Stanford–binet Intelligence Scales Nov 25, 2009 · Examples of intelligencetests. 1. Stanford-Binet IQ test The modern field of intelligencetesting began with the StanfordBinet IQ test. The Stanford-Binet ...
The Traveler Iq Challenge® - Travelpod Development . The Stanford-Binet intelligence scale is a modified version of the Binet-Simon intelligence scale. The Binet-Simon scale was created by the French ...
P .Author: Miller, Tyler F.The Graduate School University of Wisconsin-Stout Menomonie, WI Title: The Impact of Cognitive Performance of English Language Learners Graduate Degree/ Major: MS School Psychology Research Adviser: Carlos Dejud, Ph.D.MonthrYear: May, 2011 Number of Pages: 53 Style Manual Used: American Psychological Association, 6th edition Abstract This literature review investigated cognitive performance of English Language Learners 2 and the associated outcomes with cognitive scores.Assessing for intelligence is complex and can be controversial, especially when the test taker is culturally or linguistically diverse.The change in demographics in demographics has presented school psychologists with a host of challenges and barriers to ensure culturally sensitive assessments with diverse students.A number of landmark court cases and ethical standards have been brought about as a response school districts and their school psychologists who engaged in biased or discriminatory cognitive assessment practices.Despite persisting barriers preventing valid, culturally sensitive assessment practices, researchers and experts in the field of school psychology have set forth frameworks for which school psychologists can utilize to ensure valid assessment practices.In addition, research has recognized the use of nonverbal batteries as viable measures to capture cognitive One battery in particular, the Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test, has proven to be a reliable, valid, and culturally sensitive measure of intelligence that school psychologists can use with culturally and linguistically diverse students.
3 The Graduate School University of Wisconsin Stout Menomonie, WI Acknowledgments First and foremost I want to thank the University of Wisconsin-Stout for providing me with the opportunity to better my life.Secondly, I would like to thank Dr.Carlos Dejud for his time, energy, motivation, patience throughout this entire process.This thesis would not be what it is without your guidance and knowledge.Additionally, I need to thank my boss, my mentor, and friend, Bob Hebl.You have taught me so many invaluable life lessons over the years and have impacted my life much more than you will ever know.I would also like to thank my family.You have been extremely supportive, encouraging, and loving throughout graduate school.Along those lines, I want to thank my fiance, Kari, for her ongoing love and support.We have sacrificed a great deal the last two years perusing our education, but now it is time to pursue our life together.4 Finally, I want to thank the school psychology cohort of 2011.We entered graduate school as individuals but left as a family.I cannot express in words how important you all have been and the impact you have made.I could not imagine going through graduate school with a finer group of people.5 Table of Contents ...
Page Abstract....2 Chapter I: Introduction .6 Statement of the Problem ....11 Purpose of the Study .11 Research Objectives .11 Definition of Terms ...12 Assumptions of the Study ...14 Limitations .14 Chapter II: Literature Review ....15 History of Intelligence ...15 Change in Demographics ....19 Law and Ethics 21 Culturally Frameworks For Cognitive Assessment With CLD Students .24 Current Barriers When Assessing ELL Students ...27 Cognitive Assessment Instruments ....
32 The Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test..33 Chapter III: Summary, Critical Analysis, and Recommendations ....40 Summary ....40 Critical Analysis ...
44 Recommendations 45 References ....47 English Proficient 7 Traditional, norm-referenced intelligence tests, such as the Stanford-Binet and the Wechsler are no longer appropriate within the realm of CLD students, as these tests primarily normed using middle-class, English-speaking individuals (Jacob & Hartshorne, 2007).Assessing the cognitive ability of ELLs using instruments such as the Stanford-Binet or one from the Wechsler series ultimately becomes assessing the child's expressive and language skills and wrongfully dilute overall test performance (Rhodes, Ochoa, & Ortiz, 2005).The implications of test selection, administration and interpretation without sensitivity to a student's culture and language may mistakenly brand students with stigmatizing labels, lead to higher dropout rates and over represent certain races and ethnicities in special education (Valencia & Suzuki, 2001; Artiles & Ortiz, 2002).Perhaps the most salient criticism of special education has been the complexity of overrepresentation and underrepresentation of CLD students receiving special education services (Coutinho & Oswald, 2000; Artiles, Rueda, Salazar, & Higareda, 2005; Salend & Duhaney, 2005).
Guiberson (2009) reports that erroneous special placements may manifest in a variety of ways, which include overrepresentation, underrepresentation and misidentification.Overrepresentation occurs when a given minority group a higher percentage of students in special education when compared to the group's percentage of the entire student population (Salend & Duhaney, 2005).Conversely, underrepresentation transpires when nonwhite students, with significant educational needs are overlooked and fail to receive opportune services (Guiberson, 2009).Sattler (2008) notes that underrepresentation can also occur when minority students, who do not have a disability, but rather are intellectually gifted, fail to receive adequate services.
Further, misidentification is classified as students who possess genuine disabilities are misdiagnosed with another form of disability (Guberson, 2009).
and the however, there Rogers, 2010; Ochoa, Rivera, & Ford, 1997).
Although best practice would encourage schools to employ a bilingual psychologist, there are avenues for monolingual school psychologists to explore when conducting cognitive assessments (O'Bryon & Rogers, 2010).10 Currently, there are more intelligence tests to choose from than ever before.With that said, the majority of intelligence tests were created from test developers who are of European background and contain a certain extent of cultural and linguistic bias when used with CLD students (Suzuki, Prevost, & Short, 2008).
Several nonverbal intelligence tests have created to minimize these biases and ensure reliable and valid results.These tests include: the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (KABC -II), Second Edition; Differential Ability Scales, Second Edition -2), Comprehensive Test of Nonverbal Intelligence (CTONI), Test of Nonverbal Intelligence, Third Edition (TONI -3), Leiter International Performance Scale, Revised (Leiter-R), Raven's Progressive Matrices (Ravens) and the Wechsler Nonverbal Scale of Ability (WNV; Garcia-Vazquez, Crespi, & Riccio, 2010; Sattler, 2008).Although a wide assortment of nonverbal batteries exists, many come with caveats.
For example, many of these batteries are one-dimensional, in that they only provide one type of task (e.g., matrices), are restricted to measuring nonverbal intelligence as opposed to general intelligence, and some continue require previously acquired knowledge or prior cultural experiences (Bracken & McCallum, 1998; Garcia-Vazquez, Crespi & Riccio, 2010).One nonverbal battery that was piloted utilizing CLD students, remained cognizant of potential cultural and linguistic biases, and taps general intelligence is the Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Battery (UNIT; Bracken & McCallum, 1998).
Currently, the UNIT is touted as an adequate nonverbal assessment that school psychologists can select when assessing the intelligence of CLD students (Athanasiou, 2000).11 Statement of the Problem With the increasing cultural and linguistic diversity of nation's students, school psychologists are encountering numerous challenges when attempting to assess the cognitive abilities of CLD students.Traditional, norm-referenced cognitive assessments contain culturally and linguistically loaded questions that are often inappropriate for many CLD students and may yield intellectual scores that are not reflective of the child's actual true reasoning abilities.
A substantial percentage of school psychologists remain unequipped to assess CLD students due to a number of reasons, such as the lack of bilingual school psychologists, failure to receive culturally sensitive assessment practices during graduate lack of knowledge of second language acquisition, acculturation, and administering inappropriate intelligence tests.Purpose of the Study The purpose of this literature review is to investigate how the United States demographics have changed within the last three decades
.In addition, the literature review will examine what methods school psychologists are using to assess CLD students, frameworks in which to following when conducting culturally sensitive assessments and potential barriers to conducting sound assessments.Finally, the review of literature will examine what types cognitive assessments exist and which are most appropriate for CLD students.
Data will be collected through a comprehensive literature review during the Spring of 20 11.Research Objectives The following research objectives are addressed in this literature review: 1.To explore the origin of intelligence testing and the function in which they serve and continue serve.
2.To examine the changing demographics of school-age children.3.
To investigate what landmark cases and ethical guidelines have shaped the way in which psychologists assess CLD students.12 4.
To highlight multiple frameworks in which to conduct culturally sensitive assessments.
5.To determine what barriers inhibit reliable and valid cognitive assessments of ELL students.6.
To examine what cognitive assessments exist and which are most appropriate to use with ELL students.Definition of Terms To understand the content area of this literature review, the following terms have been defined and will be used: Cognitive Assessments -Norm-referenced tests that follow standardized directions, which produce an overall intelligence quotient (Kranzler, 1997).The terms intelligence tests, intellectual assessment and cognitive batteries will be used interchangeably with cognitive assessments.Cultural Loading -The degree to which a subtest inherently contains or demands a test taker to have previous cultural knowledge in order to provide an adequate response (VazquezNuttall et al., 2007).
This term will also be used interchangeably with cultural bias.Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CLD) -The term Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CLD) refers to students age 3-21 who whose primary or home language is other than English (Colorado Department of Education, 2009).English Language Learner -"Students who are not native English speakers and are not reclassified as fluent in English" (Frisby, 2008, p.535).
-A English Proficient native language -A began with army needed 17 superior intelligence, neglecting those with average intelligence.
However, Wechsler envisioned a battery that would provide clinical psychologists with information that stemmed beyond classifying intellectual deficiencies.The purpose of Wechsler's novel and innovative intelligence test was to provide clinical psychologists with a tool to pinpoint specific mental faculties, determine areas of strength and and provide interventions based upon test results (Boake, 2002; Sattler, 2008).Wechsler's Form I began several revisions and with every revision, the standardization and psychometric properties steadily improved.
The Wechsler batteries continued to evolve and have now become the face of intelligence testing.In fact, Camara, Nathan and Puente (2000) found that, through survey within the top 20 standardized tests frequently used amongst clinical psychologists, the WAIS-R was the most heavily relied upon standardized test.Additionally, Camara, Nathan and Puente (2002) discovered the WISC-R was the third most commonly used standardized test and that the Wechsler Memory Scale was the ninth most commonly used.In a similar study, Stinnett, Havey, & Oehler-Stinnett (1994) randomly selected and surveyed 123 members ofthe National Association of School Psychologists (NASP).
The respondents reported the WAIS-R, the WISC-R and the WISC-III were the most commonly used intelligence tests amongst practicing school psychologists.In addition, respondents were asked to rank the importance of 13 commonly used intellectual instruments.
The respondents ranked the previously listed Wechsler batteries as the most important batteries to be used (Camara, Nathan, & Puente, 2000).There is substantial data suggesting the Wechsler continues to dominate the market of intellectual assessments (Camara, Nathan, & Puente, 2000; Groth-Mamat, 2003; Kaufman & students (Tomes, intelligence batteries, with the increase ofCLD students and have failed to evolve at a commensurate rate oftoday's population.Change in Demographics 19 The change in demographics have continued to shape the country during the previous three decades.Aud, Fox and KewalRamani (2010) report that in 1980, 80 percent of United States population was classified as White and that by 2008, it dwindled to 66 percent.In addition, the Black population remained roughly 12 percent while the Asian/Pacific Islander population increased from 2 to 4 percent during this timeframe.Interestingly, the Hispanic population increased from 6 percent of the total population in 1980 to account for 15 percent of the population in 2008.
Furthermore, the Hispanic population is projected to account for 21 percent of the nation's population by 2025 while the White population is expected to decrease to 57 percent (Aud, Fox and KewalRamani, 2010).Not only has the nation experienced a shift in its racial and ethnic composition, the total number oflanguages spoken has dramatically increased.Nearly 20 percent of the nation's population speaks a language other than English at home (U.S.Census Bureau, 2009).Moreover, of that 20 percent, nearly 10.8 million of those who spoke a language other than English at home were school-age children (U.S.Department of Education, 2008).Further, in 2006, nearly 72 percent of school-age children who spoke a language other than English at home spoke Spanish.It is evident that the increase of predominately Spanish speakers have become a great presence in the United States and has greatly revamped the face of American education.School district's racial and ethnic composition has greatly shifted.
For example, during the school year there were over 5 million LEP students, an increase of 53 percent increase compared to the 1997-1998 school year (U.S.Department of Education, 2010).require teachers thus, the with severe cognitive deficits.
When the families of these children challenged the school's decision, the children were then read the intelligence tests in Spanish and as a result, the scores increased (Childs, 1990).In fact, one Mexican-American student initially received a cognitive ability score of 30, which is categorized as a cognitive disability.When a bilingual school psychologist retested this student in Spanish, her cognitive ability score was 79, which is considered below average (Jacob & Hartshorne, 2007).
22 Similar to the case of Diana v.
State Board of Education, the case of Larry P.v.Riles tested the court to determine if standardized measures of assessment were valid indicators of African American students' intelligence.This class action suit argued that far too many African American students were overrepresented and placed in classes for those with cognitive impairments.The courts agreed, noting that the intelligence measures contained cultural bias and therefore, the tests, when used with African American deemed invalid (Jacob & Hartshorne, 2007).Given the high volume of CLD students, the expanding phenomena of intelligence testing and the over and underrepresentation of minority students ethical principles and codes have been established to ensure appropriate and valid intelligence testing.The National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME), APA, NASP, and AERA are four major governing bodies that set ethical precedents and standards for school psychologists to adhere to when working with CLD students.For example, Standard 9.02 of AP A's (2002) ethical code of conduct states that school psychologists should assessment methods, such intelligence tests that is sensitive to the student's primary language as well as the psychometric properties of the assessments used.
Furthermore, AP A advocates that school be administered lacking the religion, acculturation, L 1 L 1 L 1 can be L 1 a 3 x 3 cross-battery approach 3 x 3 asked to 29 assessing ELL students.After surveying over 1,500 NASP affiliated school psychologists, their data suggests a significant lack of competency in cross-cultural assessment and how to conduct evaluations with ELL students.In regards to graduate school training, over half of the respondents reported having "somewhat or very little" competency in the area of cross-cultural assessment, while only 10.6 percent of respondents reported being "above average or extremely" well competent in conducting cross-cultural issues.
Ochoa, Rivera and Ford (1997) found that 69 percent of respondents reported no or very little competency during their graduate on how to conduct evaluations with ELL students, while less than 4 percent reported having above average or extremely well competency in conducting evaluations ELL students.In addition, McCloskey and Athanasiou (2000) found that only one-fourth o
Tags: universal nonverbal intelligence test review,nonverbal assessment of intelligence,wechsler nonverbal scale of ability,what is nonverbal intelligence,test of nonverbal intelligence,universal nonverbal intelligence test interpretation,universal nonverbal intelligence test scores,universal nonverbal intelligence test report,universal nonverbal communication examples