INTELLIGENCE TESTING OF INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE BLIND OR VISUALLY IMPAIRED: A Position Paper

Marnee Loftin, MA, TSBVI Carol Evans, PhD, Davis District, UT Debbie Willis, MA, APH July 20, 2012 AER International, Bellevue, WA

1

THE BEGINNING…

APH established a Task Force in Jan. 2007

Asked question of Task Force: “Do IQ tests provide meaningful information

for individuals with visual impairment?”

2

THE ANSWER…

The Task Force responded that:

“IQ tests can provide meaningful information to individuals who are blind and visually impaired, as well as to their instructors, families, and decision makers.”

3

HOWEVER IT IS IMPORTANT:

“… provided that all tests be administered in accordance with key points that reflect the uniqueness of the population, as well as appropriate cautions.”

4

THE TASK FORCE STARTS:

The Task Force developed a position paper and key points that reflect:

Appropriate preparation for administration

Cautions in administration

Cautions in interpretation

5

CONTENTS OF POSITION PAPER CONSIST OF: PREPARATION

Administration

Specialized Training Needed

Reasons for Evaluation

Collaboration between Disciplines

Eye Conditions and Developmental History

6

(Continued)

ADMINISTRATION

Adaptations

Tactile and Symbolic Representation

7

(Continued)

INTERPRETATION Qualitative Interpretation

Reporting Results

8

POSITION STATEMENT

When appropriate practices are followed, cognitive or intelligence testing of individuals who are blind or VI provides useful and valuable information to test-takers, their families, instructors, and other decision makers.

9

ISSUE 1: ADMINISTERING INTELLIGENCE TESTS

GUIDELINE: Intelligence test results yield valuable information about an individual and increase the usefulness of the overall evaluation.

10

PRIOR TO ADMINISTRATION THE EVALUATOR MUST:

Ensure completion of Functional Vision/Learning Media Assessment (FV/LMA) by TVI or O&M Specialist

Understand … information contained in the FV/LMA and

ways to use it in testing

11

(Continued)

… the impact of adaptations and modifications upon test results

… the importance of making tests accessible without changing content assessed or of level of difficulty

Support of collaborative evaluations for ensuring the highest quality outcomes

12

ISSUE 2: SPECIALIZED TRAINING

Guideline 2: Those administering tests need specialized training in theory of assessment and test construction as well as child development and communication methods of individuals who are blind and VI

13

Professional Preparation of Evaluator must include: Constructs of intelligence

Theory of tests and measurement

Typical and atypical child development

Test administration with general and special populations

Understanding of collaborative evaluations

14

The Professional Evaluator must:

Accept the concept of collaborative evaluation

Incorporate expertise of VI professionals in the evaluation process

Collaborate in all phases from preparation for testing to report writing

15

ISSUE 3: REASONS FOR EVALUATION

Guideline: The reason for the evaluation, and the resulting specific clinical judgments and recommendations, should be clearly documented in each individual’s report.

16

The Evaluator must:

Request information about specific reasons for evaluation

Avoid accepting reasons that relate only to

regulations

17

Specificity of these requests will:

Improve test selection

Answer referral questions

Minimize simple reporting of scores

Increase applicability of results

18

The Recommendations should:

Be clear to all stakeholders

Avoid professional jargon

Explain technical terms

Apply to real-life situations and promote increasing independence and self-advocacy

19

The Evaluation should not be used as the sole determinant of:

Cognitive abilities

Presence of additional disabilities

Eligibility for special programs

20

ISSUE 4: COLLABORATION

Guideline: The visual impairment and/or rehabilitation professional, classroom teacher, family, and individual must be involved during the planning, evaluation, and report writing process.

21

COLLABORATIVE EVALUATIONS WILL ALWAYS:

Gather information from all individuals

Actively solicit and discuss information

View collaboration as an on-going process

Reflect the professional expertise of all

22

ISSUE 5: EYE CONDITION AND DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

Guideline 5: The evaluator should be aware of the individual’s medical and developmental history, as well as the implications of the eye condition on the tasks to be performed (and implementation of recommendations).

23

Specific information necessary includes understanding of:

Medical history

Developmental patterns and relationship to vision

Early intervention

Congenital vs. Adventitious vision loss

Neurological vs. Ocular vision problems

24

ISSUE 6: ADAPTATIONS

Guidelines: Adaptations, which include accommodations that do not change the concepts tested nor the difficulty level of the test items, should be planned in advance in collaboration with the visual impairment and/or rehabilitation professional and the test developer, and be well-documented in the final report.

25

ACCOMMODATIONS SHOULD: Provide access to the test taker

Be planned in advance

Maintain the basic concept and level of difficulty of items

Be documented in final report

26

ACCOMMODATION OR MODIFICATION? Accommodations do not affect basic

concept or level of difficulty, e.g. braille or LP

Modifications affect basic concept or level of difficulty, e.g. use of calculator

Either change increases the need for caution in interpretation of results

27

ISSUE 7: TACTILE AND SYMBOLIC REPRESENTATIONS

Guideline 7: Symbols, tactile graphics, and miniature objects must be carefully considered and used with caution to represent pictorial or graphical information. Real objects should be used whenever feasible.

28

Visual stimuli must be carefully analyzed to determine

Relevance to the concept being assessed

Stimuli that can be made accessible

Any changes or eliminations

Appropriate use of miniature objects if familiarity with both the real object and the miniature is ensured

29

ISSUE 8: DIRECT OBSERVATION

Guideline: The assessment should include direct observation in multiple situations.

30

Suggested behaviors for observation include: Visual efficiency

Visual fatigue

Organizational abilities required in problem-solving

Application of O&M skills in new environments

Presence of self-stimulatory behaviors

31

Additional information should include: Social integration with peers

Independent initiation of activities

Organization of tasks for successful management and completion

Self-advocacy skills

Self-management of technology

32

ISSUE 9: QUALITATIVE INTERPRETATION

Guideline: When visual-spatial items or tests are administered, these results should be used only for clinical purposes and to identify appropriate modifications of educational or vocational materials and instructional methods. Results obtained from visual-spatial evaluations must never be reported as scores or used to determine the presence of other disabilities. Important exceptions to this guideline exist, and are documented below.

33

Visual-Spatial items or tests may be administered if:

The individual uses vision for learning

The FV and LMA support the presence of adequate vision for specific items

Both the VI professional and Evaluator agree that results provide meaningful information AND support the referral question

34

Accommodations made to Visual-Spatial items/test must be:

Supported by the FV/LMA

Endorsed by both vision professional and evaluator

Noted in the final report

Include such things as extended time and use of CCTV during administration

35

Results of performance on Visual-Spatial items or tests should be:

Reported qualitatively rather than as a score

Used as a source to determine learning strengths

Used to plan meaningful accommodations in different environments

36

ISSUE 10: REPORTING RESULTS

Guideline: Reports of assessments of individuals with visual impairments need to be expanded to include an explanation of the procedures followed, changes in standardized administration, and the description of performance observed.

37

GENERAL CAUTIONS

All reports should reflect that tests represent an estimate of abilities

Standardization of most-frequently- administered tests did not include persons with visual impairments

38

Test results should be reported with the Evaluator specifying: Intervals around the obtained score as well as

specific score

Confidence intervals at 90% level

Specific concerns relating to validity of scores

Any adaptations in procedures and/or materials

Lack of norms for individuals who are blind or visually impaired and corresponding cautions

Accommodations to provide access are specified

39

REPORTING RESULTS OF VISUAL SPATIAL TESTS

Extreme caution must be used in reporting scores on visual spatial tests

Generally these must be reported qualitatively, i.e. as strengths and weaknesses, with implications for materials and instruction

40

Further Information:

www.aph.org/tests/intelligencetesting.html

Marnee Loftin loftinm@tsbvi.edu or loftinmp@att.net

Carol Evans visionpsych@gmail.com or braillepsych@yahoo.com

Debbie Willis dwillis@aph.org

41