bas3 psychologist report - gl assessment · i spoke to gagan's mother on the telephone on 7...

BAS3 Psychologist Report ID number: 0010 Child's name:

Date of birth: 05/01/06 Date tested: 07/11/11 Last date tested:

Age at assessment: 5:10 Address:

School / class:

Special needs: Physical and mobility Home / first language: English Ethnicity: Indian

Background to assessment Gagan is a Year 1 child who has had a Statement of Special Educational needs since 2009. Gagan has a brittle bone condition. It was concluded during statutory assessment that as well as physical difficulties linked to her bone condition she has very low cognitive ability, difficulties with social skills, delayed language and difficulties with self help skills. Gagan has attended Hightop School, a maintained special school that specialises in providing for young people with physical difficulties and learning difficulties, since the start of Reception. Gagan's parents speak English and Punjabi at home; they consider English to be Gagan's first language. Educational Psychology input was requested by Hightop School to provide up‐to‐date evidence about Gagan's special educational needs as school felt that Gagan has made considerable progress with learning during her time at Hightop. No cognitive assessment was done during Gagan's statutory assessment; school wonder whether the conclusions that were drawn about her cognitive ability during statutory assessment were an underestimate. If this were the case, school wondered whether it was appropriate for Gagan to start accessing mainstream school. On 4 November, 2011, I spoke with Gagan's class teacher and nursery nurse and I observed Gagan in class. On 7 November, 2011, I returned and completed the British Ability Scales 3 Early Years (BAS3) with Gagan to assess her strengths and weaknesses in verbal skills, pictorial reasoning and spatial skills. As I was told that Gagan can be nervous when working with unfamiliar adults, and as Gagan's sister (Rupi) happened to be present in school that morning, Rupi was present during the assessment.

Behavioural observations Gagan smiled on occasion and answered questions when asked but she did not initiate conversation and did not speak more than was necessary. She appeared to be trying her best with the assessment (for example, on a couple of occasions she spontaneously self‐corrected) despite tiring towards the end of the assessment. On a number of occasions Gagan became silent when she was unable to complete a task. On these occasions I let her know that it was okay to miss a question and move on to the next one. Gagan's fine motor skills (including her pen grip and letter formation) appeared to be an area of weakness although not to the extent that they interfered with her general performance.

Testing undertaken Core Scales • Verbal Comprehension • Picture Similarities • Naming Vocabulary • Pattern Construction (Alt) • Matrices

© 2012 GL Assessment Limited Created on 27/03/2012 for A. Psychologist of Independent Assessment Services 1

• Copying Diagnostic Scales • Recall of Objects: Immediate Verbal • Recall of Objects: Immediate Spatial • Recall of Objects: Delayed Verbal • Recall of Objects: Delayed Spatial • Early Number Concepts • Recall of Digits Forward • Matching Letter‐like Forms • Recognition of Pictures • Recall of Digits Backward

Views of child Gagan said that she likes school and that the best thing about school is that she gets to play with her friend Steff. When asked what could be better about school, Gagan said, "Nothing."

Views of parents I spoke to Gagan's mother on the telephone on 7 November, 2011. She spoke about how much progress Gagan has made at Hightop and about how she believes that this level of progress would not have been made if Gagan had been at a mainstream school. Further, Mrs Grewal commented that she feels that Gagan would not be able to access mainstream school because of the large number of children there and Gagan's brittle bone condition.

Views of psychologist: Next steps The results of this assessment suggest that Gagan's cognitive abilities a) are greater than was indicated during her statutory assessment and b) are also greater than is usual for students on roll at Hightop. Given Gagan's low levels of confidence and her reluctance to engage in conversation it is possible that Gagan's ability is not fully evident in the classroom environment. Those working with Gagan should be aware of her great strength in pictorial reasoning. Where possible, visual means of learning (for example, using pictures, computer games and mind‐maps) should be used to supplement and support Gagan's language‐based learning. Hightop should continue to liaise with Gagan's Occupational Therapist to put in place a programme to develop her fine motor skills and to further assess her visual‐spatial skills as these are an area of significant weakness. Gagan has made significant progress since her Statement of Special Educational Needs was written. An interim review has been called at Hightop School (10am on 25 January, 2012) to update her Statement so that it more accurately describes her needs. All involved in working with Gagan (both her family and professionals) should start to consider the possibility of Gagan accessing some mainstream inclusion. Gagan remains a vulnerable child both because of her brittle bone condition and her varied learning profile. As such, any mainstream inclusion would need to be carefully planned and monitored.

Any other comments Given the level of difference between Gagan's non‐verbal reasoning ability and her general conceptual ability it is best practice to consider her full pattern of scores rather than to quote her general conceptual ability on its own.

Assessment completed by: A. Psychologist, Independent Assessment Services


Appendix A: Tabulated results

GCA and Cluster standard scores

CLUSTERS

VERBAL ABILITY

NON‐VERBAL REASONING ABILITY

SPATIAL ABILITY

SNC

Verbal Comprehension 38

Picture Similarities 62 62

Naming Vocabulary 39

Pattern Construction (Alt) 29 29

Matrices 53 53

Copying 27 27

Sum of T‐scores 77 + 115 + 56 = 248 171

VERBAL ABILITY

NON‐VERBAL REASONING ABILITY

SPATIAL ABILITY GCA

SNC

Standard score 80 113 58 80 85

Confidence interval (95%) 73–92 99–122 53–71 74–89 78–95

Percentile 9 81 0.3 9 16

CLUSTER Standard score

Description of standard score

(see Appendix C)

Verbal Ability 80 Below Average

Non‐verbal Reasoning Ability 113 Above Average

Spatial Ability 58 Very Low

GCA Score 80 Below Average

SNC Score 85 Below Average


Comparisons of GCA and Cluster Scores and observed with predicted Achievement Scale scores

Significance? COMPARISONS WITH THE GCA

Observed difference p=0.05 Y/N

Frequency (%)

Verbal 0 10 N >25

Non‐verbal Reasoning ‐33 10 Y <1

Spatial 22 11 Y 10<>5

Significance? BETWEEN CLUSTER COMPARISONS


Frequency (%)

Verbal vs Non‐verbal Reasoning ‐33 16 Y 5<>2

Verbal vs Spatial 22 17 Y 25<>15

Non‐verbal Reasoning vs Spatial 55 18 Y <1

Significance? WITHIN CLUSTER COMPARISONS


Frequency (%)

Verbal Comprehension vs Naming Vocabulary ‐1 11 N >25

Pattern Construction vs Copying 2 10 N >25

Picture Similarities vs Matrices ‐9 15 N >25 *This comparison is based on the Pattern Construction Standard analysis but, as you used the Alternative Procedure, you should treat these figures with caution.


Summary of ability scores, T‐scores, percentiles and age equivalents

Significance?

Core Scales Ability score Ability score T‐score Percentile

Difference from mean core T‐score p=0.05 Y/N

Frequency (%)

Age equivalent

Verbal Comprehension 110 38 12 ‐3 7 N >25 4:04

Picture Similarities 120 62 88 21 10 Y <1 7:07

Naming Vocabulary 123 39 14 ‐2 8 N >25 4:01

Pattern Construction (Alt) 104 29 2 ‐12 3:10

Matrices 94 53 62 12 9 Y 15<>10 6:01

Copying 44 27 1 ‐14 7 Y >25 Below 3:00

Mean T‐score = 41

Significance?

Diagnostic Scales Ability score Ability score T‐score Percentile

Difference from mean core T‐score p=0.05 Y/N

Frequency (%)

Age equivalent

Recall of Objects: Immediate Verbal

64 44 27 3 19 N >25 Below 5:00

Recall of Objects: Immediate Spatial

3 35 7

Recall of Objects: Delayed Verbal

4 41 18

Recall of Objects: Delayed Spatial

2 36 8

Early Number Concepts 94 31 3 ‐10 10 Y >25 3:10

Recall of Digits Forward 81 37 10 ‐4 11 N >25 Below 5:00

Matching Letter‐like Forms 41 33 4 ‐8 12 N >25 3:10

Recognition of Pictures 118 64 92 23 15 Y 1 11:03

Recall of Digits Backward 29 39 14 ‐2 10 N >25 Below 5:00Note: The Diagnostic Scale figures are based on the BAS II norms, except for Early Number Concepts. Early Number Concepts is calculated differently from the other Core Scale comparisons, given that the comparator in these cases is not an element of the GCA or SNC. See the BAS3 Technical Manual for further information.


Profile of results

Green = GCA and Cluster Scores; Orange = Early Years Core Scales; Purple = Diagnostic Scales; The circle (standard score) or diamond (T‐score) is the child's actual score and the whiskers on either side show the 95% confidence interval. Scores falling within the shaded band are considered to be 'Average' (see Appendix C).


Table 1: Score descriptors for T‐scores and Achievement Scale standard scores

Scales T‐score Description of T‐score

(see Appendix C)

Verbal Comprehension 38 Below Average

Picture Similarities 62 Above Average

Naming Vocabulary 39 Below Average

Pattern Construction (Alt) 29 Very Low

Matrices 53 Average

Copying 27 Very Low

Recall of Objects: Immediate Verbal 44 Average

Recall of Objects: Immediate Spatial 35 Low

Recall of Objects: Delayed Verbal 41 Below Average

Recall of Objects: Delayed Spatial 36 Low

Early Number Concepts 31 Low

Recall of Digits Forward 37 Below Average

Matching Letter‐like Forms 33 Low

Recognition of Pictures 64 High

Recall of Digits Backward 39 Below Average

Table 2: Individual scale data

Scales Raw score Item set Ability score

Standard Error of Measurement

Lower limit*

Upper limit*

Verbal Comprehension 15 6‒30 110 5.5 105 116

Picture Similarities 20 12‒35 120 6.6 113 127

Naming Vocabulary 12 11‒31 123 6.7 116 130

Pattern Construction (Alt) 14 1‒19 104 6.5 98 111

Matrices 18 1‒26 94 5.2 89 99

Copying 3 1‒12 44 8.4 36 52

Recall of Objects: Immediate Verbal 16 1‒60 64 6.0 58 70

Recall of Objects: Immediate Spatial 3

Recall of Objects: Delayed Verbal 4

Recall of Objects: Delayed Spatial 2

Early Number Concepts 14 1‒17 94 6.0 88 100

Recall of Digits Forward 10 1‒36 81 8.0 73 89

Matching Letter‐like Forms 7 1‒26 41 5.0 36 46

Recognition of Pictures 15 1‒23 118 6.0 112 124

Recall of Digits Backward 2 1‒30 29 10.0 19 39

* The lower and upper limits represent the 68% confidence interval for the obtained ability score. The 68% confidence interval has been obtained by subtracting one Standard Error of Measurement from the obtained ability score and adding one Standard Error of Measurement to the obtained ability score. If required, the 95% confidence interval may be obtained by subtracting two Standard Errors of Measurement from the obtained ability score and adding two Standard Errors of Measurement to the obtained ability score.


Table 3: Confidence intervals for individual scale data

Scales T‐score (95% CI)

Percentile rank (95% CI)

Verbal Comprehension 27‐38‐49 1‐12‐46

Picture Similarities 49‐62‐75 46‐88‐99

Naming Vocabulary 26‐39‐52 1‐14‐58

Pattern Construction (Alt) 20‐29‐42 1‐2‐21

Matrices 43‐53‐63 24‐62‐90

Copying 20‐27‐43 1‐1‐24

Recall of Objects: Immediate Verbal 32‐44‐56 4‐27‐73

Recall of Objects: Immediate Spatial ‐‐ ‐‐

Recall of Objects: Delayed Verbal ‐‐ ‐‐

Recall of Objects: Delayed Spatial ‐‐ ‐‐

Early Number Concepts 20‐31‐43 1‐3‐24

Recall of Digits Forward 21‐37‐53 1‐10‐62

Matching Letter‐like Forms 23‐33‐43 1‐4‐24

Recognition of Pictures 52‐64‐76 58‐92‐99

Recall of Digits Backward 20‐39‐59 1‐14‐82 See BAS3 Technical Manual for an explanation of how the confidence intervals (CI) have been obtained. The red figure in the middle is the obtained score and the other figures represent the lower and upper limits of the confidence interval within which the true score is likely to lie.


Appendix B: Description of BAS3 and of what each BAS3 scale is designed to assess

Introduction The BAS3 scales are designed to estimate the current level of aspects of developed intellectual or cognitive functioning. The test data is intended to supplement rather than replace other sources of information about a child or young person's level of cognitive functioning. (Cognitive functioning refers to the ability to process verbal and non‐verbal information and to the use of reasoning skills and concepts to solve problems and puzzles.) Therefore, the data should always be interpreted alongside other information obtained from observation and behavioural assessment, together with information about the child's background and current life situation. In this way, the test results reported may be used to aid the generation of hypotheses, or to provide evidence which helps to confirm hypotheses, about the child's cognitive strengths and weaknesses. BAS3 has Cognitive Scales and three Achievement Scales. The Cognitive Scales are organised into Core and Diagnostic Scales. The Core Scales contribute to the General Conceptual Ability (GCA) Score and are also used to obtain the Cluster Scores (see below). The Diagnostic Scales provide additional information on a range of other specific abilities.

Cluster Scores There are four overall Cluster or summary scores in BAS3. These are obtained from the Core Scales. The General Conceptual Ability Score (GCA) is the score that summarises the individual's overall ability to carry out the complex transformations on information needed for reasoning and when applying concepts. It indicates the individual's capacity to adapt his or her intellect to any task and has previously been termed 'General IQ'. Within this overall general ability, it is possible to evaluate relative strengths in three more specific areas. These three factor‐based Clusters are termed Verbal Ability, Non‐verbal Reasoning Ability and Spatial Ability.

BAS3 Core Scales

Matrices This scale contributes to the GCA Score and the Non‐verbal Reasoning Ability Cluster Score. The score indicates the individual's level of non‐verbal inductive reasoning ability. The items in the scale require the ability to identify rules governing variables in abstract figures and to formulate and test these rules. Solution of the items also requires the use of verbal mediation strategies and visual‐spatial analysis, including perception of shape, relative size and orientation.

Pattern Construction (Alt) This scale contributes to the GCA Score and the Spatial Ability Cluster Score. The score indicates the individual's level of visual‐spatial ability. The scale items require the ability to perceive and analyse visual information: decomposing designs into their component parts, perceiving and preserving the relative position, size and angles of the designs and using systematic spatial problem‐solving strategies such as sequential assembly, trial and error or hypothesis testing. Eye‐hand coordination is also required to solve the items.

BAS3 Diagnostic Scales

Early Number Concepts This scale measures knowledge of basic mathematical concepts, including number, size and position. It requires knowledge of mathematical language, the ability to perceive and analyse visual images and the integration of visual and verbal information. Scores will be influenced by background experience and general verbal comprehension.

Matching Letter‐like Forms This scale measures perception and discrimination of the spatial orientation of simple figures. It requires fine discrimination between similar figures resembling alphabetic characters and the use of strategies for scanning and making visual comparisons.

Recall of Digits Backward This scale taps into verbal working memory and, possibly, visualisation. It requires the oral recall of sequences of numbers in the reverse order from which they were heard.


Recall of Digits Forward This scale is primarily a measure of short‐term auditory memory span but is also influenced by auditory attention. It requires the oral recall of sequences of numbers.

Recall of Objects This scale measures short‐term and intermediate/delayed memory for visual information (pictures) using both verbal and spatial recall. Performance is influenced by the ability to use strategies for the storage and retrieval of information and by the ability to attend and concentrate.

Recognition of Pictures This scale measures short‐term visual memory. The items require efficient visual scanning, attention to visual details including shape, size and orientation and, at the lower end of the scale, the use of verbal tagging as evidenced by the spontaneous use of verbal labels when recognising the target objects.


Appendix C: Information about BAS3 scores

Norm‐referenced scores and BAS3

All the norm‐referenced scores obtained with BAS3 have been linked to the normal curve, as shown in the diagram. This allows each score obtained by an individual to be evaluated in relation to how many other children at that age would have the same score. In this way, it is possible to consider how average/usual a score is or how unusual it might be. T‐scores have a mean score of 50 and a standard deviation of 10 points either side. Most children (~ 68%) will score within the range 40 to 60, and around 96% will score within the broad range of standard scores from 30 to 70. T‐scores are obtained for each of the individual scales in BAS3, with the exception of the three Achievement Scales. Standard scores have a mean score of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 points either side. Most children (~ 68%) score within the range 85 to 115, and around 96% will score within the broad range of standard scores from 70 to 130. Standard scores are obtained for the four Cluster Scores in BAS3, i.e. for the GCA and for the Verbal Ability, Non‐verbal Reasoning Ability and Spatial Ability Cluster Scores. In addition, standard scores are obtained for the three Achievement Scales, i.e. for Number Skills, Spelling and Word Reading. Percentiles or percentile ranks also show where a child's score lies in relation to children of his or her same age. The 50th percentile is average. Most children (~ 68%) will obtain a percentile within the broad range from the 16th to the 84th percentile, while around 96% will obtain a percentile within the broad range from the 2nd to the 98th percentile. A score at the 10th percentile means that 10 out of 100 children in the standardisation sample achieved a similar score or lower, and 90 scored higher.

Describing the BAS3 scores Various terms are used within this report when describing a child or young person's abilities. For convenience, and in line with many other published tests, the following terms are used when describing the various scores and percentiles.

GCA / SNC, Cluster Score and Achievement Scale score descriptors (with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15)


Scores Percentiles Very High 130 and above 98‒99 High 120‒129 91‒97 Above Average 110‒119 75‒90 Average 90‒109 25‒74 Below Average 80‒89 9‒24 Low 70‒79 3‒8

Very Low 69 and below 1‒2

T‐score descriptors (with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10)

Scores Percentiles Very High 70 and above 98‒99 High 63‒69 91‒97 Above Average 57‒62 75‒90 Average 43‒56 25‒74 Below Average 37‒42 9‒24 Low 30‒36 3‒8

Very Low 29 and below 1‒2

A note of caution The descriptor for the GCA is based usually on the child's performance on six scales. The descriptive term may be considered more reliable therefore than the descriptors for the Clusters, which are based on performance on only two scales. The descriptor for the T‐score is based on performance on just one scale. Consequently, applying the seven‐point gradation to the Cluster Scores and individual T‐scores might be considered less reliable than when applied to the GCA. Therefore, some caution is needed when using the descriptors. There is a need for further caution. All the descriptors are linked to the child's single obtained scores, rather than to the confidence intervals for each of the scores. If the scores at the lower and upper ends of the confidence intervals are described, a single obtained score being described as Below Average might in fact be truly Low or truly Average. This is especially true for the T‐scores. Therefore, again caution is needed when using the descriptors. One approach to these two cautions for the Cluster Scores and T‐scores is to simplify the score categories and use the following descriptors:

Cluster Scores T‐scores Above Average 110 and above 57 and above Average 90‒109 43‒56

Below Average 57‒62 42 and below

Age equivalents The age equivalents available for each individual scale represent the median ability score in the standardisation sample for that scale at the ages specified. As such, they may help to give a guide to the age of child for which the observed performance on any one scale would be most typical.

A note of caution The standardisation data for any one individual scale has been used to develop the age equivalents for that scale. Each scale has its own set of data. This means that different ability scores on two scales may convert into the same age equivalent, or that the same ability score on two scales may convert into different age equivalents. This may lead others to question the accuracy of the scoring, whereas the differences are simply the result of the scale by scale development of BAS3.


bas3 psychologist report - gl assessment · i spoke to gagan's mother on the telephone on 7...

Documents