Harvey F. Clarizio

Curriculum‐based measurement: Conceptual and psychometric considerations

This review of published literature and research critically examines the conceptual and psychometric problems associated with curriculum-based measurement (CBM) as they relate to eligibility decision making and programming for special education. It is concluded that although CBM can provide a useful supplement in assessing and remediating academic difficulties, it suffers from many of the criticisms leveled at traditional assessments as well as some unique limitations of its own. It is concluded that CBM, to be of most value, needs to be part of a larger systematic psychoeducational assessment program rather than a replacement for it.

Intellectual assessment of Hispanic children.

This review examines the issue of whether individual intelligence tests such as the WISC-R are biased against Hispanic school-aged children. Three common but faulty notions of test bias are discussed, and a psychometric definition of bias is advanced. Evidence regarding external and internal validity is analyzed. Guidelines for the intellectual assessment of bilingual students are presented, following a discussion of possible language bias.

Recategorized WISC-R scores of learning disabled children and differential diagnosis

This study analyzed WISC-R profiles along a three-factor approach (Spatial; Verbal-Comprehensive; Attention-Concentration), as suggested by Bannatyne (1968) for purposes of differential diagnosis. The WISC-R profiles of 278 school-verified learning disabled children were compared to those of four other groups: Educable Mentally Impaired (N = 141), Emotionally Impaired (N = 67), Otherwise Impaired (N = 61), and Nonimpaired (N = 294). The total sample was drawn from the State of Michigan public schools. Statistically significant differences were found between the learning disabled group and the other four groups on WISC-R subtest scores. Further analysis revealed that 36% of the learning disabled and 32% of normal children exhibited this WISC-R profile. Analysis of WISC-R profiles of SpatialVerbalAttention was not useful in differential diagnosis among the five groups. The results are discussed in terms of the limited utility of a three-factor analysis of WISC-R subtest scores for the purpose of differential diagnosis.

Grade Retention among Students with Learning Disabilities.

This study explored the rates of grade retention among children with undiagnosed learning disabilities. During the 1990–91 school year, data were collected on 344 Michigan students who were referred for special-education evaluation due to learning problems. Of the 201 students determined to possess a learning disability (LD), 71.6% had been retained at least once before they were referred for special-education evaluation. Minority and urban LD students were more apt to be retained before being referred for evaluation. Retained LD students were usually one year older than nonretained LD students at the time of special-education referral. Although retention among LD students did not appear to be related to gender or grade placement, retained LD students generally exhibited lower levels of intelligence and weaker skills in reading comprehension, writing, and math at the time of their referral.

Defining severe discrepancy in the diagnosis of learning disabilities: A comparison of methods

Abstract Given the significant increase in the number of students identified as learning-disabled (LD) and the growing concern about the overidentification of LD cases, attention has been focused on methods for determining a severe discrepancy between ability and achievement. Two such methods (a z -score discrepancy and a regression procedure) were compared by means of two different cutoff procedures on scores for 236 LD referrals. These results were then contrasted with a policy dictating that the lowest-achieving of those referred be considered as LD. Each student was evaluated with an individual intelligence scale and an achievement test. The results indicated that the regression procedure identified fewer students than did the z -score method. When the percentage of identified children is held constant, the methods were similar with respect to the types of errors made (false positives and false negatives). Data indicated that selecting the lowest-achieving students would have yielded about the same percentage of correct decisions, as defined by the multidisciplinary team, as did the two discrepancy methods. The policy implications of these findings are also considered.

Conduct Disorder: Developmental considerations

Antisocial behavior clearly has its roots in childhood. DSM-IV now recognizes that antisocial behavior follows at least two main developmental routes—a childhood-onset and a post-pubertal adolescent-onset—that vary in etiology, natural course, compounding features, prognosis, and treatment needs. Neuropsychological deficits and family adversity predispose the early starters to a life of antisocial behavior. Aggressive antisocial behavior crystallizes around age 8. Importantly, the adolescent-limited delinquents are free from psychopathology. Findings about developmental pathways and individual factors affecting the development of conduct disorder are presented. Both stability and change characterize the cause of conduct disorder. Conclusions and implications are noted.

A Comparison of Methods for Calculating a Severe Discrepancy.

Abstract Given the substantial rise in the number of students identified as learning-disabled, increasing attention has centered on methods for determining a severe discrepancy between ability and achievement. Using scores from 86 learning disabilities referrals, we compared four such methods (a z-score discrepancy, an estimated true score discrepancy, an unadjusted regression procedure, and an adjusted regression procedure). Each student was evaluated with the WISC-R, PIAT, and K-ABC. A high degree of agreement was found between z-score and estimated true score difference approaches. Less agreement was found between the unadjusted regression procedure and the other methods. It was concluded that the four methods cannot be used interchangeably in the calculation of severe discrepancies. Of the four methods that were analyzed, the unadjusted regression procedure selected the smallest percentage of students.

Assessment of severe emotional impairment: Practices and problems

The basic purpose of this study was to determine: (a) how school psychologists operationally define severe emotional disturbance as outlined in PL 94–142 (SED), and (b) the extent to which assessment procedures are in compliance with PL 94–142. A total of 83 school psychologists from two north central states participated in the study. Results indicated that a typical battery for assessing SED consisted of the WISC-R, WRAT, Bender-Gestalt, an incomplete sentences test, a behavior-rating scale, classroom observation, and informal interviews. A high correlation was found between the frequency with which psychologists use a type of data and the importance ascribed to that data source. Psychologists generally relied on only one or two criteria when considering severity of emotional disturbance. Special education placement often was contingent upon program availability. Implications for training and practice were presented.

Childhood depression: Diagnostic considerations

The basic purposes of this review are to: (a) examine existing definitions of childhood depression and their implications for diagnosis; (b) evaluate certain of the better known self-report inventories, parent rating scales, psychiatric interviewing schedules, and peer nomination techniques; and (c) address diagnostic issues associated with reliability, validity, consistency across raters, settings, and time, and requirements for symptom duration.

Interclinician Agreement and Bias in School Psychologists' Diagnostic and Treatment Recommendations for a Learning Disabled Child.

Interclinician agreement was measured among 24 practicing school psychologists who assessed a simulated learning disability case of a fourth-grade girl. The data were analyzed with both an unprompted report written by each subject (recall), and a checklist of descriptive statements about the case (recognition). Interclinician agreement was found to be moderately high for diagnoses, and somewhat less for prescriptions. Interpretation bias due to the childs race (black, white), SES (low, high) and achievement level of the childs school (low, high) was not observed on most diagnostic statements. Only 17 of the 744 possible diagnostic main effects and 2-way interactions were significant at p<.01, while 7 such differences would be expected purely by change. No statements about intelligence, classroom behavior, or social relationships were statistically significant. However, the simulated low SES black child did tend to be classified as “not eligible for special education” much more often than did the white or upper class black on both the written reports and on the checklist, while the upper SES child was labelled learning disabled more frequently than was the low SES child on the recognized checklist. Other main effects and interactions also were noted in some statements about developmental history, arithmetic achievement, perceptual-motor integration, and excessive dependence.