3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:39 Page 1
Part I
INTERVENTION PLANNING:DIAGNOSTIC ASSESSMENT,RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION, ANDCONSULTATION
COPYRIG
HTED M
ATERIAL
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:39 Page 2
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:39 Page 3
One
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD OF ANALYZINGASSESSMENT RESULTS FOR TAILORINGINTERVENTIONS (SMAARTI)
Jennifer T. MascoloDawn P. FlanaganVincent C. Alfonso
The term intervention is one that is familiar to anyone working in a schoolsystem. Adjectives such as research-based and evidence-basedwhen placed infront of this term elevate it to an indubitable status. This is primarily
because these descriptors suggest that the intervention was subjected to a rigorousevaluation and was found to be effective, meaning that when implemented withfidelity, it leads to positive outcomes (e.g., Cooney, Huser, Small, & O’Connor,2007; Flanagan & Alfonso, 2011).
Not surprisingly, then, evidence-based interventions are often the ones that areused first in either general or specialized instructional settings as compared to thoseinterventions and techniques without such support. In general, it is incumbentupon practitioners to use evidence-based interventions with students who struggleacademically. It is also prudent to use comprehensive interventions that can meetstudents’ multiple manifest academic difficulties (e.g., remedial reading programsthat contain the five essential components of reading; Feifer, 2011). However, it isclear from the literature that despite their overt relevancy, not all comprehensive,evidence-based interventions address the academic needs of every student effec-tively (e.g., Della Tofallo, 2010; Hale, Wycoff, & Fiorello, 2011).
In a tiered service delivery model, interventions are planned for and selectedbased on universal screening data. For example, students who are at risk forreading difficulties may receive Wilson if their reading difficulties are related
3
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:39 Page 4
primarily to decoding difficulties or Read 180 if their reading difficulties are relatedprimarily to comprehension difficulties (e.g., Feifer, 2011, and Chapter 5, thisvolume). When a student does not respond as expected to evidence-basedinterventions, a comprehensive evaluation is often recommended to gain a betterunderstanding of the nature of and basis for the student’s learning difficulties. It isthrough a comprehensive and focused evaluation that the intervention processmoves from planning and selecting interventions to tailoring interventions. Planningand selecting interventions is typical of a standard treatment protocol Response toIntervention (RTI) service delivery model, whereas tailoring interventions is moreconsistent with a problem-solving RTI model.
PLANNING AND SELECTING INTERVENTIONS VERSUSTAILORING INTERVENTIONS
Planning and selecting interventions is conceptualized here as the process ofidentifying evidence-based interventions that are most often used in standardservice delivery models to address manifest academic difficulties that are revealedvia progress monitoring (e.g., a particular reading program is selected by a districtas a Tier II intervention for students with reading fluency difficulties). On theother hand, a primary focus of tailoring interventions involves understanding thestudent’s pattern of cognitive and academic strengths and weaknesses and how thispattern interacts with the instructional materials used by the student as well asclassroom instructional factors, environmental factors, and other individual/situational factors that may facilitate or inhibit learning. The goals, therefore,are (a) to use information about a variety of intrinsic and extrinsic factors to tailorspecific interventions; and (b) to ensure that a student has appropriate access to thecurriculum byminimizing or bypassing the adverse affects that cognitive and otherweaknesses have on the student’s learning. Tailoring interventions may includeModification (e.g., instructional, curricular), Accommodation, Remediation, andCompensation. The acronym,MARC, can be used to assist in remembering thesemethods of tailoring interventions, which are defined in Rapid Reference 1.1.
AMETHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS
This chapter provides a Systematic Method of Analyzing Assessment Results forTailoring Interventions (SMAARTI). This method, as initially conceptualized byMascolo (2008), involves the organization, analysis, and synthesis of assessmentdata to aid in understanding the cognitive basis of students’ learning difficulties.Based onmultiple data sources, the steps of SMAARTI assist in identifying various
4 ESSENTIALS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR UNIQUE LEARNERS
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:40 Page 5
Rapid Reference 1.1 Methods of Tailoring Interventions...........................................................................................................................
TailoringMethod Brief Description Examples
Modification Changes content of material to betaught or measured; typicallyinvolves changing or reducinglearning or measurementexpectations; may change thedepth, breadth, and complexity oflearning and measurement goals.
Reducing the amount of materialthat a student is required to learnSimplifying material to be learnedRequiring only literal (as opposedto critical/inferential) questionsfrom an end-of-chaptercomprehension checkSimplifying test instructions andcontent
Accommodation Changes conditions under whichlearning occurs or is measured, butdoes not change or reduce learningor assessment expectations.Accommodations may includetiming, flexible scheduling,presentation, setting, and responseaccommodations.
Extending time on examsAssigning a project in advance orallowing more time to complete aprojectAligning math problems vertically,as opposed to horizontallyProviding a separate room toworkHaving a student dictate responsesto a scribe
Remediation Techniques or programs used toameliorate cognitive and academicdeficits. Academic interventionstypically focus on developing a skill,increasing automaticity of skills, orimproving the application of skills.Cognitive interventions typicallyfocus on improving cognitiveprocesses such as working memorycapacity and phonologicalprocessing. There are manytechniques, published programs,and software designed for thepurpose of remediation.
Evidence-based programs listed atWhat Works Clearing House:http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwcReading programs appearing onthe Florida Center for ReadingResearch website: www.fcrr.ordTechniques and materials from theReading Rockets website: www.readingrockets.orgCogMed (Pearson)Spotlight on ListeningComprehension (LinguiSystems,2006)
Compensation Procedures, techniques, andstrategies that are intended tobypass or minimize the impact of acognitive or academic deficit.
Teaching the use of mnemonicdevicesOrganizational aids or techniquesTeaching a student to outline oruse graphic organizers
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 5
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:40 Page 6
methods of tailoring intervention (i.e., MARC) that make instruction moreaccessible to the student, thereby improving learning. SMAARTI is used whena student fails to respond as expected to evidence-based interventions (typicallythose used at Tier II) and, therefore, undergoes a comprehensive evaluation thatincludes an assessment of cognitive functioning.
STEPS OF SMAARTI
SMAARTI consists of five steps (see Rapid Reference 1.2). While this methodassumes that several forms of data have already been collected for a particularstudent and, therefore, will be viewed post-hoc, the steps of SMAARTI can also serveas a roadmap to the types of data that ought to be gathered in an initial evaluation toaid in tailoring interventions for students with unique learning needs.
DON’T FORGET............................................................................................................A comprehensive evaluation should include data from the following areas offunctioning: (a) educational history and current academic performance; (b) familialfactors and medical history; (c) cognitive performance (including Cattell-Horn-Carroll [CHC] ability domains and neuropsychological processes); (d) behavioral andsocial-emotional functioning; and (e) classroom/instructional/environmental obser-vations. Other information that must be garnered during the course of an evaluationto ensure that interventions are practical include parent/home resources (e.g., timeavailable to spend with student, parent interest/motivation, parents’ level of languageproficiency, computer in the home), student’s schedule and routine, current and pastinterventions used, and current strategies used by the student. When necessary, acomprehensive evaluation may include assessment of cultural and linguistic factors aswell as any other factors that will assist in differential diagnosis.
Rapid Reference 1.2 The Five Steps of SMAARTI...........................................................................................................................
1. Organize primary data using the CHC-based Data Organization and Targets forIntervention form (or DOTI form; see Table 1.1 and CD). Primary data includeinformation from norm-referenced, standardized tests of cognitive and academicability and neuropsychological processes and provide information about charac-teristics that reside mainly within the child (i.e., that are intrinsic). Examine allprimary data to gain an understanding of the student’s unique pattern of ability andprocessing strengths and weaknesses.
2. Determine whether academic weaknesses are empirically related to the cognitiveweaknesses by reviewing the research on the relations among specific cognitive
6 ESSENTIALS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR UNIQUE LEARNERS
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:40 Page 7
Step 1: Organize Primary Data Using the CHC-Based Data Organizationand Targets for Intervention (DOTI) Form
In this step, practitioners may use the CHC-based DOTI form in Table 1.1(also downloadable from CD) to organize primary data. Primary data includestandardized test scores from cognitive and academic measures, special-purpose batteries (e.g., memory, language), district-wide testing programs(e.g., English Language Arts scores), and progress monitoring. As may be seenin Table 1.1, the DOTI form is organized into 10 CHC domains. It alsocontains an “other” category, which is reserved for use with measures not
abilities, neuropsychological processes, and academic skills (see Rapid Reference1.4). An empirically established relationship between cognitive abilities or pro-cesses and academic skills allows practitioners to gain a better understanding of thepotential reasons for the academic deficit. Knowledge of the underlying reasonsfor academic skill deficiency is necessary for both diagnosis and intervention.
3. Review manifestations of cognitive weaknesses, organize secondary data, identifyinitial targets for intervention, and identify types of academic skill deficits forremediation using the DOTI form. Determine whether identified cognitiveweaknesses manifest in real-world performances in predictable ways. Refer tothe CHC-based manifestations tables (see Rapid References 1. 5 to 1.13) to gainan understanding of the various ways in which a weakness in a specific cognitivedomain likely manifests generally, as well as more specifically in reading, math, andwriting. Based on this information, integrate secondary data into the DOTI form.Secondary data include information from rating scales, classroom observations, andinterviews with parents, teachers, and the student him- or herself. Like primarydata, secondary data typically provide information about characteristics that areintrinsic to the child. When practitioners are able to observe the manifestations ofspecific cognitive deficits in classroom performance, for example, cognitive testresults are ecologically valid. Be sure to note whether manifestations of cognitivedeficits are pervasive (i.e., occur across settings) or setting-specific (e.g., occur onlyin school during mathematics instruction). When recording data in the DOTIform, hypothesize whether the cognitive areas of weakness should be targeted formodification, accommodation, remediation, compensation, or some combinationthereof, and whether the areas of academic weakness are related to basic skillacquisition, fluency, or higher level skill (i.e., application).
4. Consider tertiary data, which are comprised of information about classroominstruction, instructional materials, environment, and strategies—that is, informa-tion about factors that affect learning and that are largely external to the student(i.e., extrinsic). Use the information in Rapid References 1.14 to 1.20 to tailorinterventions for the purpose of minimizing the effects of cognitive weaknesses onlearning and achievement.
5. Integrate data from all previous steps, design and implement an intervention, andmonitor its effectiveness.
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 7
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:44 Page 8
readily classified into one of the 10 CHC domains (e.g., measures of visualmotor ability, attention, executive functions, social-emotional). The DOTIform has three columns for organizing data, allowing for normative strengthsand weaknesses to be recorded in separate columns. As the note to Table 1.1
Table 1.1 CHC-Based Data Organization and Targets for Intervention(DOTI) Form
CHC Cognitive/AcademicAbility or ProcessingDomain
Normative Weaknessand Information About
Intervention
WithinNormalLimits
Normative Strengthand Information
About Intervention
Fluid Reasoning (Gf)Target for Intervention?Crystallized Intelligence (Gc)Target for Intervention?Long-Term Storage andRetrieval (Glr)Target for Intervention?Short-Term Memory (Gsm)Target for Intervention?Visual Processing (Gv)Target for Intervention?Auditory Processing (Ga)Target for Intervention?Processing Speed (Gs)Target for Intervention?Reading (Grw-R)Type of Skill TargetedWriting (Grw-W)Type of Skill TargetedMathematics (Gq)Type of Skill TargetedOtherTarget for Intervention?
Note: Use the following guidelines for identifying strengths and weaknesses: NormativeWeakness is defined by standard scores that are about one standard deviation or more belowthe mean; Normative Strength is defined by standard scores that are about one standarddeviation or more above the mean; within normal limits is defined by standard scores that fallbetween ± 1 SD of the normative mean (i.e., standard scores between 85 and 115). If acognitive domain is targeted for intervention, note whether it is targeted for Modification toInstruction/Curriculum (M), Accommodation (A), Remediation (R), or Compensation (C).When there is a need to target an academic area for intervention, note the type of skill targeted aseither a Basic (or foundational) skill (B), Fluency (F), or a Higher-level (or applied) skill (H).
8 ESSENTIALS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR UNIQUE LEARNERS
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:44 Page 9
indicates, in general, standardscores that are about 1 standarddeviation (SD) below the meanor lower are considered norma-tive weaknesses and standardscores that are about 1 SD abovethe mean or higher are consid-ered normative strengths.
To illustrate various aspects ofSMAARTI, this chapter includes excerpts from a case study, a boy, AydenMurphy, who has difficulties with learning (see Rapid Reference 1.3). ADOTI form for Ayden is included in Table 1.2. This table contains primarydata only. For example, a quick review of the data included in this table shows thatAyden has cognitive weaknesses in Glr, Ga, and Gs as well as deficits in reading,math, and writing skills. He also has relative strengths, particularly in the areaof Gv.
C A U T I O N.........................................................Readers not familiar with CHC theory arereferred to Essentials of Cross-BatteryAssessment, Third Edition (Flanagan, Ortiz, &Alfonso, 2013) for definitions and taskexamples of all CHC abilities as well asCHC classifications of cognitive, academic,and neuropsychological tests.
Rapid Reference 1.3 Selected Information From aPsychoeducational Evaluation of Ayden Murphy...........................................................................................................................
Name: Ayden MurphyAge: 10Gender: MaleGrade Level: Fifth Grade
Reason for Referral:Ayden was referred to the Spotswood Center for Psychological Services for anevaluation by his mother, Ms. Murphy. Ms. Murphy reported that she was concernedabout Ayden’s difficulties in reading, reading comprehension, and writing. Morespecifically, Ms. Murphy indicated that Ayden continues to have difficulty decodingwords and is not able to write in complete sentences most of the time or formparagraphs. In general, Ayden’s academic performance has declined markedly in thefifth grade and he has recently demonstrated much less interest in school, homework,and reading.
Selected Measures Administered/Evaluation Procedures:Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration, Sixth Edition
(BEERY VMI)
(continued)
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 9
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:44 Page 10
Child Intake InterviewParent Intake Interview (Source: Mother)Test of Orthographic Competence (TOC)Woodcock-Johnson III Normative Update Tests of Achievement (WJ III NU ACH);
Form A, Age NormsWoodcock-Johnson III Normative Update Tests of Cognitive Abilities (WJ III NU
COG); Form A, Age Norms
Background Information:Ayden is a 10-year-old Caucasian male who is currently in fifth grade at JeffersonElementary. He resides with his mother, stepfather, maternal grandmother, andyounger sister. Ms. Murphy reported that Ayden typically gets along with all membersof the household. Ayden has no reported medical conditions and is seemingly in goodhealth. Ayden’s last vision exam was approximately a year ago. He wears glasses fornearsightedness. Although he has never had a hearing exam outside of school, hishearing has never been a concern and he has passed all screening exams conducted atschool.
Ayden attended Washington Heights Day Care between the ages of 3 and 5years. He has attended Jefferson Elementary School since kindergarten and iscurrently in the fifth grade. During kindergarten (age 5), Ayden’s teacher reportedthat he behaved well, but had difficulty reading and making sound-symbolconnections. During first grade (age 6), Ayden had a strict teacher whom Ms.Murphy believed was beneficial for him. Specifically, Ayden’s first-grade teacherkept him on-task and worked with him often on an individual basis. Nevertheless,during second grade (age 7), Ayden continued having difficulty reading and alsobegan misbehaving in the classroom. For example, he would often play with thingsin his desk during reading instruction and frequently left his seat during readinggroups. In third grade (age 8), Ayden was described as having problems withreading and writing and, in fourth grade (age 9), he received additional help from areading teacher. Although he continued to struggle in reading and writing in thefourth grade, his teacher reported that he made some improvement over thecourse of the academic year.
Ayden is currently in fifth grade (age 10). According to his mother, Ayden iscurrently receiving pull-out services, which include meeting with the remedial readingteacher for one period three times per week for 30 minutes.
In terms of social-emotional development, Ms. Murphy described Ayden asgenerally cooperative, even-tempered, friendly, happy, and affectionate. Hereportedly gets along well with others. Ayden enjoys playing football, soccer,and X-Box. According to Ayden, his least favorite activities are reading indepen-dently and completing social studies homework, although Ms. Murphy reportedthat Ayden enjoys reading with his family. Ayden also likes going to the park,movies, and out to eat. Ayden attends Operation Exodus, which is an after-schoolprogram designed to help him complete his homework and explore variouseducational activities.
(continued)
10 ESSENTIALS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR UNIQUE LEARNERS
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:46 Page 11
Table 1.2 DOTI Form for Ayden MurphyWith Primary Data Only
CHC Cognitive/AcademicAbility or Processing Domain
NormativeWeakness and
Information AboutIntervention
Within NormalLimits
NormativeStrength and
Information AboutIntervention
Fluid Reasoning (Gf) Fluid ReasoningFactor = 88 ± 4
Target for Intervention?Crystallized Intelligence (Gc) Comprehension-
KnowledgeFactor = 95 ± 4
Target for Intervention?Long-Term Storage andRetrieval (Glr)
Long-Term Storageand Retrieval Factor= 77 ± 5
Target for Intervention?Short-Term Memory (Gsm) Short-Term
Memory Factor= 96 ± 6
Target for Intervention?Visual Processing (Gv) Visual
ProcessingFactor =107 ± 4
Target for Intervention?Auditory Processing (Ga) Auditory Processing
Factor = 72 ± 5Target for Intervention?Processing Speed (Gs) Processing Speed
Factor = 84 ± 4Target for Intervention?Reading (Grw-R) Passage
Comprehension =70 ± 5Reading Fluency =83 ±
Letter-WordIdentification =90 ± 4
Type of Skill TargetedWriting (Grw-W) Writing Samples =
74 ± 6Spelling =87 ± 5Writing Fluency= 95 ± 5
Type of Skill TargetedMathematics (Gq) Applied Problems =
81 ± 4Fluency = 80 ± 4
Calculation =107 ± 4
Type of Skill Targeted(continued )
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 11
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:47 Page 12
Step 2: DetermineWhether AcademicWeaknesses Are EmpiricallyRelated to the CognitiveWeaknesses by Reviewing the Research on theRelations among Specific Cognitive Abilities, NeuropsychologicalProcesses, and Academic Skills
In the initial step of SMAARTI, data were organized by CHC domain andnormative strengths and weaknesses were identified. Prior to making classifica-tions or diagnostic decisions and tailoring interventions, however, it is importantto examine the relations among cognitive abilities, neuropsychological processes,and specific academic skills for the following reasons. First, information oncognitive-achievement relationships assists in interpreting the data entered onthe DOTI form. Second, because specific learning disabilities are caused byunderlying cognitive processing weaknesses, knowing the cognitive correlates ofmanifest academic difficulties assists in diagnosis (e.g., Flanagan, Alfonso, &Ortiz, 2012; Flanagan et al., 2013). Third, when empirical data are available tosupport a relationship between identified areas of cognitive and academic weak-nesses, interventions designed to remediate academic skill deficits can be tailoredin an attempt to minimize the effects of cognitive weaknesses on learning. Thus, inthis step, practitioners should examine the information in Rapid Reference 1.4 todetermine if identified cognitive and academic weaknesses are related empirically.
Table 1.2 (Continued )
CHC Cognitive/AcademicAbility or Processing Domain
NormativeWeakness and
Information AboutIntervention
Within NormalLimits
NormativeStrength and
Information AboutIntervention
OtherTarget for Intervention?
Note: Cognitive and Academic standard scores are from the WJ III NU COG and ACHbatteries (Woodcock, McGrew, & Mather, 2001, 2007), unless otherwise noted. Use thefollowing guidelines for identifying strengths and weaknesses: Normative Weakness is definedby standard scores that are about one standard deviation or more below the mean; NormativeStrength is defined by standard scores that are about one standard deviation or more above themean; within normal limits is defined by standard scores that fall between ± 1 SD of thenormative mean (i.e., standard scores between 85 and 115). If a cognitive domain is targeted forintervention, note whether it is targeted for Modification to Instruction/Curriculum (M),Accommodation (A), Remediation (R), or Compensation (C). When there is a need to target anacademic area for intervention, note the type of skill targeted as either a Basic (or foundational)skill (B), Fluency (F), or a Higher-level (or applied) skill (H).
12 ESSENTIALS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR UNIQUE LEARNERS
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:47 Page 13
Rapid Reference 1.4 Summary of Relations BetweenCHC Broad and Narrow Cognitive Abilities and Reading,
Math, and Writing Achievement...........................................................................................................................
ReadingAchievement
MathAchievement
WritingAchievement
Gf Inductive (I) andgeneral sequentialreasoning (RG)abilities play amoderate role inreadingcomprehension.
Inductive (I)and generalsequential (RG)reasoningabilities areconsistentlyvery importantfor mathproblem solvingat all ages.
Inductive (I) andgeneral sequentialreasoning abilities (RG)are consistently relatedto writtenexpressionat all ages.
Gc Languagedevelopment (LD),lexical knowledge(VL), and listeningability (LS) areimportant at allages. These abilitiesbecomeincreasinglyimportant with age.
Languagedevelopment (LD),lexical knowledge(VL), and listeningabilities (LS) areimportant at allages. These abilitiesbecomeincreasinglyimportant withage.
Languagedevelopment (LD),lexical knowledge (VL),and generalinformation (K0) areimportant primarilyafter about the secondgrade. These abilitiesbecome increasinglyimportant with age.
Gsm Memory span(MS) andworkingmemory (WM)capacity.
Memory span(MS) andworkingmemory (WM)capacity.
Memory span (MS)is important towriting, especiallyspelling skills,whereas workingmemory (WM) hasshown relationswith advancedwriting skills (e.g.,writtenexpression).
Gv OrthographicProcessing—reading fluency
May be importantprimarily for higherlevel or advancedmathematics(e.g., geometry,calculus).
OrthographicProcessing—spelling
(continued)
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 13
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:47 Page 14
Research on the relations among cognitive abilities, neuropsychological pro-cesses, and specific academic skills has mounted over the years (see Flanagan, Ortiz,Alfonso, & Mascolo, 2006; Flanagan, Alfonso, & Mascolo, 2011; Fletcher, Lyon,Fuchs,&Barnes, 2007; andMcGrew&Wendling, 2010, for summaries).Much ofthe recent research on cognitive-academic relationships has been interpreted withinthe context of CHC theory (e.g., Flanagan et al., 2011) and with specificinstruments developed from CHC theory (e.g., McGrew & Wendling, 2010).In addition, statistical analyses, such as structural equationmodeling, have beenusedto understand the extent to which specific cognitive abilities explain variance inacademic skills above and beyond the variance accounted for by g (e.g., Floyd et al.,2008; McGrew, Flanagan, Keith, & Vanderwood, 1997; Juarez, 2012; Vander-wood, McGrew, Keith, & Flanagan, 2001). Finally, many valuable resourcessummarize the research on cognitive and neurobiological processes associatedwith specific academic skill deficits (e.g., Feifer & Della Toffalo, 2007; Flanagan
Ga Phonetic coding(PC) or“phonologicalawareness/processing” is veryimportant duringthe elementaryschool years.
Phonetic coding (PC) or“phonologicalawareness/processing” isvery important duringthe elementary schoolyears for both basicwriting skills and writtenexpression (primarilybefore about grade 5).
Glr Naming facility (NA)or “rapid automaticnaming” is veryimportant during theelementary schoolyears. Associativememory (MA) isalso important.
Naming facility(NA); associativememory (MA)
Phonetic coding (PC) or“phonologicalawareness/processing” isvery important duringthe elementary schoolyears for both basicwriting skills and writtenexpression (primarilybefore about grade 5).
Gs Perceptual speed (P)abilities areimportant during allschool years,particularly theelementary schoolyears.
Perceptual speed (P)abilities areimportant during allschool years,particularly theelementary schoolyears.
Perceptual speed (P)abilities are importantduring all school yearsfor basic writing andrelated to all ages forwritten expression.
(continued)
14 ESSENTIALS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR UNIQUE LEARNERS
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:47 Page 15
& Alfonso, 2011; Fletcher-Janzen& Reynolds, 2008; Fletcher et al., 2007; Hale &Fiorello, 2004; Miller, 2010, 2013).
The research summarized in Rapid Reference 1.4 includes primarily studies onthe relations among the various CHC broad and narrow cognitive abilities andspecific neuropsychological processes and themajor areas of achievement—namely,reading, math, and writing. Rapid Reference 1.4 shows that narrow abilitiessubsumed by Gc (lexical knowledge, language development, listening ability,general information), Gsm (memory span, working memory capacity), Ga (pho-netic coding), Glr (associative memory, meaningful memory, naming facility), andGs (perceptual speed) were found to be significantly andmost consistently related toreading achievement. Similarly, narrow abilities within these same broad abilitieswere found to be related to writing achievement.Narrow abilities within the areas ofGf, Gc, Gsm, Glr, and Gs were found to relate significantly to math achievement,with Gf (induction and general sequential reasoning) showing a stronger relation tothis academic area than either reading or writing.
A review of Ayden’sDOTI form (Table 1.2) shows three areas of cognitive deficitand areas of academic skill deficiency in reading, math, and writing. Based on theinformation summarized in Rapid Reference 1.4, it appears that there is anempirically supported relationship between Ayden’s cognitive weakness in Gsand his academic fluency in reading andmath. There also seems to be an empiricallysupported relationship between his weakness in Ga (viz., the narrow PhoneticCoding ability) and his spelling ability and reading fluency (i.e., inefficient phoneticstrategies slows down reading, thereby interfering with comprehension). Finally,Ayden has weaknesses in both the learning efficiency and retrieval fluency aspects ofGlr, both of which are empirically related to higher level application of basicacademic skills. Ayden’s deficit in Glr and relative weakness in Gf together affectreading comprehension, math problem solving, and written expression adversely.
Step 3: Review Manifestations of CognitiveWeaknesses and OrganizeSecondary Data, Identify Initial Targets for Intervention, and IdentifyTypes of Academic Skill Deficits for Remediation Using the DOTI Form
Once empirically established relations between cognitive and academic areas areidentified, practitioners should consult Rapid References 1.5 to 1.13 to determinewhether the identified cognitive-academic relationships are ecologically valid.These rapid references will prove particularly useful when organizing secondarydata in the DOTI form. Secondary data include any information that can relatepotentially to a specific aspect of the student’s cognitive functioning that was notalready included as primary data. Such information might include data obtained
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 15
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:48 Page 16
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.5Ge
neral
andS
pecifi
cManifesta
tions
ofFlu
idReasoning
(Gf)Weakness
es................................................................................................................................................................................................
CHC
Bro
adCogn
itiveAbilities/
Neu
ropsycho
logica
lFun
ctions
Brief
Defi
nition
Gen
eral
Man
ifestations
of
Cogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lW
eakn
ess
Spe
cificMan
ifestations
of
Cogn
itive/
Neu
ropsycho
logica
lW
eakn
ess
Fluid
Rea
soning
(Gf)
Novelreason
ingandprob
lem
solving;
abilityto
solveprob
lemsthatare
unfamiliar.
Processesareminimallydependento
npriorlearning.
Involves
manipulatingrules,abstracting,
generalizing,andidentifying
logical
relatio
nships.
Fluidreason
ingisevidentininferential
reason
ing,conceptformation,
classificatio
nof
unfamiliarstim
uli,
categorization,andextrapolationof
reason
ableestim
ates
inam
biguou
ssituatio
ns(Schneider
&McG
rew,2012).
NarrowGfabilitiesincludeInduction,
GeneralSequentialR
easoning
(Deductio
n),and
Quantitative
Reason
ing.
Diffi
cultieswith:
Higher-levelthinkingand
reason
ing
Transferringor
generalizinglearning
Derivingsolutio
nsfor
novelproblem
sExtendingknow
ledge
throughcriticalthinking
Perceiving
andapplying
underlyingrulesor
process(es)tosolve
prob
lems
Rea
ding
Diffi
culties:
Drawinginferences
from
text
Abstractingmainidea(s)
MathDiffi
culties:
Reason
ingwith
quantitative
inform
ation(w
ordprob
lems)
Internalizingprocedures
and
processesused
tosolve
prob
lems
Apprehendingrelatio
nships
betweennumbers
Writing
Diffi
culties:
Essaywritingandgeneralizing
concepts
Develop
ingathem
eCom
paringandcontrastingideas
16
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:49 Page 17
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.6Ge
neral
andS
pecifi
cManifesta
tions
ofCrystallize
dInte
lligence
(Gc)
Weakness
es................................................................................................................................................................................................
CHC
Bro
adCogn
itiveAbilities/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lFun
ctions
Brief
Defi
nition
Gen
eral
Man
ifestations
of
Cogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lW
eakn
ess
Spe
cificMan
ifestations
ofC
ogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lWea
kness
Crystalliz
edIntellige
nce(G
c)Breadthanddepthof
know
ledgeandskills
that
arevalued
byon
e’sculture.
Develop
edthroughform
aleducationas
wellas
generallearningexperiences.
Stores
ofinform
ationanddeclarativeand
proceduralknow
ledge.
Reflectsthedegree
towhich
aperson
has
learnedpracticallyusefulknow
ledgeand
masteredvalued
skills
(Schneider
&McG
rew,
2012
).NarrowGcabilitiesincludeGeneralVerbal
Inform
ation,Language
Develop
ment,Lexical
Know
ledge,ListeningAbility,Inform
ationabou
tCulture,C
ommunicationAbility,and
GrammaticalSensitivity.
Diffi
cultieswith:
Vocabularyacquisitio
nKn
owledgeacquisitio
nCom
prehending
language
orunderstandingwhat
othersaresaying
Fact-based/inform
ational
questio
nsUsin
gpriorkno
wledgeto
supp
ortlearning
Findingtheright
words
touse/say
Rea
ding
Diffi
culties:
Decod
ing(e.g.,wordstudentisattempting
todecode
isno
tinhis/hervocabulary)
Com
prehending
(e.g.,po
orbackgrou
ndknow
ledgeabou
tinformationcontainedin
text)
MathDiffi
culties:
Understanding
mathconceptsandthe
“vocabularyof
math”
Writing
Diffi
culties:
Grammar(syntax)
Blandwritingwith
limiteddescrip
tors
Verbo
sewritingwith
limiteddescrip
tors
Inapprop
riate
wordusage
Lang
uage
Diffi
culties:
Understanding
classlesson
sExpressivelanguage—
“povertyof
thou
ght”
17
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:49 Page 18
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.7Ge
neral
andS
pecifi
cManifesta
tions
ofAuditory
Processing
(Ga)
Weakness
es................................................................................................................................................................................................
CHC
Bro
adCogn
itiveAbilities/
Neu
ropsycho
logica
lFun
ctions
Brief
Defi
nition
Gen
eral
Man
ifestations
of
Cogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lW
eakn
ess
Spe
cific
Man
ifestations
of
Cogn
itive/
Neu
ropsycho
logica
lW
eakn
ess
Aud
itory
Pro
cessing
(Ga)
Abilityto
analyzeandsynthesizeauditory
inform
ation.
One
narrow
aspectof
Gaisaprecursorto
orallanguage
comprehensio
n(i.e.,parsin
gspeech
sounds
orPhon
eticCod
ing).
Inadditio
nto
Phon
eticCod
ing,other
narrow
GaabilitiesincludeSpeech
Sound
Discrim
ination,Re
sistanceto
Audito
ryStimulus
Distortio
n,Mem
oryforS
ound
Patterns
(and
othersrelatedto
music).
Diffi
cultieswith:
Hearinginform
ation
presentedorally,initially
processin
goralinform
ation
Paying
attentionespecially
inthepresence
ofbackgrou
ndno
iseDiscerning
thedirection
from
which
auditory
inform
ationiscoming
Discrim
inatingbetween
simplesounds
Foreign-language
acquisitio
n
Rea
ding
Diffi
culties:
Acquiringphon
icsskills
Sounding
outw
ords
Usin
gphon
eticstrategies
MathDiffi
culties:
Readingwordprob
lems
Writing
Diffi
culties:
Spelling
Note-taking
Poor
quality
ofwriting
18
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:50 Page 19
Rapid
Reference1.8
General
andS
pecificM
anifesta
tionsofLong-Te
rmSto
ragea
ndRetrie
val(G
lr)Weakness
es.................................................................................................................................................................................................................
CHC
Bro
adCogn
itive
Abilities/Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lFun
ctions
Brief
Defi
nition
Gen
eral
Man
ifestations
of
Cogn
itive/Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lW
eakn
ess
Spe
cificMan
ifestations
of
Cogn
itive/Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lW
eakn
ess
Long
-Term
Storage
and
Retriev
al(G
lr)
Abilityto
storeinform
ation(e.g.,
concepts,w
ords,facts),consolidateit,
andfluentlyretrieve
itatalatertime
(e.g.,minutes,hou
rs,days,andyears)
throughassociation.
InGlrtasks,inform
ationleaves
immediate
awarenesslong
enou
ghfor
thecontentsof
primarymem
oryto
bedisplacedcompletely.Inotherw
ords,
Glrtasks(unlikeGsm
tasks)do
not
allowforinformationto
bemaintained
continuo
uslyinprimarymem
ory
(Schneider
&McG
rew,201
2).
Glrabilitiesmay
becategorized
aseither
“learningefficiency”or
“fluency.”Learning
efficiency
narrow
abilitiesincludeAssociativeMem
ory,
MeaningfulM
emory,andFree
Recall
Mem
ory;fluencynarrow
abilities
involveeither
theprod
uctio
nof
ideas
(e.g.,Ideatio
nalFluency,A
ssociatio
nal
Fluency),the
recallof
words
(e.g.,
Nam
ingFacility,W
ordFluency),orthe
generatio
nof
figures(e.g.,Figural
Fluency,FiguralFlexibility)(Schneider
&McG
rew,201
2).
Diffi
cultieswith:
Learning
newconcepts
Retrieving
orrecallin
ginform
ationby
usingassociation
Perfo
rmingconsistently
across
different
task
form
ats(e.g.,
recognition
versus
recallform
ats)
Rapidretrievalofinformation
Learning
inform
ationquickly
Pairedlearning
(visu
al-audito
ry)
Recallin
gspecificinform
ation
(words,facts)
Generatingideasrapidly
Rea
ding
Diffi
culties:
Accessin
gbackgrou
ndknow
ledgeto
supp
ortn
ewlearning
whilereading
Slow
toaccessphon
ological
representatio
nsduringdecoding
Retellin
gor
paraphrasin
gwhato
nehas
read
MathDiffi
culties:
Mem
orizingmathfacts
Recallin
gmathfactsandprocedures
Writing
Diffi
culties:
Accessin
gwords
touseduringessay
writing
Specificwritingtasks(com
pare
and
contrast;persuasivewriting)
Note-taking
Idea
generatio
n/prod
uctio
nLa
ngua
geDiffi
culties:
Expressive—
circum
locutio
ns,speech
fillers,“interrupted”
thou
ght,pauses
Receptive—
makingconnectio
nsthrougho
utoralpresentatio
ns(e.g.,class
lecture)
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:50 Page 20
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.9Ge
neral
andS
pecifi
cManifesta
tions
ofPro
cessing
Speed(
Gs)W
eakness
es.................................................................................................................................................................................................
CHC
Bro
adCogn
itiveAbilities/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lFun
ctions
Brief
Defi
nition
Gen
eral
Man
ifestations
of
Cogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lW
eakn
ess
Spe
cificMan
ifestations
ofC
ogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lWea
kness
Pro
cessingSpe
ed(G
s)Speedof
processin
g,particularly
whenrequiredto
focusattention
for1
–3minutes.
Usuallymeasuredby
tasksthat
require
theabilityto
perfo
rmsim
plerepetitivecognitive
tasks
quicklyandaccurately.
NarrowGsabilitiesinclude
PerceptualSpeed,Rate-of-T
est-
Taking,N
umberF
acility,Re
ading
Speed,andW
ritingSpeed(note
thatthelatter
twoabilitiesarealso
listedundero
ther
broadCHC
domains,including
Grw
).
Diffi
cultieswith:
Efficientp
rocessingof
inform
ation
Quicklyperceiving
relatio
nships
(similaritiesanddifferences
betweenstimuliorinformation)
Working
withintim
eparameters
Com
pletingsim
ple,rote
tasks
quickly
Rea
ding
Diffi
culties:
Slow
readingspeed,which
interfe
reswith
comprehensio
nNeedto
reread
foru
nderstanding
MathDiffi
culties:
Autom
aticcomputatio
nsCom
putatio
nalspeed
isslo
wdespite
accuracy
Slow
speedcanresultinreducedaccuracy
dueto
mem
orydecay
Writing
Diffi
culties:
Limitedou
tput
dueto
timefactors
Labo
redprocessresults
inreducedmotivationto
prod
uce
Lang
uage
Diffi
culties:
Canno
tretrieve
inform
ationquickly—
slow,
disruptedspeech;canno
tget
outtho
ughtsquickly
enou
ghIsslo
wto
processincominginform
ation,puts
demands
onmem
orystorethatcanresultin
inform
ationoverload
andlossof
meaning
20
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:51 Page 21
Rapid
Reference
1.10
General
andS
pecificM
anifesta
tions
ofVisualProc
essing
(Gv)Weakness
es................................................................................................................................................................................................
CHC
Bro
adCogn
itiveAbilities/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lFun
ctions
Brief
Defi
nition
Gen
eral
Man
ifestations
of
Cogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lW
eakn
ess
Spe
cificMan
ifestations
ofC
ogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lWea
kness
Visua
lPro
cessing
(Gv)
Abilityto
analyzeandsynthesizevisual
inform
ation.
Theabilityto
makeuseof
simulated
mentalimagery(ofteninconjunction
with
currently
perceivedimages)to
solveprob
lems(Schneider
&McG
rew,
2012
).Th
erearemanynarrow
Gvabilities,
someof
which
includeVisu
alization,
SpeededRo
tatio
n,Closure
Speed,
Flexibilityof
Closure,V
isualMem
ory,
andSpatialScanning.
Diffi
cultieswith:
Recognizingpatterns
Readingmaps,graphs,charts
Attending
tofine
visualdetail
Recallin
gvisualinform
ation
App
reciationof
spatial
characteristicsof
objects(e.g.,
size,length)
Recognition
ofspatialorientation
ofob
jects
Rea
ding
Diffi
culties:
Ortho
graphiccoding
(usin
gvisualfeatures
oflettersto
decode)
Sight-wordacquisitio
nUsin
gchartsandgraphs
withinatext
inconjunctionwith
reading
Com
prehensio
nof
text
involvingspatial
concepts(e.g.,socialstudiestext
describ
ing
physicalbo
undaries,movem
ento
ftroop
salon
gaspecified
route)
MathDiffi
culties:
Num
beralignm
entd
uringcomputatio
nsRe
adingandinterpretinggraphs,tables,and
charts
Writing
Diffi
culties:
Spellingsight
words
Spatialplanningduringwritingtasks(e.g.,no
attentionto
margins,w
ords
thatoverhang
aline)
Inconsistentsize,spacing,po
sition,andslant
ofletters
21
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:51 Page 22
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.11
General
andS
pecifi
cManifesta
tions
ofShort
-Term
Mem
ory(Gsm
)Weakness
es...............................................................................................................................................................................................
CHC
Bro
adCogn
itiveAbilities/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lFun
ctions
Brief
Defi
nition
Gen
eral
Man
ifestations
of
Cogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lW
eakn
ess
Spe
cificMan
ifestations
ofC
ogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lWea
kness
Sho
rt-T
erm
Mem
ory
(Gsm
)Abilityto
holdinform
ationin
immediate
awarenessanduseor
transform
itwithinafew
seconds.
Diffi
cultieswith:
Followingmultisteporal
andwritteninstructions
Remem
beringinform
ation
long
enou
ghto
applyit
Remem
beringthe
sequence
ofinform
ation
Rote
mem
orization
Maintaining
one’splacein
amathprob
lem
ortrainof
thou
ghtw
hilewriting
Rea
ding
Diffi
culties:
Readingcomprehensio
n(i.e.,understanding
whatisread)
Decod
ingmultisyllabicwords
Orally
retellin
gor
paraphrasin
gwhato
nehasread
MathDiffi
culties:
Rote
mem
orizationof
facts
Remem
beringmathematicalprocedures
Multistepprob
lemsandregrou
ping
Extractinginform
ationto
beused
inwordprob
lems
Writing
Diffi
culties:
Spellingmultisyllabicwords
Redundancy
inwriting(w
ordandconceptuallevels)
Identifying
mainidea
ofastory
Note-taking
22
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:51 Page 23
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.12
General
andS
pecifi
cManifesta
tions
ofAtten
tion
Weakness
esandE
xamp
lesofRecomm
endations
andInte
rventions
................................................................................................................................................................................................
CHC
Bro
adCogn
itive
Abilities/Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lFun
ctions
Brief
Defi
nition
Gen
eral
Man
ifestations
of
Cogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lW
eakn
ess
Spe
cificMan
ifestations
of
Cogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lW
eakn
ess
Atten
tion
Attentio
nisacomplex
and
multifaceted
constructu
sedwhenan
individualmustfocus
oncertain
stimulifor
inform
ationprocessin
g.In
ordertoregulate
thinking
andto
completetasksof
daily
livingsuch
asscho
olwork,itisnecessaryto
beable
toattend
tobo
thauditoryandvisual
stimuliintheenvironm
ent.Attentio
ncanbe
view
edas
thefoundatio
nof
allother
higher-order
processin
g.Attentio
ncanbe
dividedinto
five
subareas:selective/focusedattention,
shiftingattention,dividedattention,
sustainedattention,andattentional
capacity(M
iller,20
13).
Itisimpo
rtanttoidentifytheexact
nature
oftheattentionalproblem
(s)
priortoselectingan
interventio
n,teaching
strategies,m
odifyingthe
curriculum
,orm
aking
accommod
ations,
Easilydistracted
Lacksattentionto
detail;makes
carelessmistakes
Difficulty
discerning
demands
ofatask
(e.g.,where
tobeginor
howto
getstarted)
May
onlybe
ableto
attend
totask
inshortintervals
Difficulty
changing
activities
Difficulty
applying
adifferent
strategy
whentask
demands
change
Difficulty
attendingto
morethan
onethingor
task
atatim
eCanno
tperform
wellw
henfaced
with
multiplestimulioran
abundanceof
detail
Rea
ding
Diffi
culties:
Loseshisor
herp
lace
easily
Easilydistracted
whilereading
Doe
sno
tpickup
impo
rtant
detailsintext
MathDiffi
culties:
Doe
sno
tcon
sistentlyattend
tomathsigns
Frequent
mistakes
onword
prob
lems
Writing
Diffi
culties:
Has
difficulty
completinglong
assignm
ents;difficulty
following
timelines
23
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:52 Page 24
Rapid
Reference
1.13
General
andS
pecificM
anifesta
tions
ofExecutive
Functionin
gWeakness
esandE
xamp
lesofRecomm
endations
andInte
rventions
....................................................................................................................................................................................................
CHC
Bro
adCogn
itiveAbilities/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lFun
ctions
Brief
Defi
nition
Gen
eral
Man
ifestations
ofC
ogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lWea
kness
Spe
cificMan
ifestations
ofC
ogn
itive/
Neu
ropsyc
hologica
lW
eakn
ess
Exe
cutive
Fun
ctioning
Executivefunctio
ning
isoften
understood
astwobroadly
conceptualized
areasthatare
relatedto
thebrain’sfro
ntal
lobes:cognitive
controland
behavioral/emotional
control.Th
ecognitive
aspectsof
executive
functio
ning
includeconcept
generatio
n(G
c/Glr);problem
solving(G
f);attentional
shifting(attentio
n;Gs);
planning;organizing;working
mem
ory(G
sm);andretrieval
fluency(G
lr).The
behavioral/
emotionalaspectsof
executivefunctio
ning
relate
totheinhibitorycontrolsof
behavior
(e.g.,impulsivity,
regulatio
nof
emotionalton
e,etc.)(seeMille
r,20
10).
Diffi
cultywith:
Learning
newactivities,generatingconcepts,and
solving
prob
lems
Identifying
goalsandsettinggoals
Planning
(e.g.,begins
projectw
ithou
tnecessarymaterials;
does
notallocate
sufficienttimeto
completetask)
Sequencing
(e.g.,may
skipstepsinmultistepprob
lems)
Prioritizing(e.g.,no
tsurewhat’s
impo
rtantw
hentaking
notes)
Organization(e.g.,losesimpo
rtantp
apers;failsto
turn
incompleted
work;createsunrealisticschedule)
Initiation(e.g.,hasdifficulty
gettingstartedon
tasks,
assignm
ents,etc.)
Pace
(e.g.,oftenruns
outo
ftimeon
seatworkandexam
s;has
difficulty
completingho
mew
orkdueto
unrealistictim
eline)
Shiftingbetweenactivities
flexibly;cop
ingwith
unforeseen
events
Self-mon
itoring(e.g.,do
esn’tcheck
toinsure
thateach
step
was
completed;doe
sn’tcheckworkbefore
subm
ittingit)
Emotionalcon
trol(e.g.,may
exhibitinapp
ropriate
orover-
reactiverespon
seto
situatio
ns)
Rea
ding
Diffi
culties:
Sequencing;tellingastory
chrono
logically
Prioritizing;extractingmainidea
andotherimpo
rtantinformation
Prob
lem
solving;draw
ing
inferences
from
text
MathDiffi
culties:
Sequencing;rem
emberingorder
ofop
erations
Prioritizing;figuringou
twhatis
impo
rtantw
hensolvingword
prob
lems
Shifting;attendingto
mathsigns
onapage
Writing
Diffi
culties:
Generatingideasto
writeabou
tSequencing
astory
Prioritizingmaineventsinastory
Source:A
dapted
from
LeslieE.Packer
(Schoo
lbehavior.com
);seealso
Packer
andPruitt’sbo
ok,C
hallengingKids,C
hallenged
Teachers(W
oodb
inePress,20
10),
24
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:52 Page 25
via observation, rating scales, record reviews, work sample analysis, and/orinterviews. For example, if a mother reports, in a parent intake interview, thather son has difficulty remembering to take necessary items to a recurring event (e.g.,soccer practice), this information can be considered secondary data and recordedin the Gsm section, given its potential relationship to memory. Similarly, if amother reports that her daughter is highly anxious during essay exams, thisinformation may be recorded in the Glr section, given that anxiety may interferewith retrieval of learned information.
To help build a knowledge base about the general and specific ways in whichcognitive weaknesses manifest in real-world performance, particularly academicperformances, Flanagan and colleagues (2013) developed Rapid References 1.5 to1.13. These rapid references describe ways in which deficits in broad CHC abilitiesmanifest in real-world performance (e.g., classroom activities). Rapid References1.12 and 1.13 describe manifestations of deficits in attention and executivefunctions, respectively. It is important to note that these rapid references do notrepresent an exhaustive list of manifestations. Rather, they assist practitioners inextending their thinking beyond standardized test scores by considering howcognitive deficits impact learning in multiple settings (e.g., classroom and home).
Rapid References 1.5 to 1.13 are organized into four columns. For example,Rapid Reference 1.5 shows that the first column, “CHC Broad CognitiveAbilities/Neuropsychological Functions,” identifies a CHC broad cognitive abilityor neuropsychological process, in this case, Fluid Reasoning (Gf). The secondcolumn, “Brief Definition,” provides a brief definition of the broad ability orprocess along with a list of narrow abilities subsumed by the broad ability. Thethird column, “General Manifestations of Cognitive/Neuropsychological Weak-ness,” lists the types of difficulties that can be expected to manifest generally whenthere is a weakness in the cognitive domain. For example, difficulties with higherlevel thinking, problems with generalizing learning, and difficulty with ruleapplication during problem solving may be evident when an individual has aweakness in Gf. “Specific Manifestations of Cognitive/Neuropsychological Weak-nesses” are listed in the fourth column and typically center on the types ofdifficulties that may be seen in specific academic domains (e.g., reading, writing,math). Rapid Reference 1.5 shows that individuals with a weakness in Gf mayhave difficulties drawing inferences from text (reading comprehension), appre-hending relationships between numbers (math application), and developing atheme when writing (written expression), to name a few.
When secondary data sources reveal that cognitive deficits manifest in specificacademic areas as expected based on the information in Rapid References 1.5 to1.13, the empirically supported cognitive-academic relationships have ecological
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 25
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:52 Page 26
validity, which is critical for tailoring interventions effectively. Ecological validityrefers to “the relation between real-world phenomena and the investigation ofthese phenomena in experimental contexts” (Shmuckler, 2001, p. 420). InSMAARTI, this relationship is akin to an empirically supported below-averagecognitive-achievement consistency, where the relationship is supported by real-world manifestations—an important marker for specific learning disability iden-tification (see Flanagan et al., 2013).
It is important to keep in mind that secondary data need not be consistentwith standardized test results (i.e., primary data) to be included in the DOTIform. That is, while convergence among data sources provides ecologicalvalidity for standardized test findings, a lack of convergence calls into questionthe validity of the primary data, which is equally important and suggests a needto evaluate the primary data more carefully (e.g., approach to tasks, sufficiencyof evaluation, malingering). It is also important to realize that even whensecondary data converge as expected with primary data, such as in the exampleof the boy who repeatedly forgot his soccer gear, alternative hypotheses mayalso be tested. For example, rather than a Gsm deficit, this student may havedifficulties with attention or organization—characteristics that may warrant adifferent approach to intervention as compared to a Gsm deficit.
Additional secondary data may include information obtained via a work sampleanalysis, parent–teacher interviews, observations, error analysis, or records review(e.g., report cards, classroom tests, teacher notes/comments). For example, if apractitioner reviewed several math tests with low scores, the scores may be enteredin the Quantitative Knowledge (Gq) domain in the normative weakness column(e.g., “math quiz 3/10/13—score 63; math quiz 4/2/13—score 59”). Similarly,practitioner comments from work sample analysis may be included (e.g., “10spelling errors out of a 25-word writing sample” may be entered for the Writingdomain [Grw-W] in the normative weakness column).
Table 1.3 shows that secondary data in the form of parent and teacher reportsabout Ayden’s academic performance converge with standardized test data in theareas of Glr, Ga, and Gs. For example, Ayden’s teacher reported that he hasdifficulty working within time limits and his mother reported that he is slow tocomplete his homework. Both of these reports are consistent with his observedweakness in the cognitive area of Gs, thus providing ecological validity evidencefor the observed Gs deficit. Table 1.3 also shows that Ayden’s teacher indicatedthat he does better on multiple-choice tests as compared to essay tests. Such anobservation is consistent with an individual with Glr difficulties, as essay testsrequire recall of information, whereas multiple choice tests require recognition,thereby minimizing the demands on Glr.
26 ESSENTIALS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR UNIQUE LEARNERS
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:52 Page 27
As shown in Table 1.3, the DOTI form also provides space for practitionersto hypothesize about the cognitive and academic areas that may need to betargeted for intervention. For example, when it is hypothesized that a cognitivedomain should be targeted for intervention, then the practitioner should makea note of whether he or she believes the intervention should focus onModification (instructional or curricular), Accommodation, Remediation,Compensation, or some combination thereof, using the letters M, A, R,and C, respectively. For young children in particular, when academic weak-nesses are found, intervention is primarily of the remedial type. Whilecognitive weaknesses should also be targeted for remediation in young childrengiven brain plasticity (e.g., Fletcher-Janzen & Reynolds, 2008), depending onthe area of weakness, young children may also need modifications to instruc-tion, for example, to minimize the effect of the cognitive weakness, therebyallowing greater access to the curriculum. Worthy of note is that identificationof strengths assists in determining what interventions may circumvent or limitthe impact of a weakness.
Table 1.3 shows that Ayden’s Gs deficit was a target for intervention.Specifically, the evaluator hypothesized that it may be necessary to makeaccommodations for Ayden’s Gs deficit as well as make modifications toinstruction or the curriculum in an attempt to minimize the effects of thisdeficit.
When it is determined that an academic weakness should be targeted forintervention, then the practitioner should make a note of the type of skill that istargeted for remediation. For example, the practitioner can use the letters B, F,and H to designate the skill as either a Basic (or foundational) skill, a F luencyskill, or a Higher level (applied) skill, respectively. A deficit in a foundationalskill suggests a need for basic skill building via explicit teaching designed toremediate the weakness (e.g., teaching a student how to subtract double-digitnumbers). A fluency deficit suggests that basic skills, while present, are notautomatic. Therefore, fluency deficits suggest the need for practice. Whenfluency deficits exist, it is important to examine whether the use of inefficientstrategies may be interfering with the development of fluency (e.g., fingercounting). Difficulties with higher level application of skills (e.g., readingcomprehension, math problem solving, written expression) can be directlyrelated to lower level deficits or they canreflect a breakdown in the student’sability to analyze or synthesize skillswithin an academic domain to problemsolve or otherwise demonstrate higher
C A U T I O N................................................Cognitive deficit may not manifestin a specific academic area.
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 27
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:54 Page 28
Tab
le1.3
DOTIF
orm
forAyd
enMur
phywithPrimaryan
dSec
ond
aryData
CHCCognitive/Academic
Abilityor
Processing
Dom
ain
NormativeWeaknessandInform
ationAbout
Interventio
nWith
inNormalLimits
NormativeStrength
andInform
ation
About
Interventio
n
FluidReasoning
(Gf)
FluidReasoning
Factor
=88
±4
Teacher
Report:sometim
eshas
difficulty
generalizingwhath
ehaslearned
Targetfor
Intervention
?C(Com
pensation)
Crystallized
Intelligence(G
c)Com
prehension-Knowledge=
95±
4Targetfor
Intervention
?Lon
g-Term
Storageand
Retrieval(G
lr)
Long-Term
StorageandRetrieval=
77±
5
Teacher
Report:seem
sto
dobetteron
multip
le-choicetestsas
comparedto
essays;diffi
culty
remem
bering
previouslytaught
inform
ation
ParentR
eport:spends
hoursstud
ying—
morethan
hisfriends;
oftenhasd
ifficulty
gettingoutw
hath
ewantsto
say
Targetfor
Intervention
?M
(Modificatio
n)A(Accom
modation)
C(Com
pensation)
Short-Term
Mem
ory(G
sm)
Short-Term
Mem
ory=
96±
6Targetfor
Intervention
?VisualP
rocessing(G
v)VisualP
rocessing=
107±
4TOCOrthographicAbility=
103±
3
28
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:55 Page 29
Teacher
Report:seem
sto
dobetterwith
visualinform
ation
(e.g.,chartsandgraphs
inmath
andscience)
Ayden:“Ilove
todraw
.”Targetfor
Intervention
?Emph
asizein
program
planning
totheextent
possible
Aud
itoryProcessing(G
a)Aud
itory
Processing
=72
±5
Reading
Specialist:doesnotu
seph
oneticstrategies
consistently;reliesmoreon
visualfeaturesandcontextualcues
todecode
Teacher
Report:mishearswords
frequently
Targetfor
Intervention
?R(Rem
ediatio
n)ProcessingSp
eed(G
s)Processing
Speed=
84±
4Teacher
Report:hasdifficulty
working
with
intim
elim
itsParentR
eport:takesalong
timeto
completehomew
ork
Targetfor
Intervention
?A(Accom
modation)
M(M
odificatio
n)Reading
(Grw
-R)
PassageCom
prehension
=70
±5
Teacher
Report:hasdifficulty
retelling
whath
ehasread
for
monthlybook
reports
Reading
Fluency=
83±
5Reading
Specialista
ndScho
olPsychologistO
bservation
:oralreadingisslo
wandlaborious
Ayden:“Ican’treadfast.”
Letter-W
ordIdentifi
catio
n=
90±
4
Typ
eof
Skill
Targeted
H(H
igherL
evelApp
lication)
F(Fluency)
Writing
(Grw
-W)
Writin
gSamples=
74±
6Teacher
Report:doesnotu
sevocabu
lary
words
inwritin
gassignments;n
ote-taking
isdifficultforhim—
verbatim
note-
taking
asopposedto
paraph
rasing
Spellin
g=
87±
5Writin
gFluency=
95±
5
(contin
ued)
29
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:55 Page 30
Tab
le1.3
(Con
tinu
ed)
CHCCognitive/Academic
Abilityor
Processing
Dom
ain
NormativeWeaknessandInform
ationAbout
Interventio
nWith
inNormalLimits
NormativeStrength
andInform
ation
About
Interventio
n
Typ
eof
Skill
Targeted
H(H
igherL
evelApp
lication)
B(BasicSkill)-
spellin
gMathematics(G
q)App
liedProblems=
81±
4Parenta
ndTeacher
Reports:diffi
culty
with
wordproblems
Fluency=
80±
4Teacher
Report:slo
wbu
taccurate
Classroom
Tests:G
rade
of“D
”on
allM
adMathMinutes
Calculatio
n=
107±
4
Typ
eof
Skill
Targeted
H(H
igherL
evelApp
lication)
F(Fluency)
Other
Ayden
hasrecently
begunto
avoidreadingforpleasureand
seem
sto
bedeveloping
anxietyrelatedto
readingaloudin
school
Ayden
ishighly
motivated
tolearn
andpu
tsforth
considerableeffortin
alledu
catio
nal
activities;doeswell
with
hand
s-on
activities
Targetfor
Intervention
?Capitalizeon
his
motivationand
incorporateinterests
into
remedial
activities
30
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:55 Page 31
level thinking. Students who have difficulty with higher level skills oftenrespond well to instructional aids and techniques such as graphic organizers,modeling, and procedural mnemonics.
Step 4: Consider Tertiary Data, Which Are Comprised of InformationAbout Factors That Affect Learning and Achievement and That AreLargely External to the Student (i.e., Extrinsic)
At this step of SMAARTI, practitioners already have a good understanding of thenature of the student’s learning difficulties based on primary and secondary datasources. However, additional data most likely need to be considered for tailoringinterventions to meet a student’s unique learning needs. Four categories of tertiarydata,meaning data that are largely external to the student, shouldbe consideredpriorto tailoring interventions, namely classroom instruction, instructional materials,environment, and strategies. A brief description of each category follows.
With regard to classroom instruction, practitioners should consider how factorssuch as pacing of instruction, timing and nature of feedback, responsiveness tostudents’ questions, and quality of student–teacher interaction, for example,affect learning and achievement for the student in question. Instructionalmaterials include the tools of teaching with which the student directly interactsand includes such things as textbooks, workbooks, electronic media (softwareprograms, applications), and consumables (e.g., worksheets). Attention toinstructional materials may assist in identifying factors that can inhibit learning(e.g., small font embedded in most graphics for a student with a visual perceptualdifficulty, a large amount of text, visuals, and callouts on a page for a student withattention difficulties) or facilitate learning (e.g., use of an audio glossary on apublished textbook’s website to assist a student with weaknesses in vocabulary,phonemic awareness, and basic decoding skills). Factors in the home or schoolenvironment may also exacerbate or minimize the impact of a student’s cognitiveweaknesses and, therefore, should be considered carefully. Relevant environ-mental factors refer to the student’s classroom or home physical space, includingdesk arrangements (student’s and teacher), room acoustics, environmental noise,lighting, temperature, use of resources (e.g., classroom learning aids such asposters, word walls), and classroom/home displays (e.g., homework board,bulletin boards of student work). Finally, strategies include any method orplan that is explicitly taught to or used by the student in an effort to compensatefor cognitive weaknesses or deficits, thereby facilitating learning and achieve-ment.Data relevant to each of these categories are gathered typically via classroomobservations and teacher/parent/student interviews.
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 31
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:55 Page 32
It is important to realize that most classroom observations and interviews areconducted prior to a comprehensive evaluation. Therefore, during an initialclassroom observation or interview, the practitioner is not necessarily primed togather tertiary data in an effort to determine what factors might facilitatelearning or exacerbate learning difficulties because the specific nature andpresumptive cause of the learning problem are not yet known or understoodwell. As such, it may be necessary to conduct additional classroom observationsor interviews after the practitioner has a more complete understanding of thevarious and specific presumed causes of the student’s learning difficulties.Moreover, it is likely that most practitioners are not very familiar with theinstructional materials used by the teacher and student (e.g., textbooks,electronic media, worksheets) and, therefore, they are not in a position togive guidance on how certain features of instructional material may facilitatelearning for a student. Therefore, practitioners should make an effort tofamiliarize themselves with relevant instructional materials.
Rapid References 1.14 to 1.20 include information, organized according tothe four categories described earlier, that will assist practitioners in gatheringtertiary data and considering these data for the purpose of tailoring interventionsfor students with specific cognitive weaknesses or deficits. There is one rapidreference for each of seven broad CHC cognitive abilities. For example, RapidReference 1.17 includes recommendations for a student like Ayden, whoselearning difficulties are affected adversely by a deficit in Long-term Storage andRetrieval. To ensure that the adverse effects that a Glr weakness has on learningare minimized, the practitioner should consult this rapid reference to gainknowledge about how to intervene and tailor instruction for Ayden. Further-more, when reviewing the information in this rapid reference, the practitionershould consider factors and strategies that capitalize on a student’s area of relativestrength. For example, Ayden has a relative strength in Visual Processing (Gv).Therefore, relevant recommendations include pairing verbal information withvisuals, organizing materials to be learned using visual aids, and providing visualreminders (Post-its, color-coded systems). It is important to note that theinformation contained in Rapid References 1.14 to 1.20 is not meant to beexhaustive. For more information about recommendations for students withcognitive ability and processing weaknesses or deficits, see the other chapters inthis book or other relevant resources (e.g., Mather & Jaffe, 2002). Copies ofRapid References 1.14 to 1.20 may be downloaded from the CD that accom-panies this book.
32 ESSENTIALS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR UNIQUE LEARNERS
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:56 Page 33
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.14
Recomm
endations
ThatMay
Facilitat
eLearning
andA
idin
Bypassing
orMinimizin
gthe
EffectsofaF
luidR
easonin
g(Gf)D
eficit
................................................................................................................................................................................................
Classro
om
Instru
ction
Instru
ctiona
lMaterials
Env
ironm
ental
Strateg
ies
Use
demon
stratio
nsto
externalizethereason
ing
process(think-alouds)
Expanded
answ
erkeys
containing
the“reason”
for
correct/incorrectchoices
Prob
lem-solving
charts
(hanging
ortapedto
desk)
Use
metacognitivestrategies
(mnemon
icsthatare
mem
orableandthat
accuratelyrepresentthe
learning
task)
Graduallyofferguidedpractice(e.g.,guided
questio
nslist)to
prom
oteinternalizationof
procedures
orprocess(es)
Guidedlistsforimplem
enting
procedures,formulas
Proceduralcharts/lists
(hanging
ortapedto
desk)
Use
toolsthathelpthem
categorizes
objectsand
conceptsto
assistindraw
ing
conclusio
ns(e.g.,graphic
organizers,con
cept
maps)
Offertargeted,explicitfeedback
Mod
els/exam
ples
Preferredseating
arrangem
entsthatprovide
easyaccessto
apeer
mod
elwith
strong
reason
ingskills
(e.g.,forcoo
perativelearning
activities)
Listen
toandseparate
the
stepsincompletinga
prob
lem
from
theactual
contentu
sedinaprob
lem
Offero
pportunitiesforlearningform
atsthatallow
forreasoning
tobe
mod
eled
forthe
student(e.
g.,coo
perativelearning,reciprocalteaching)
Text
features
(boldface,italics)
Com
pare
newconceptsto
previouslylearned
concepts(sam
evs.different)
Graphicorganizersthatallowfor
avisualdepictionof
relatio
nships
betweenandam
ongconcepts
Use
analogies,sim
iles,metapho
rs,pairedwith
concrete
explanations,tosupp
ortu
nderstanding
whenpresentingtasks(e.g.,“W
earegoingto
learn
ourm
athfactswith
lightning
speed,thatmeans
we
aregoingto
learnthem
fast”)
Manipulatives
todemon
strate
relatio
nships
(e.g.,partto
who
lerelatio
nships)
33
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:57 Page 34
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.15
Facto
rsThatMay
Facilitat
eLearning
andA
idinBypassing
orMinimizin
gthe
EffectsofaC
rystallized
Intellige
nce(Gc)D
eficit
................................................................................................................................................................................................
Classro
om
Instru
ctiona
lFac
tors
Instru
ctiona
lMaterials
Env
ironm
ental
Fac
tors
Strateg
ies
Provides
anenvironm
entrichinlanguage
andexperiences
Con
tainschapterG
lossaries
Word-of-the-day
calendar
Use
KWLstrategy
toincrease
backgrou
ndknow
ledge
Incorporates
frequentp
racticewith
and
expo
sure
towords
E-Glossariesavailable
Wordwalls
Use
contextw
henreadingto
ascertain
meaning
Readsalou
dto
children
Provides
vocabularybuilding
activities
(printo
ronline)
Capitalizeon
oppo
rtunities
topracticenew
words
(listeningfortheiruseintelevisio
nshow
sandotherm
edia,purpo
selyusing
them
inconversatio
n)Variesreadingpurpose
(leisu
re,information)
Con
tainstoolsforp
riming
backgrou
ndknow
ledge(e.g.,
Harcourt)
Distraction-fre
eseating
Engage
inactivities
such
aswordsearches
containing
relatedterm
s(e.g.,travelterm
s)andcrossw
ords
(note:puzzlemaker.com
can
create
custom
ized
puzzles)
Works
onvocabularybuilding
Includes
storystarters
Closeddo
ors
Writeanewwordandits
definitio
nalon
gwith
adraw
ing
Teachesmorphology
Includes
text
features
(boldface,
italics)
Closedwindo
ws
Capitalizes
onop
portunities
todefine
words
withininstruction(e.g.,“the
compositionof
igneou
srock,thatis,
whatitismadeof,is...”)
Availabilityof
videoclips
34
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:57 Page 35
Includes
supp
ortivemod
alities
(e.g.,visuals,
gestures)toincrease
understandingof
language
used
Audioglossaries
Embeds
instructionwithinameaningful
context(e.g.,relatingwords
tolearner
experiences,increasinglistening
ability
throughgame-likeform
at)
Dictio
naries
Develop
svocabularythroughnaturalistic
extensionof
language
(e.g.,ifastudentasks,
“Can
Istartmywork,”theteacherm
ight
respon
d,“Yes,you
canbeginyour
work,”
naturally
buildingsyno
nym
know
ledge)
Thesaurus
Usesextensionandexpansionstrategies
(Mather,Lynch,&Richards,200
1)Encyclop
edias
Use
vocabularycartoo
ns(Burchers,20
00)
Use
text
talks
35
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:58 Page 36
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.16
Facto
rsThatMay
Facilitat
eLearning
andA
idinBypassing
orMinimizin
gthe
Effectsofan
Auditory
Processing
(Ga)
Deficit
................................................................................................................................................................................................
Classro
om
Instru
ctiona
lFac
tors
Instru
ctiona
lMaterials
Env
ironm
entalF
actors
Strateg
ies
Enunciates
sounds
inwords
inan
emphatic
mannerw
henteaching
newwords
forreading
orspelling
Video
clips
Rulesfortalking
and
listening
Use
comprehensio
nmon
itoring(e.g.,
Doe
sthewordIheard/readmake
senseincontext?)
Usesinstructionaltechniques(e.g.,workpreview/
text
preview)toclarify
unknow
nwords
Read
alou
dtexts/features
Spellinglists
Engage
inself-advocacy
(e.g.,asking
for
inform
ationto
berepeated
and/or
clarified
inregard
tothemish
eard
part)
Provides
instructionalsuppo
rts(e.g.,guided
notes)duringno
te-takingactivities
Audioglossaries
Closeddo
ors
Physicallypo
sitioning
oneselftow
ard/
closeto
thespeaker
Buildsintim
eforclarificatio
nquestio
nsrelatedto
“missed”or
“mish
eard”itemsduringlecture
Supp
lemento
ral
instructions
with
written
instructions
Closedwindo
ws
Attending
tospeaker’s
mou
thand/or
gestures,facialexpressions,duringthe
deliveryof
inform
ation
Shortens
instructions
Phon
emicaw
areness
activities
Distraction-fre
eseating
Recordingno
tesviaaudiometho
dsto
allowamechanism
forb
eing
ableto
fill
inno
tesforcom
pleteness
Makes
aneffortto
minimizebackgrou
ndno
isevia
theuseof
instructionalcom
mands
(e.g.,work
quietly,refrainfro
mtalkingwith
your
neighbor)
Electron
ictextbo
oks
Noise
minimizers(carpet,
noise-reducing
headphon
es)
Followingalon
gwith
written
directions/te
xtduringtheprovision
oforalinstruction
Repeatsor
rephrasesquestio
nsaskedby
other
studentsto
ensure
thatallstudents“hear”the
questio
nthatisassociated
with
theteacher’s
givenrespon
se
Guidedno
tes,graphic
organizers
Preferentialseating(close
toteacher,aw
ayfro
mheaters,fans)
Practicingspellinglistswith
visually
basedtechniques
Emphasizes
sight-w
ordreading
Localizesoundsource
for
studentb
ystanding
closer
whendeliveringinstructions
Use
visualizationstrategies
toremem
berthings
Pauses
whendeliveringoralinstructionto
allow
timeforstudent
toprocessauditoryinform
ation
Use
writtenmediums(e.g.,em
ail,text)
topreserve
content/integrityof
inform
ationcommunicated
36
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:59 Page 37
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.17
Facto
rsThatMay
Facilitat
eLearning
andA
idinBypassing
orMinimizin
gthe
EffectsofaL
ong-T
ermSto
ragea
ndRetrie
val(G
lr)De
ficit
................................................................................................................................................................................................
Classro
om
Instru
ctiona
lFac
tors
Instru
ctiona
lMaterials
Env
ironm
entalF
actors
Strateg
ies
Usesclose-endedquestio
ns,yes/
no,true/false
Guidedlistsfor
implem
entingprocedures,
form
ulas
Proceduralcharts
Organizes
materialtobe
learnedusingvisualaids
(e.
g.,diagram
s,flow
charts),auditoryaids
(e.g.,
chunking),or
othertangibles
(e.g.,flashcards)
Usesconsistentinstructio
nal
routines
Practiceguides
Wordwalls
Makes
connectio
nsby
relatingmaterialtobe
learned
toon
eself
Offersrepeated
practicewith
andreview
ofnewlypresented
inform
ation
Onlinereview
Deskorganizers
Relatesconceptsto
belearnedto
oneanothervia
toolssuch
asaconceptm
ap
Teachesmem
orystrategies
and
encourages
theiru
se(verbal
rehearsaltosupp
ortencod
ing,
useof
mnemon
icdevices;Dehn,
2010
)
Glossaries(electronic,audio,
printed)
Externalmem
oryaids
(lists,
audibletim
ers)
Creates
ascheduleford
istrib
uted
practiceof
materialtobe
learned
Usesmultiplemod
alities
when
teaching
newconcepts(pair
writtenor
visualwith
verbal
inform
ation)
tosupp
ortd
ual
recoding
(Dehn,20
10)
Studyguides
Calendarswith
visual
references
toduedates
Plansforregularreview
ofmaterial
Limits
theam
ount
ofnew
materialtobe
learned;
introd
uces
newconcepts
gradually
andwith
aloto
fcontext
Review
sheets
Visu
alreminders(Post-its,
color-codedsystem
s)Re
hearsesmaterialtobe
learnedviarecitatio
n,repetition
(continued)
37
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:12:59 Page 38
Ismindfulof
whennewconcepts
arepresented
Dictio
naries(tosupp
ort
wordretrieval)
Quiet
environm
ento
rnoise-
reductionaids
(headp
hones,
cubicles,study
carrels)
Studiesandcompletes
homew
orkinadesignated
locatio
nwith
necessarymaterials
Makes
associations
between
newlylearnedandprior
inform
ationexplicit
Thesaurus(tobuild
vocabularyandminimize
impactof
retrieval
weaknesses)
Preferentialseatingto
minimizedistractions
when
encoding
Usesactivelearning
strategies
(note-taking,flash
cards,conceptm
aps,chunking)inreview
sessions
Usesliststo
facilitaterecall
(prompts)
Studiesandreview
slearning
materialimmediately
priortosleeping
Expandsvocabularyto
minimize
impactof
wordretrievaldeficits
Usesorganizatio
nalstrategiessuch
assemantic
clustering(D
ehn,20
10)
Buildsinwait-tim
eforstudent
whenfluencyof
retrievalisan
issue
Usesverbalassociationstrategies
(e.g.,elaboration;
Dehn,20
10)
Usestext
previewsto
“prim
e”know
ledge
Implem
entsdualcoding
strategies
(visu
alto
verbal
andvice
versa)
Provides
backgrou
ndknow
ledge
firstb
eforeasking
aquestio
nto
“prim
e”studentfor
retrieval
Engagesinself-testing
Usesspecificstrategies
foracademictasks
(e.g.,PQ
RST,forreading
comprehensio
n;Dehn20
10)
(continued)
38
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:0 Page 39
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.18
Facto
rsThatMay
Facilitat
eLearning
andA
idinBypassing
orMinimizin
gthe
EffectsofaP
rocess
ingSpeed(Gs)D
eficit
................................................................................................................................................................................................
Classro
om
Instru
ctiona
lFac
tors
Instru
ctiona
lMaterials
Env
ironm
ental
Fac
tors
Strateg
ies
Focuseson
features
ofworkprod
uctsthatare
unrelatedto
timeparameters(e.g.,
quality
oraccuracy
ofarespon
se)
Practiceguides
Clocks
Plan
forlon
g-term
projectsby
usingarealistic
schedulethatallowsforcon
sistent
movem
ent
towardcompletion
Repeated
practice
Onlinereview
Writtenschedules
Previewimpo
rtantp
artsof
text
(end-of-chapter
questio
ns,title,subtitles,glossaryof
term
s)to
facilitatereadingspeed
Offersspeeddrills
Deskorganizers
App
lyplanning
andtim
emanagem
entstrategies
Use
computeractivities
that
require
quick,sim
pledecisio
nsUse
techniques
such
asskimmingandscanning
forreading
activities
Extended
time
Bookson
tape
Use
anou
tlining
strategy
forn
ote-taking
Reducesthequantityof
workrequired
(includingho
mew
ork)
Onlineactivities/gam
es(e.g.,
http://www
.arcadem
icskillb
uilders.com
/games/)
Increaseswait-tim
esbo
thafterq
uestions
areaskedandafterrespo
nses
aregiven
Cho
ralrepeatedreading
39
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:1 Page 40
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.19
Facto
rsThatMay
Facilitat
eLearning
andA
idinBypassing
orMinimizin
gthe
EffectsofaV
isualPro
cessing
(Gv)De
ficit
................................................................................................................................................................................................
Classro
om
Instru
ctiona
lFac
tors
Instru
ctiona
lMaterials
Env
ironm
entalF
actors
Strateg
ies
Provideoralexplanationforvisu
alconcepts
Video
clips
Color-cod
edInform
ation
Usesorthographicstrategies
for
decoding
(e.g.,wordlength,shape
ofword);U
ses“cover-cop
y-compare”
technique—
goto:http://w
ww
.amblesideprim
ary.com/amblew
eb/
lookcover/lookcover.htm
lRe
view
sspatialcon
cept
andsupp
orts
comprehensio
nthroughuseof
hands-
onactivities
andmanipulatives
(e.g.,
usingmod
elsto
demon
strate
the
moo
n’sorbitalpath).
Enlarged
text
(viaon
line
zoom
featureor
alternativeprintcop
yof
textbo
ok,w
orksheet)
Preferentialseatingaimed
atallowingthe
studenttoaccessvisualmaterial(e.g.,
smartb
oard)m
anipulatives,visu
alaids,
andotherm
aterialsto
supp
ortlearning
Capitalizes
onintactor
strong
auditoryskills
duringlearning/studying
(e.g.,uses
phon
emicskills
for
decoding
tasks)
Provides
verballabelfor
visual
representatio
ns(e.g.,“The
shaded
red
barsrepresentw
omen’svotes,thegreen
barsrepresentm
en’svotes”)
Highlightsmargins
duringwritingtasks
Assignedno
te-takingbudd
yPairs
visualinform
ationwith
verbal
(mnemon
ics)
Provides
writtencopies
oforal
instructions,lectures
Provides
direct
handwritingpractice
Readersor
scrib
es,w
here
needed
Labelsvisualcharts/graphswith
verbal
labels
Audito
rycueing
tosupp
lementvisu
alinform
ation/cues
(e.g.,“Loo
katthebar
graphforw
eeklysales”)
Provides
visualsupp
orts
(graphicorganizers,
graphpaper)
Reduce
visualdistraction
Highlightsor
colorcod
esimpo
rtant
inform
ation
40
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:1 Page 41
Provides
graph-paperto
assistw
ithnumber
alignm
ent
Alternativelighting(naturallight,
non-fluo
rescentlighting)
Usesaids
tosupp
ortvisu
altracking
(finger,index
card,ruler)
Bookson
tape
Spaces
itemson
apage
Text-to-speech
techno
logy
(screenand
text
readers)
Usesapplications
orsupp
ortsthat
allowfore
nlargemento
ffon
ts
Reading/scanning
pens
Usesno
te-takingstrategies
(e.g.,
Cornell,ou
tlining)
41
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:2 Page 42
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.20
Facto
rsThatMay
Facilitat
eLearning
andA
idinBypassing
orMinimizin
gthe
EffectsofaS
hort-Term
Mem
ory(Gsm
)Deficit
................................................................................................................................................................................................
Classro
om
Instru
ctiona
lFac
tors
Instru
ctiona
lMaterials
Env
ironm
entalF
actors
Strateg
ies
Offersrepetitionof
inform
ation
Practiceguides
Color-cod
edinform
ation
App
lyrotestrategies
(e.g.,basic
rehearsal,
simplerepetition)
forinformationto
belearnedintheshort-term
Review
sinform
ationandnewly
presentedconceptsoften
Guidedstudy
Math-factstables
(e.g.,
multiplication)
Encourageuseof
relatio
nalstrategies(e.g.,
mnemon
ics)
Deliversinform
ationin
manageableparts
Onlinereview
Writtenschedules
Use
elaborativerehearsal(associatingnew
inform
ationwith
priorkno
wledge)
Evidencesuseof
consistent
instructionalrou
tines
Flashcards
Visu
alschedules(e.g.,pictures)
Semantic
rehearsal(creatingasentence
usingthings
tobe
remem
bered)
Usesmeaningfulstim
ulitoassist
with
encoding
andallowfor
experientiallearning(i.e.,learning
whiledo
ing)
Multisensorymaterialsto
facilitate
encoding
Writtenreminders
(hom
ework)
Chunking
Provides
oppo
rtunities
for
repeated
practiceandreview
Paraphrasin
g
Provides
supp
orts(e.g.,lecture
notes,guided
notes,studyguides,
writtendirections)to
supp
lemento
ralinstructio
n
Visu
almnemon
ics(im
agery,pegw
ords,loci,
keyw
ordmetho
d;Dehn,20
08)
42
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:2 Page 43
Breaks
downinstructionalsteps
forstudent
Chaining
Provides
visualsupp
ort(e.g.,
times
table)
tosupp
ort
acquisitio
nof
basic
mathfacts
First-letter
mnemon
ics
Outlines
mathprocedures
for
studentand
provides
procedural
guides
orflashcards
forthe
studenttousewhen
approachingprob
lems
Use
tangiblereminders(alarm
s,to-dolists,
calendarschedules)
Highlightsimpo
rtantinformation
withinawordprob
lem
App
lyspecificacadem
icstrategies
(e.g.,
writeou
tallmathcomputatio
ns,use
acalculator,spellchecker)
Has
studentswriteallsteps
and
show
allw
orkform
ath
computatio
nsUseswritingprogramsor
techniques
thatem
phasize
draftingfirst(e.g.,D
raftBu
ilder
6)Te
acheschunking
strategies
Source:A
dapted
from
LDOnline.Cop
yright
2008
bytheNationalC
enterforLearning
Disabilities,Inc.Allrightsreserved.
43
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:2 Page 44
Step 5: Integrate Data From All Previous Steps, Design and Implementan Intervention, and Monitor Its Effectiveness
In this final step, practitioners integrate all data from Steps 1 through 4 to designand document an intervention. As seen in Rapid Reference 1.21, the SMAARTIPlanning Form is organized into five columns. Practitioners should use informa-tion from the DOTI form to assist in planning and selecting educational strategiesand tailoring interventions.
Ayden has several academic areas targeted for intervention. Ayden’s difficultiesin reading, math, and writing are related partly to associated cognitive weaknesses.The manifestations of these weaknesses and specific interventions and recom-mendations for addressing them appear in Rapid Reference 1.21.
Ayden’s difficulties in reading decoding appear to be related partly to his Gaweakness in phonetic coding. These difficulties appear to be maintained partly bythe fact that Ayden does not apply phonetic coding strategies and, instead, relieson the visual features of words in an attempt to decode them. While he has beenfairly successful with this strategy and has acquired sight-word decoding skills(e.g., Letter Word Identification, SS = 90, Average), he is struggling in contentareas, such as social studies and science, where new technical terms are introduced(e.g., symbiotic, injustice) that do not lend themselves easily to visual analysis. Tosupport his decoding, and subsequent comprehension, it is suggested that Aydenuse audio glossaries that accompany his science and social studies texts so that hecan hear the words and definitions read aloud to him before he begins a newlesson. Beyond audio glossaries, an environmental accommodation, namelypreferential seating, is suggested for Ayden. This is primarily due to Ayden’sreported concerns with reading aloud in front of his classmates. Given his concernof social repercussions of his reading weaknesses (e.g., feeling embarrassed in frontof his peers), Ayden is less likely to access teacher support to assist him in decodingunknown words. Preferential seating, close to the teacher’s desk, can allow Aydento access help more inconspicuously and can allow his teacher to monitor his needfor help (e.g., she can have a bird’s-eye view of his reading behaviors, such aspausing, that might suggest a difficulty with decoding). Finally, the Great Leapsprogram, which is presently used by Ayden’s reading specialist, is recommendedfor continued use given its applicability to his age, his familiarity with andmotivation in the program, and its focus on building fluency. Notwithstanding,because the phonemic awareness component of the program is primarily presentedin the earlier grades, a supplemental phonemic awareness activity is being suggestedfor Ayden to be used at each reading session. This activity can be obtained via theuse of the Month-by-Month Phonics and Vocabulary workbook.
44 ESSENTIALS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR UNIQUE LEARNERS
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:4 Page 45
Rapid
Refer
ence
1.21
ReviewofAyden’s
Cognitiv
eWeakness
–Academic
WeaknessR
elationship
s.................................................................................................................................................................................................
Aca
demic
Targe
tsfor
Interven
tion
(Step1)
Sug
gested
Rem
edial
Pro
gram
Related
Cogn
itive
Wea
kness(es)
(Step2)
Man
ifestations
of
Cogn
itive
Wea
kness(es)
(Step3)
Sug
gested
MARC
Interven
tions
and
Rec
ommen
dations
(Step4)
Rea
ding
Dec
oding
GreatLeaps
Mon
th-by-Mon
thPhon
icsand
Vocabulary,Grade
5(Cunningham,Lom
an,&
Arens,200
7)
Ga—
Phon
eticCod
ing
Doe
sno
tuse
phon
eticstrategies
consistently
Audioglossaries
Preferentialseating
Rea
ding
Fluen
cyGreatLeaps
Gs,Glr
Readingisslo
wandlabo
rious
Shortenedpassages
Text
preview
Rea
ding
Compr
ehen
sion
GreatLeaps
Glr,Gf
Has
difficulty
retellin
gwhath
ehas
read
inmon
thlybo
okrepo
rts
Think-alou
dsCoo
perativereading
Cause/effectgraphic
organizers
MathFluen
cyArcadem
ics
Gs
Isaccurate
butslow
Abb
reviated
mathminutes
with
charting
(continued)
45
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:4 Page 46
MathPro
blem
Solving
Glr,Gf
Difficulty
with
wordprob
lems
Mathmnemon
ics
Mathconceptcard
Proceduralchart
Spe
lling
Folding-intechnique;cover-
copy-com
pare
Ga—
Phon
eticCod
ing
Mish
earswords
frequently
Wordwall
Spellchecker
Spellingdictionarywith
graph
Preferentialseating
Written
Exp
ression
Inspiratio
nGlr,Gf
Doe
sno
tuse
newlylearned
vocabularyinwritingassignm
ents;
note-takingisverbatim
Sentence
strip
sW
ordbank
Wordwall
Thesaurus
Feedback
Guidedno
tes
(continued)
46
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:4 Page 47
While Great Leaps can also be used to address Ayden’s difficulties with readingfluency, two additional recommendations, namely shortened passages and textpreview, are recommended. The modification of shortened passages during class-wide independent reading is recommended primarily because Ayden’s reading isdescribed consistently as slow and laborious. Further, given his concerns aboutreading more slowly than his peers, Ayden has attempted to compensate byrushing through the reading, which has always resulted in difficulty withcomprehension questions. When he reads at a more measured pace, he typicallydoes not finish the passage and, as a result, often needs to answer the readingquestions at home, which then necessitates a full rereading of the passage, therebylengthening the amount of time spent in homework. Shortened passages can buildhis confidence by allowing him to finish his work at a similar rate as his peers, canfacilitate his comprehension of the passages as it reduces the perceived need torush, and, finally, can make a more efficient use of homework time as he will onlyneed to read new material (if the remaining part of the assignment is still requiredof him). To further support his reading fluency, it is suggested that Ayden engagein a text preview whereby he reviews the chapter or passage title, headings, andnew vocabulary prior to being tasked with reading a passage during class. Whileshortened passages can accommodate partly Ayden’s weakness in Gs, the textpreviews can serve as a primer that can circumvent the impact of his Glr weakness(e.g., speed of lexical access).
In terms of reading comprehension, in addition to the Great Leaps program, itis recommended that Ayden’s teacher continue to use cooperative reading groups,but pair him with a student with strong reasoning skills who can serve as a modelduring guided think-alouds (e.g., activities that help externalize the reasoningprocess by explicitly pointing out connections during reading, such as characters’feelings and their behaviors). To facilitate Ayden’s comprehension and encodingof what he has read, and circumvent the full impact of his reasoning difficulties,it is also recommended that he use graphic organizers during reading tasks,specifically those that allow for relationships (e.g., cause and effect) to bereadily seen.
Based on the evaluation data, Ayden has a specific weakness in processing speed(Gs) that impacts not only reading fluency, but also the automaticity with whichhe completes math problems. As described by his teacher, when Ayden completes“mad math minutes” with the class, he is always the last one working and rarely, ifever, completes a full sheet. As a result, Ayden has become averse to this daily mathpractice and has begun to show signs of escape/avoidance (e.g., asks to use thebathroom, repeatedly drops his pencil on the floor during the timed minute).To build Ayden’s confidence and facilitate his engagement with this task, it is
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 47
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:4 Page 48
suggested that the math minutes be abbreviated (20 problems instead of 30).Additionally, it is recommended that Ayden graph his progress in terms of totalnumbers of items completed in a minute and total number of items accurate.Given that Ayden’s accuracy is already high, it is expected that this latter numberwill be consistently high, thereby providing an immediate opportunity for positivefeedback and reinforcement. The abbreviated sheet is expected to positivelyimpact the total number of items completed, thereby building Ayden’s confi-dence. The daily graphing will allow Ayden to focus on his individual progressrather than use his peers as a benchmark for judging himself. Finally, this format(graphing) capitalizes on Ayden’s reported interest in working with visuals and isexpected to be motivating in and of itself.
To further strengthen Ayden’s automaticity with math facts, repeated practicein the home is recommended. Rather than focus on drill and practice viatraditional methods (flashcards), a fun, web-based program, called Arcademics,is recommended. This website has several math games, presented in an arcade-likeformat. The Arcademics games are particularly attractive as a home-basedintervention as they are also available as apps on the iPad, which increases themobility of this intervention, an important consideration for Ayden, who spendstwo days a week at his grandmother’s home after school. The games, such as Jet-Ski addition, provide visual feedback as well as audio feedback to Ayden relating tothe accuracy and speed of his response (e.g., his jet-ski is propelled forward, at a fastpace, with accurate and quick responding).
Beyond fluency, Ayden’s deficits within the areas of reasoning (Gf) andretrieval (Glr) limit his ability to apprehend patterns or underlying rules withinproblems as well as to retrieve procedures necessary to complete problems. Tocircumvent the impact of these weaknesses, it is recommended that Ayden betaught specificmnemonics to assist him with retrieving steps or sequences necessaryto compute problems (e.g., PDMAS) and that he use a math concept card that isorganized into four quadrants with each of four operations represented (i.e.,addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division) along with associated wordsthat denote each operation (e.g., “in all,” “sum,” “in total,” “altogether” wouldappear under the addition symbol). Together, these supports are intended tofacilitate Ayden’s ability to identify the computations and/or procedures requiredto complete math word problems.
In writing, several interventions are recommended for Ayden. An initialrecommendation is to allow Ayden to use Inspiration software during independentwriting tasks. This visually based writing software program allows Ayden tocapitalize on his relative Gv strength and can help circumvent the impact of his Gfweakness as it allows him to see relationships between concepts/ideas given the
48 ESSENTIALS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR UNIQUE LEARNERS
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:4 Page 49
graphic organizer type format. Additional recommendations such as providingAyden with word banks during the completion of specific tasks (e.g., answeringend-of-chapter questions and/or short-answer test questions in content areas suchas science or social studies) are offered. To facilitate his self-advocacy skills, it issuggested that Ayden be reminded of, and encouraged to reference, his classroomword wall, which contains a cumulative listing of weekly vocabulary words. It ishoped that this classroom resource will encourage Ayden to use newly learnedvocabulary in his weekly writing assignments. Given that increasing one’svocabulary can minimize the full impact of a retrieval deficit, building Ayden’svocabulary is important. One way to achieve this is through implementing aninstructional recommendation that involves having Ayden’s teacher providefeedback on his writing by circling specific words and offering another termthat is similar in meaning as well as circling one or two terms for which Ayden canoffer an alternative. To accomplish this, Ayden can use a thesaurus to locate thecircled terms and then select, from the listed choices, another word that would beequally effective in communicating his thoughts. Beyond a physical thesaurus,Ayden can be taught to use the thesaurus function in Microsoft Word.
Presently, Ayden takes notes verbatim as his retrieval difficulties impact hisability to quickly paraphrase what the teacher is saying and it also impacts thesequencing/organization of his thoughts. To address the latter issue, sentence stripsare recommended during writing tasks. Use of such strips allows Ayden to writediscrete thoughts or facts, as they come to mind, and then physically manipulatethe strips into an organized, cohesive sequence, after he has generated discretethoughts. To address his difficulty with paraphrasing or summarizing, guided notesare recommended. Such a support can help circumvent the impact of Ayden’s Glrweakness. Further, guided notes can minimize memory demands during note-taking, thereby allowing Ayden to more fully attend to the lesson. Finally, theearlier recommendation for preferential seating is relevant to addressing Ayden’snote-taking difficulties in that it can minimize any auditory distractions that mightotherwise increase the frequency with which he mishears words. Further, it allowshim and the teacher to have easy access to one another. As such, Ayden can moreprivately secure assistance with writing tasks and the teacher can discreetly check inwith him during such tasks.
To address Ayden’s spelling weaknesses and maximize the utility of theclassroom word wall, Ayden can be reminded to reference this wall to assisthim with spelling recently learned words. It is also suggested that Ayden beencouraged to use the spellchecker function on computer-based writing assign-ments. Based on his mastery of words, Ayden will be asked to build a spellingdictionary, generating an entry for each newly mastered word. Finally, it is
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 49
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:4 Page 50
suggested that his reading teacher use the folding-in technique with Ayden to buildhis sight-word reading/spelling skills. This technique aims to increase spelling/reading skills via a flashcard method that involves presenting 10 words, seven ofwhich are known and three of which are “unknown.” This 70/30 ratio of knownto unknown results in consistently high rates of success during the task, with theaim of improving Ayden’s confidence and motivation. To reinforce the wordspresented by his reading teacher, a recommendation to allow Ayden repeatedpractice via a cover-copy-compareweb-based program is offered.With this program,Ayden’s mother can build a word list containing the 10 words used in the folding-in technique. The computer program will show each word in isolation, then afterAyden right clicks the “cover” button, a hand will swipe in from the left side of thescreen to cover the word, at which point Ayden will type the word and select the“compare” button. The hand will retract and the correctly spelled word will berevealed for comparison.
Practitioners should develop a plan for monitoring interventions and evaluatingtheir benefit. Depending on their use and benefit, practitioners will summarize anoutcome of the recommendations and suggest next steps. The next steps caninvolve one of three actions, Retain (RT), Refine (RF), or Reduce/Eliminate (RD/E). If the recommendation is being used and is working, the recommendation canbe retained. If an element of the recommendation is not particularly effective or ifthere is an identified factor that can maximize its effectiveness, it can be refined.Finally, if the intended benefit is achieved (e.g., spelling accuracy increasessubstantially and consistently) or if the intensity of the recommendation canbe adjusted, the support can be eliminated and/or reduced. It is important todistinguish between refining and reducing. A reduction of a support does notinvolve changing the support; rather, it involves modifying the frequency orintensity with which the support is delivered. A refinement involves changing anaspect of the recommendation.
SUMMARY
School psychologists and other practitioners involved in the assessment of studentswith learning difficulties routinely collect data related to students’ social, emo-tional, behavioral, academic, and cognitive functioning. Parent intakes, classroomobservations, teacher and student interviews, administration of standardized tests,and record reviews represent routine assessment activities. Despite the time andeffort necessary to collect these data, they are rarely integrated in a systematicmanner for use in tailoring interventions. Rather, data from comprehensiveevaluations are used typically to determine a student’s eligibility for special
50 ESSENTIALS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR UNIQUE LEARNERS
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:4 Page 51
education services. While eligibility decisions are important and often drive thedelivery of intervention resources, it is difficult to make sound choices regardingthe nature and type of intervention needed for any given student without adetailed review of multiple data sources, including data gathered from cognitiveassessment.
This chapter described a Systematic Method of Analyzing Assessment Resultsfor Tailoring Interventions (SMAARTI) for students with learning difficulties.This method allows practitioners to define targets for intervention via a careful,research-based analysis of a student’s quantitative and qualitative cognitive andacademic strengths and weaknesses. The steps of SMAARTI assist the practitionerin understanding evidence-based connections between below-average cognitiveand academic deficits and determining qualitative manifestations of observedcognitive weaknesses or deficits in real-world (e.g., classroom) performances. Oncea student’s unique below-average cognitive-academic consistencies are deter-mined, SMAARTI assists the practitioner in tailoring interventions for thestudent. Ultimately, SMAARTI encourages practitioners to collect multipledata sources using multiple data gathering methods to ensure that any interventionthat is recommended for a student is targeted specifically to his or her uniquelearning needs.
REFERENCES
Burchers (2000). Vocabulary cartoons.Cooney, S. M., Huser, M., Small, S., & O’Connor, C. (2007). Evidence-based programs: An
overview. What Works,Wisconsin–Research to Practice Series, 6. Madison, WI: University ofWisconsin–Madison/Extension.
Cunningham, P. M., Loman, K. L., & Arens, A. B. (2007). Month-by-month phonics andvocabulary, grade 5. Greensboro, NC: Carson-Dellosa.
Dehn, M. J. (2008). Working memory and academic learning: Assessment and intervention.Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Dehn, M. J. (2010). Long-term memory problems in children and adolescents: Assessment,intervention, and effective instruction. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Della Toffalo, D. (2010). Linking school neuropsychology with response-to-interventionmodels. In D.C. Miller (Ed.) Best practices in school neuropsychology: Guidelines for effectivepractice, assessment, and evidence-based interventions (pp. 159–184). New York, NY:Guilford.
Della Toffalo, & Douglas, A. (2010). Best practices in school neuropsychology: Guidelinesfor effective practice, assessment, and evidence-based intervention. In D.C. Miller (Ed.),Best practices in school neuropsychology (pp. 159–183). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &Sons.
Elliott, S. N., Witt, J. C., Kratochwill, T. R., & Callan Stoiber, K. (2002). Selecting andevaluating classroom interventions. In M. R. Shinn, H. M. Walker, & G. Stoner (Eds.),Interventions for academic and behavior problems II: Preventive and remedial approaches(pp. 243–294). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 51
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:4 Page 52
Feifer, S. G. (2011). How SLD manifests in reading. In D. P. Flanagan & V. C. Alfonso(Eds.), Essentials of specific learning disability identification (pp. 21–42). Hoboken, NJ:Wiley.
Feifer, S. G., & DeFina, P. D. (2002a). The neuropsychology of written language disorders:Diagnosis and intervention. Middletown, MD: School Neuropsych Press.
Feifer, S. G., & DeFina, P. D. (2002b). The neuropsychology of mathematics: Diagnosis andintervention. Middletown, MD: School Neuropsych Press.
Feifer, S. G., & Della Toffalo, D. A. (2007). Integrating RTI with cognitive neuropsychology: Ascientific approach to reading. Middletown, MD: School Neuropsych Press.
Flanagan, D. P., & Alfonso, V. C. (2011). Essentials of specific learning disability identification.Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Flanagan, D. P., Alfonso, V. C., & Mascolo, J. T. (2011). A CHC-based operational definitionof SLD: Integrating multiple data sources and multiple data gathering methods. In D. P.Flanagan & V. C. Alfonso (Eds.), Essentials of specific learning disability identification(pp. 233–298). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Flanagan, D. P., & Alfonso, V. C., & Ortiz, S. O. (2012). The cross-battery assessmentapproach: An overview, historical perspective, and current directions. In D. P. Flanagan andP. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests and issues (3rd ed.,pp. 459–483). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., & Alfonso, V. C. (2013). Essentials of cross-battery assessment(3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., Alfonso, V. C., & Mascolo, J. T. (2006). The achievement testdesk reference (ATDR): A guide to learning disability identification. Boston, MA: Allyn &Bacon.
Fletcher, J. M., Lyon, G. R., Fuchs, L. S., & Barnes, M. A. (2007). Learning disabilities: Fromidentification to intervention. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Fletcher-Janzen, E., & Reynolds, C. R. (Eds.). (2008).Neuropsychological perspectives on learningdisabilities in the era of RTI: Recommendations for diagnosis and intervention. Hoboken, NJ:Wiley.
Floyd, R. G., Clark, M. H., & Shadish, W. R. (2008, Aug.). The exchangeability of IQs:Implications for professional psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39,414–423.
Hale, J. B., & Fiorello, C. A. (2004). School neuropsychology: A practitioner’s handbook. NewYork, NY: Guilford Press.
Hale, J. B., Wycoff, K. L., & Fiorello, C. A. (2011). RTI and cognitive hypothesis testing foridentification and intervention of specific learning disabilities: The best of both worlds. InD. P. Flanagan & V. C. Alfonso (Eds.), Essentials of specific learning disability identification(pp. 173–201). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Juarez, B. M. (2012). Effects of general and specific cognitive abilities on reading achievement in areferred sample. New York, NY: St. John’s University.
Mascolo, J. T. (2008). Linking assessment to intervention: The SMART approach (Invitedpresentation). New York, NY: Fordham University-Lincoln Center.
Mather, N., & Jaffe, L. E. (2002). Woodcock-Johnson III: Reports, recommendations, andstrategies. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Mather, N., Lynch, K., & Richards, A. M. (2001). The thinking blocks: Language, images andstrategies. In S. Goldstein &N. Mather (Eds.) Learning disabilities and challenging behaviors:A guide to intervention and classroom management. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
McGrew, K. S., Flanagan, D. P., Keith, T. Z., & Vanderwood, M. (1997). Beyond g: Theimpact of Gf-Gc specific cognitive abilities research on the future use and interpretation ofintelligence tests in the schools. School Psychology Review, 26, 189–210.
52 ESSENTIALS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR UNIQUE LEARNERS
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:4 Page 53
McGrew, K. S., & Wendling, B. J. (2010, Aug.). Cattell-Horn-Carroll cognitive-achievementrelations: What have we learned from the past 20 years of research? Psychology in the Schools,47(7) (Special Issue: Current research in Cattell-Horn-Carroll-based Assessment), 651–675.
Miller, D. C. (Ed.). (2010). Best practices in school neuropsychology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Miller, D. C. (2013). Essentials of school neuropsychological assessment (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley.Packer, L. E., & Pruitt, S. K. (2010). Challenging kids, challenged teachers. Bethesda, MD:
Woodbine House.Schmuckler, M. A. (2001). What is ecological validity? A dimensional analysis. Infancy, 2(4),
419–436.Schneider, W. J., & McGrew, K. (2012). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence. In D.
Flanagan & P. Harrison (Eds.),Contemporary Intellectual Assessment: Theories, Tests, and Issues(3rd ed.) (pp. 99–144). New York: Guilford.
Vanderwood, M. L., McGrew, K. S., Flanagan, D. P., & Keith, T. Z. (2001). The contributionof general and specific cognitive abilities to reading achievement. Learning and IndividualDifferences, 13(2) (Special Issue: Is g a viable construct for school psychology?), 159–188.
Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001, 2007) Woodcock-Johnson III Tests ofAchievement Normative Update. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside.
TEST YOURSELF............................................................................................................................
1. The evidence-based programs listed on sites such asWhatWorksClearinghouse (WWC) and the Florida Center for Reading Research(FCRR), and implemented with a student, serve as an example of:
a. A modificationb. An accommodationc. Remediationd. Compensation
2. When do you engage in SMAARTI?
a. As a pre-referral stepb. During an initial evaluationc. After a student fails to respond to evidence-based interventionsd. All of the above
3. A comprehensive evaluation includes, but is not limited to, which ofthe following:
a. Educational history and current academic performanceb. Familial factors and medical historyc. Cognitive performanced. Behavioral and social-emotional functioninge. All of the above are part of a comprehensive evaluation
(continued )
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 53
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:5 Page 54
(continued )4. All of the following are examples of primary evaluation data except:
a. Standardized cognitive and academic scoresb. Progress monitoring datac. Scores from district-wide testing programsd. Data from work sample analysis
5. True or False?: Information relating to instructional materials used with astudent is an example of tertiary data.
6. Secondary data typically provides information about characteristics that are
a. Related to the child’s instructional materialsb. Related to the child’s instructional environmentc. Related to intrinsic characteristics of the child him- or herselfd. Operating in the child’s home environment
7. Step 3 of SMAARTI involves which of the following?
a. Reviewing manifestations of cognitive weaknessesb. Organizing secondary datac. Identifying types of academic skill deficitsd. Identifying initial targets for interventione. All of the above
8. Aligning math problems vertically as opposed to horizontally, having astudent dictate responses to a scribe, or providing a student with aseparate room to complete work all serve as an example of:
a. A modificationb. An accommodationc. Remediationd. Compensation
9. Reducing the amount of material that a student is required to learn,simplifying material to be learned, or requiring a student to answer only asubset of a specific type of question on a mixed facts sheet all serve as anexample of:
a. A modificationb. An accommodationc. Remediationd. Compensation
10. Teaching a student to use mnemonic devices or to outline and use graphicorganizers is an example of:
a. A modificationb. An accommodationc. Remediationd. Compensation
54 ESSENTIALS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR UNIQUE LEARNERS
3GC01 02/11/2014 22:13:5 Page 55
11. True or False?: Understanding cognitive weaknesses and their relation toacademic weaknesses is necessary for program planning in the SMAARTIapproach.
Answers: 1. c; 2. d; 3. e; 4. d; 5. T; 6. c; 7. e; 8. b; 9. a; 10. d; 11. T
A SYSTEMATIC METHOD FOR TAILORING INTERVENTIONS 55