Category: Psychologists

Relevant Research: Eligibility Criteria for Language Impairment: Is the Low End of Normal Always Appropriate?

Leaders Project

Source URL: View this document on the ASHA website

Many clinicians label a child as language impaired (LI) or typically developing (TD) based on arbitrary cutoff scores (1.5 SD below the mean or 1 SD below the mean) on standardized tests. However, as demonstrated in this article, many standardized tests do not even provide information about validity and reliability.

Read More

Continued Biases in Identifying “Gifted and Talented”

Cate

The New York Times just released an article titled, “Schools Ask: Gifted or Just Well Prepared?” The article goes in depth about the processes used to assess young children to see if they should be placed into gifted and talented programs, and questions whether or not their success is due to actual giftedness or due to the amount of preparation they have prior to being tested. We can buy high scores on “gifted and talented” identification tests. Of course, higher SES leads to broader experiences and higher quality education, which then leads to identification as “gifted and talented”. My question is, when will tests used to identify “gifted and talented” students focus on their ability to learn and apply new information, rather than assess prior knowledge?

What do you think?

Report Writing: Quantification

Leaders Project

Even though standardized test scores should not be used to determine or diagnose disability, quantification is required to demonstrate that a child should receive services. Depending on the district, city, and state laws, a child with a certain percentage of delay in one or more domains is eligible to receive related services or to be placed in special education. It is the evaluator’s job to use his or her clinical judgement to determine percentage of delay if it exists. Read More