, M. D. Eaton, & C. L. Hansen (Eds.), The fourth
R: Research in the classroom (pp. 23-40). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
4. Skinner, C. H. (1998). Preventing academic skills deficits. In T. S. Watson & F. M. Gresham (Eds.)
handbook of Child Behavior Therapy (pp. 61-82). Plenum: New York
5. Cates, G. L. (In Preparation). A data-based decision making approach to Response to Intervention (ch. 1
Introduction)
6. Gresham, F. M. (2007). Response to intervention and emotional and behavioral disorders: Best practices in
assessment and intervention. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32, 214-222.
7. Marstone, D. B. (1989). A curriculum-based measurement approach to assessing academic performance:
What it is and why do it. In Shinn, M. (Ed). Curriculum Based Measurement: Assessing special
Children. Guilford Press: New York.
8. Cates, G. L. (In Preparation). A data-based decision making approach to Response to Intervention (ch. 2
Universal Screening Measures)
9. Cates, G. L. (In Preparation). A data-based decision making approach to Response to Intervention (ch. 3
Diagnostic tools)
10. Cates, G. L. & Thomason, K. (In Press). Data-Based Decision Making: Considering Comprehension
Levels When Conducting an Experimental Analysis of Reading Interventions. Journal of Applied School
Psychology.
11. Eckert, T. L. Ardoin, S. P., Daly, E. J., & Martens, B. K. (2002). Improving oral reading fluency: A brief
experimental analysis of combining an antecedent intervention with consequences. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 35, 271-281.
12. Barnett D. W., Daly, E., & Martens, B. (2004). Empirically based special service decisions from single
case designs and increasing and decreasing intensity. Journal of Special Education, 38, 66-79.
13. Cates, G. L. (In Preparation). A data-based decision making approach to Response to Intervention (ch. 4
Progress Monitoring)
14. U.S. Department of Education (2009). Assisting Students Struggling with reading: Response to Intervention
(RTI) and multi-tier intervention in the primary grades. Institute of Educational Sciences.
15. U.S. Department of Education (2009). Assisting Students Struggling with math: Response to Intervention
(RTI) for elementary and middle schools. Institute of Educational Sciences.
16. Cates, G. L. (In Preparation). A data-based decision making approach to Response to Intervention (ch. 6