Executive Functions Assessment
and Interventions
Milton J. Dehn, Ed.D.
CASP
November 2020
Notice of Copyright 2020
These PowerPoint slides are copyrighted by
Milton J. Dehn and Schoolhouse Educational
Services, Inc. They are not to be reprinted,
copied, or electronically disseminated without
written permission. To obtain permission,
email
milt@SchoolhouseEducationalServices.com.
Financial Interest Disclosure
The presenter, Milton Dehn, is an owner of
Schoolhouse Educational Services, Inc. which
publishes the McCloskey Executive Functions
Scale (MEFS), one of the assessment measures
discussed during this workshop.
Workshop Topics
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
What are Executive Functions (EFs)
EFs, Academic Learning, and SLD
EF Assessment Strategies
EF Rating Scales
The McCloskey EF assessment
Case study
Interventions Overview
Two Students with Different Grades
• Both have an IQ of 85-90
• Both have achievement test scores in the same
range as their IQ
• Same home environment opportunities
• Neither has any type of disability
• One is a B average student
• The other is a D average student
• What is the difference?
• Many would say it is motivation, but is it?
Who Gets Referred for SLD & When
1. Not completing school work (a school
performance problem) is one of the top
referral reasons
2. These kids get referred earlier than those
who have the same skill deficits, but get
better grades (have better performance)
3. It may be their executive function (EF)
Punishing Kids with EF Delays/Deficits
1. Many middle-schoolers do not yet have the
EF skills to perform well in middle school
2. They may experience punishing
consequences for behaviors that are not
entirely under their control
3. They may be retained even though their
achievement test scores are average
EFs and Misattributions
1. Misattributions: Laziness, apathy,
irresponsible, lack of motivation, lack of
respect for authority
2. Poor study skills
3. Low intelligence
EF is the Elephant in the Classroom
Dehn’s Conclusion
• Every referred child/student should be
evaluated for executive functions, regardless
of age, abilities, skills, behaviors, background,
and type of disability being considered
• This includes SLD referrals
• To omit this is poor practice and can harm the
individual in both the short and long-term
• So, many adults never knew what their
problem was as struggling students
What We Know About EFs
1. Not enough, but we should still assess
2. How well do the assessment instruments
operationalize all of the EFs?
3. How well do we differentiate between
academic skills deficits, EF deficits,
intellectual deficits, and various psychological
disorders?
4. Individuals with well developed EF skills
succeed in school and at life.
New Directions for EF Assessment
1. More than just an ADHD assessment component
2. Depth of assessment should match the depth of EFs
3. Should differentiate between academic and socialemotional EFs
4. Should identify EF production vs skill deficits
5. Should link more directly to specific EF
interventions
Executive Functions
1.
2.
3.
4.
A complex construct; many different EFs
Different theories and definitions
Different from intelligence (correlate .2 - .3)
Cues and controls cognition, emotion, social
functioning, and behavior
5. Have a neurological basis: prefrontal cortex
6. Conscious and unconscious
7. Important for academic learning and production
EF Definitions
1. Directive capacities
2. Supervisory system with multiple parts
3. Cue the use of other mental capacities such
as cognitive abilities but are not those
capacities themselves, e.g metacognition
4. “Purposeful, organized, strategic, selfregulated, goal-directed processing of
emotions, thoughts, and actions”
Executive vs Cognitive
1. Difficult to separate executive from cognitive
2. Executive aspects involved in both ability and
skill performance
3. EF’s are measured in cognitive scales
1. Directly: Working Memory, Planning, and
Attention
2. Indirectly during any cognitive testing task
WM: Both Executive and Cognitive
1. The executive dimension of WM supervises
short-term memory (a cognitive process)
2. The executive aspect of WM inhibits, shifts,
and updates
3. The executive aspect of WM supports
cognitive processes such as fluid reasoning
4. The executive aspect of WM cues the use of
an executive skill/strategy, such as rehearsal
Main Dimensions of EF
1. Self-Regulation
1. Awareness of need (is cued) to self-regulate
2. Directing the self-regulation functions
2. Self-Realization/Self-Awareness (selfknowledge)
3. Self-Determination (goal driven)
1. Develops in adolescence
Awareness of Need to Self-Regulate
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Is attentive to others and the environment
Perceives cues from others
Perceives cues from the environment
Interprets cues correctly
When cues are perceived, EF selects and directs
appropriate EF skills, such as planning
6. Self-monitors & makes adjustments/corrections
7. If awareness of cues is lacking, needs directions
from others (production deficiency if skill exists)
Self-Regulation EFs
1. These are what are typically considered EFs
2. Awareness of when to self-regulate is a part
of these (the directive part)
3. Cue and direct how we feel, think, and act
4. Can self-regulate without being consciously
aware
5. McCloskey Executive Functions Scale has 31
specific self-regulation EFs
Self-Awareness (Conditional
Knowledge)
1. Knows which executive processes to apply to
the task at hand
2. Knows when, how, where, and why to apply
strategies
3. Has strategic knowledge & applies strategies
4. Knows when to adjust processes and
strategies
5. If conditional knowledge lacking, a
production deficiency is likely
Self-Realization
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Understands how mind functions
Ability to self-analyze
Appraisal of self is accurate
Accurately perceives how one is perceived
Knows one’s EF strengths and weaknesses
but also cognitive and other domains
6. Has low correlations with self-regulation; 6year old example
Self-Determination
1. Development begins around puberty
2. Has goals, short- and long-term
3. Long-term planning
Domain and Environment/Arena
Influences (McCloskey)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Awareness of the need to self-regulate varies by domain,
situation, and environments/arenas
The EF skills also vary
Domains
1. Emotions
2. Behaviors
3. Cognitive functions (most related to SLD)
Arenas
1. Intrapersonal
2. Interpersonal/social
3. Academic (most related to SLD)
Conditional knowledge also varies by environment or arena
Specific Executive Functions
• Generate list of specific self-regulation
functions, such as planning
• See McCloskey list
McCloskey (MEFS) Self-Regulation
Clusters
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Attention
Engagement (initiating, inhibiting, flexibility)
Optimization (monitoring, correcting)
Efficiency (pacing, using routines)
Memory (holding information, working,
storing, retrieving)
6. Inquiry (anticipating, analyzing)
7. Solution (organizing, planning, deciding)
Is There a “g” of EF?
1. Factor analysis does not prove that EF is one
“thing” in the brain or one function
2. Rather, “Co-conductors” that collaborate
3. Thus, the development of EF’s can vary; can be
specific strengths and weaknesses
4. Domain’s may have their own EFs; e.g. language
5. EFs also differ by “arena”
6. Saying that EF in general is weak is not especially
helpful in understanding the problem, child, or
developing an intervention
Development of EFs
1. Begin to develop in early infancy
1. E.g., choosing where to look
2. Control of actions
2. The different EFs are on different
developmental tracks and rates
3. Major developmental advances in
adolescence
4. Development is not under the child’s control
Development of EFs
1. Initially cued by external demand
2. Then become more internally driven
3. Complying with external EF demands
requires more mental effort and greater
control capacity than internal (ADHD)
Neurological Basis of EF
1. Control center in prefrontal cortex (PFC)
2. Each EF has its own pathway through the
frontal lobes and with other parts of brain
3. Connectivity is important for EFs functioning
4. Executive working memory, attentional
control, and fluid reasoning also located in
PFC
5. Inhibition is a fundamental function of the
PFC; it underlies attention and WM
Neuroanatomy
Prefrontal Cortex Image
Frontal Lobe dPFC
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The last lobe to develop
The “output” lobe; others are input
Executive functions---prefrontal cortex
Working memory---prefrontal cortex
Attentional control---prefrontal cortex
A Closer Look at Inhibition
1. Inhibit an automatic, learned, or typical
response
2. Inhibit task-irrelevant responses
3. Interrupt/stop an ongoing response
4. Control/inhibit internal interference
5. Re-engage after disruption
6. Ignore distractions
7. Goal directed persistence
8. Thought to be the underlying weakness for
ADHD and ADHD/Working Memory
Gender Differences from MEFS Study
1. At all age levels, females significantly better
EFs on Engagement and Optimization clusters
2. Ages 5-6, females better on all self-regulation
clusters except Memory
3. Ages 7-8, females better only on Engagement
and Optimization
4. Ages 9-10, females better on all except
Efficiency and Memory
5. Ages 11-18, females better on all clusters
EF Deficits in ADHD Population
1. Weak self-regulation EFs, especially
inhibiting, focusing, sustaining
2. Also: holding, planning, sensing time
3. Self-realization and self-determination
4. Not all individuals with EF deficits are ADHD
MEFS ADHD Profile (n = 47)
1. ADHD sample had significantly lower scores on
MEFS clusters in both academic and self/social
arenas, except for the Memory cluster
2. The majority of the differences were around one
half standard deviation for unmedicated
3. Those on medication had better EF’s and did not
have significant differences on Memory and
Efficiency in both arenas and Solution in
Self/Social arena
MEFS Autism Profile (n = 38)
1. Autism sample had significantly lower scores
on all MEFS clusters in both academic and
self/social arenas
2. The majority of the differences were around
2/3 of a standard deviation
MEFS SLD Profile (n = 48)
1. Percentages of SLD students rated as having EF
deficits in Academic EFs ranged from 8%
(Engagement) to 42% (Solution)
2. Percentages of SLD students rated as having
Academic EF strengths ranged from 33%
(Attention) to 3% (Memory)
3. Compared with non-SLD were significantly
weaker on all 7 MEFS clusters, both academic
and Self/Social (about a half-standard deviation
weaker on most clusters)
EFs and Other Disorders
1. Executive deficits are evident in every
neuropsychiatric disorder (does not mean
they are the cause)
2. Examples: Anxiety, ODD, CD, autism
3. Can have executive deficits without having a
disorder
EF and SLD Identification
1. Dehn’s perspective: A deficit in executive
functioning (general or specific) is a
“processing” deficit that can be used to
document a processing deficit for SLD
2. In Dehn’s Pattern of Strengths and
Weaknesses (PSW) approach EF scores can
be compared with scores of other processes
and CHC abilities
Some Evidence for the SLD-Processing
Weaknesses Connection
Meta-Analysis of 32 studies by Johnson et al.
(2010) found “moderately large to large effect
sizes (many close to one standard deviation of
difference) in cognitive processing differences
between groups of students with SLD and
typically achieving students.” The processes
included were: Working memory, short-term
memory, phonological processing, processing
speed, executive function, and language.”
MEFS Study: EF Correlation with
Academic Skills
1. Teachers rated student’s overall academic
skill level
2. Below average students had the lowest EF
scores, and above average the highest
3. Significant differences by academic skill level
for all MEFS clusters, regardless of disability
status
EF and Academic Learning
1. EFs are good predictors of achievement
2. EF deficits are more evident in production
problems (homework) than acquiring academic
skills
1. Production deficit: has the academic skills, but does
not demonstrate/apply them
2. May be that teacher provides more executive
controls during skill learning
3. EF demands increase in middle & high school
4. In middle school, there is a mismatch between
demands and students’ EFs developmental level
The Big 6 EFs for Academics (Meltzer)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Goal-Setting (part of Self-Determination)
Flexibly Shifting
Prioritizing
Organizing
Working Memory
Self-Monitoring
EF and Reading Comprehension
1. Important EFs: Focusing, Sustaining,
Organizing, Planning, Shifting, Inhibiting,
Monitoring, Holding/Working, Generating,
Associating, Storing/Retrieving, Balancing
EF and Math
1. EFs needed for math computation include:
Focusing, inhibiting, storing/retrieving,
monitoring, and correcting
2. For math reasoning/problem solving,
planning is important
EFs and Written Expression
1. Of all academic skills, is the most impacted
by EF difficulties
2. EFs needed to integrate the various
processes, abilities, and skills when writing.
Such EFs include: Sustaining, gauging,
holding/working, organizing, planning,
balancing, monitoring, correcting,
generating, associating
Discussion
• How has the preceding information changed
your perspective on executive functions?
Assessment of EF
1. Should be a component of every
psychological/educational evaluation
2. It determines success/failure; influences all
aspects of functioning and life
3. Provides insights into what underlies,
behavior, social functioning, learning, etc.
1. May be more informative than an FBA
EF Classroom Behavior Examples
•
•
•
•
•
•
Difficulty with self-control
Difficulty getting started
Is not very strategic
Difficulty shifting from one task to another
Difficulty planning and organizing
Does not notice and correct mistakes
EF Assessment Challenges
1. Assessments focus primarily on EF with
symbolic material (academic learning arena)
2. Direct assessments provide much EF support
3. Each scale structures the EFs differently
4. Scales don’t assess for different arenas
5. Rating items are mostly general, not specific
1. E.g., the BRIEF Working Memory subscale has
other EFs: Focus, Select, Modulate, Organize,
Monitor, Execute, Direct
Problem with Direct Standardized
Testing of EFs
1. Standardized tests provide structure, focus,
short intervals; reduce need for EF functions
2. May lack validity for the individual. Typically,
overestimate the EF abilities and skills
3. Multiple EFs are required by each task
4. The tasks also require cognitive processes
that are difficult to separate out
5. The assessment task is not a real world task
Rating Scales vs Standardized Tests
1. Some studies have found rating scales to be
more valid assessment of EFs than direct
testing for reasons on previous slide
2. Rater is observing many aspects of EF; tests
only sampling a few
3. Rating scales can be just as valid and reliable
if they pass validity scale criteria, e.g.,
consistency and negativity
NEPSY-II Attention/Executive
Functioning Domain
1. Animal Sorting (shifting)
2. Auditory Attention (sustain attention) and
Response Set (shift and inhibit)
3. Clocks (planning and organization)
4. Design Fluency (generating)
5. Inhibition (inhibit and shift)
6. Statue (ages 3-6) (inhibition)
D-KEFS
1. Ages 8 – 89
2. Nine autonomous tests
3. Is half fluid reasoning
CAS-II
1. Includes Planning, Attention, and Working
Memory measures
2. Produces a composite EF score
3. Closely related with EFs in the academic
arena
4. Is an excellent predictor of academic learning
Test of Verbal Conceptualization
and Fluency by Reynolds & Horton
• Categorical Fluency measures fluency of
ideation and the ability to retrieve words that
fit within a conceptual category.
• Classification is a verbal measure of shifting
and rule induction that is designed as a
language-based analog to the well-known
Wisconsin Card Sorting Test™.
58
Test of Verbal Conceptualization
and Fluency by Reynolds & Horton
• Letter Naming measures word retrieval by
initial sound and fluency of ideation.
• Trails C measures the ability to coordinate
high attentional demands, sequencing, visual
search capacity, and the ability to shift rapidly
between Arabic numerals and linguistic
representations of numbers.
60
Testing Observation Guidelines
1. EF deficits implicated when there is
progressive deterioration of performance as
EF demands increase
2. Example Digit Span Forward vs Digit Span
Backward
3. Differences in EF demands explain why
subtest scores vary across batteries
Interpretation of Rating Scales:
Concerns
1. Raters can be biased
1. Use more than one rater
2. Look at validity scales
1. Are responses consistent
2. Are they overly negative
3. Picks infrequent answers
Rating Scale Results
1. Expect scores to vary by informant
2. May be due to different environments,
executive function demands, experiences
with the child, or bias by informant
3. Parent vs teacher are usually more discrepant
than between parents or between teachers
BRIEF2 Scales
1. Inhibit
2. Self-Monitor
3. Shift
4. Emotional Control
5. Initiate
6. Task Completion
7. Working Memory
8. Plan/Organize
9. Task-Monitor
10. Organization of Materials
BRIEF2 Indexes
1. Behavior Regulation Index
2. Emotion Regulation Index
3. Cognitive Regulation Index
1. Ability to control and manage cognitive
processes and problem solve effectively
2. With SLD evaluations, this Index should be the
focus
4. Global Executive Composite
BRIEF2 Cognitive Regulation Index
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Initiate/Task Completion
Working Memory
Plan/Organize
Task-Monitor
Organization of Materials
CEFI (Naglieri & Goldstein)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Attention
Emotion Regulation
Flexibility
Inhibitory Control
Initiation
Organization
Planning
Self-Monitoring
Working Memory
All under CEFI Full Scale
Most of them apply to academic functioning
MEFS Standardization and Norming
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
254 Teacher raters, 167 cities, 29 states
Ages 5-19; N = 1,000; 5 age groups
Matches U.S. demographics well
17% of norming sample: disability/disorder
Online data collection
110 Items
<15 minutes to complete
MEFS Structure
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
7 Self-Regulation Clusters
31 Self-Regulation EFs
Also, Self-Realization and Self-Determination
Two arenas: Academic and Self/Social
Identifies strengths and deficits across selfregulation EFs by arena
6. Individual item analysis
Directive EFs vs EF Skills
1. Directive EFs: Becoming aware of the need to
cue and then cuing and directing its executive
skill counterpart, such as planning
1. On MEFS, labeled as “Knowing When”
2. Equivalent to construct of metacognitive awareness
2. Expressive Executive Skills: The actual
expression of the EF skill, such as planning
1. On MEFS, labeled as “Knowing How”
3. Having the EF skill, but not expressing it because
you don’t know when is a production deficit
Knowing When vs Knowing How
1. Awareness of the need to cue and then cuing
and directing its executive skill counterpart is
Knowing When
2. Knowing How: The actual expression of the
EF skill, such as planning
3. Not Knowing When results in an “EF
production deficit”
Working Memory (WM) Example
1. WM Directive Cues (Knowing When)
1. Noticing you just forgot something
2. Recognizing it will be difficult to remember
2. EF Skills (Knowing How)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Review your previous thoughts
Write it down
Rehearsal
Chunking
Visualizing
Unique MEFS Rating Structure
Identifies Different Types of EF Deficits
Rating Description
5 – Almost always does on own
without prompting
4 – Frequently does on own
without prompting
3 – Seldom does it on own
without prompting
2 – Does it, but only after
prompting
1 – Only does it with direct
assistance
0 – Unable to do even with
assistance
Strengths or Deficits
5 and 4 – Executive Function
Strength (Knows When and
How)
3 and 2 – Executive Function
Deficit (Knows How but not
When)
1 and 0 Executive Skill Deficit
(lacks Knowing How and
When)
Arenas of Involvement (McCloskey)
1. EF’s vary greatly by situation, environment,
and domain of functioning
2. Intrapersonal (internal processes) and
Interpersonal (social) (these two combined
on MEFS)
1. Autism has deficits in this arena
3. Academic (symbol system)
1. Language and academic learning
2. LD often deficient in this arena
Validity Study: MEFS and BRIEF
1. The majority of correlations between MEFS
cluster scores and BRIEF Metacognitive (now the
Cognitive Regulation Index) scores are significant
2. The majority of correlations between MEFS
cluster scores and BRIEF Behavior Regulation
scores were not significant
3. MEFS Self-Realization and Self-Determination
were mostly not significant
4. The MEFS and BRIEF are measuring different EFs
or measuring them in different ways except
those in Cognitive Regulation Index
Validity Studies: NEPSY-II EF Tests
1. Nearly all correlations between MEFS cluster
scores and NEPSY-II EF scores were not
significant
2. Only the NEPSY-II Word List Repetition had
significant correlations with several MEFS
Self-Regulation clusters
3. The MEFS and NEPSY-II are measuring
different EFs or measuring them in different
ways
Percentages with EF Skill Deficits
Across 7 MEFS Clusters and 2 Arenas
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Normal males and females: 0-7%
Speech and language: 0-15%
SLD: 6-42%
ADHD Unmedicated: 7-30%%
ADHD Medicated: 4-32%
EBD: 10-57%
Autism: 29-53%
Percentages for production deficits are much
higher (has skill but does not do independently)
Case Study
12 year old, 6th grade female
WJ IV GIA of 71; WM a strength (95)
Academic skills 2nd to 4th grade level
She is in unstructured charter school projectbased regular ed. class; performance is poor
5. No interest in learning
6. Can shut down and become noncompliant
7. Can be socially appropriate when she chooses to
1.
2.
3.
4.
Case Study Results
1.
2.
3.
4.
MEFS completed by classroom teacher
All cluster scores 1st percentile except Memory
No EF strengths
Most scores in the Knowing When Difficulty column;
she can perform the EF when prompted and thus has
the capacity/skill
5. Has more EF deficits (not knowing how) under
academic than self/social, consistent with
underachievement indicators on the WJ IV
6. NEPSY-II EF scaled scores are 7-12, majority around 9
1. Why?
See Report
Case Study Results
1. The items identify specific skills that need
teaching or available skills that need to be
self-cued (learn when to do them)
2. Quick Gains: develop more self-cueing for
skills that are already there
1. Talk about situations, stimuli that mean it’s time
to engage the skill, e.g., someone says, “Hello”
means it time to focus on what the other person
is saying and respond
2. Practice responding to cues
Case Study Continued
1. Review number of responses under
Strengths, EF Deficits, and Exec Skills Deficit
columns while contrasting Academic and
Self/Social arenas
1. Engagement, Inquiry and Solution stronger
socially than academically
2. Which is the priority arena: Academic or
Self/Social?
Discussion
What changes in your executive function
assessment procedures are you considering?
EF Intervention Considerations
1. Don’t assume the child has conscious control
over the EFs in question
2. Knowing how deficits: Skill is present; needs
to be taught how to recognize cues
3. If EF skills are lacking, then they need to be
taught before cuing is taught
4. When skills taught, metacognitive
(awareness) component needs to be
embedded
General EF Intervention Guidelines
1. Model effective EF use (think aloud)
2. Focus on making child aware of the EF’s needed
to accomplish a task
3. Begin with external control when there EF skill
deficits
4. Gains may be minimal and progress slow
5. Have reasonable expectations
6. Teach specific executive functions as skills
routines
EF Strategies for Goal Setting
1. Discuss goals with student and put in writing
2. Short-Term and Long-Term goals
3. Makes students more motivated when they
set goals themselves
4. Identify the steps involved
5. Identify the strategies needed
6. Includes planning and time management
Awareness Emphasis
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
“Thinking about thinking”
Applies to all EF Deficits and EF Interventions
Teach child how EF works
Inform child of strengths and weaknesses
Teach how to control, apply, use the EF skills
Emphasize personal efficacy of intervention
Includes strategy knowledge and application
Teach conditional strategy knowledge: how,
when, where, why
EF Strategies for the Whole Class
(Meltzer): Metacognitive Instruction
1. Recognize the purpose of a strategy (basically
an EF Skill)
2. Recognize the benefits of a strategy
3. Teach conditional strategy knowledge: how,
when, where, why to use the strategy
4. When students understand the above, they
personalize and generalize strategies and
persist at using them
Strategies for External Control
1. Structure the environment to reduce selfregulation demands
2. Structuring time (schedules, timers, etc.)
3. External prompting (providing list of steps)
4. Cue/prompt specific self-regulation EF skills
when students’ directive EFs are deficient
5. Providing feedback and reinforcement
Environmental Modifications for
Poor Inhibition
1. Increase external controls
1. Restrict access to things that cause problems
2. Increase supervision
3. Create ways to cue child to control impulses
1. “What should you do when this happens?”
4. Teach child to ask self specific questions in
problem situations
1. “Did I get too close?”
Cues and Prompts Training Sequence
1. Practice following directions; perform the
skill when directed to do so
2. Give verbal prompts without specific details
3. Give nonverbal cues
4. Discuss and practice recognizing cues from
others and the environment
5. Discuss and practice self-cueing through selftalk
Using Verbal Mediation
1. Using self-talk to increase self-control
2. Generating internalized language is a very
effective tool for improving self-regulation
EFs
3. First, model it by talking through it aloud
4. Then have child say it aloud
5. Then whisper
6. Then say it internally
EF Strategies for Shifting and Flexibility
1. Shifting examples: from one approach to
another, from one process to another, from
the main ideas to the details, from writing to
editing, from reading to computing
2. Flexibility examples: interpreting information
in different ways, solving math problem in
different ways, studying differently for
different kinds of tests
EF Strategies Organizing & Prioritizing
1. Prioritize based on level of importance
1. Allocate time based on priority
2. Teach them to impose their own structure on
the task
3. Organize materials and work space
4. Graphic organizers
5. Following a rubric for writing
Questions to Ask Self When Planning
and Problem Solving
1. What prior knowledge do I have than can
help with this task?
2. What strategies should I use?
3. What should I do first?
4. How am I doing?
5. What adjustments do I need to make?
6. How did I do?
7. What could I have done differently?
Executive Functioning: Planning
1. Developing planning improves math
performance (Naglieri’s study; ATI)
2. Discuss benefits of plans
3. Learn how to plan step-by-step
4. Develop plans
5. Verbalize them
6. Implement them and evaluate
7. Practicing planning steps with a variety of
materials and situations
Planning Steps
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
What is my goal?
What do I need to do to achieve the goal?
How do I do each of these?
Brainstorm ways?
Select the ways.
Put them in sequence.
Break into smaller steps as needed.
Implement, evaluate, revise
EF Strategies for Working Memory
1. Learn how to manage cognitive load
1. What is cognitive load?
2. Using rehearsal
3. Chunking and visualizing
EF Strategies Self-Monitoring
and Checking
1.
2.
3.
4.
Review progress towards goals
Reflect on strategy use
Develop and use personalized checklists
Use self-cuing
Attention: Self-Monitoring
1. Teacher, or device carried by student, cues student
at variable intervals, 1 - 5 minutes
2. When cued, student marks monitoring sheet
regarding behavior when cue occurred or behavior
since last cue
3. When teacher is cueing, she also provides her rating
alongside student’s; student receives bonus point
when ratings match
4. Set a points goal that student is working for, easy at
first, then keep adjusting upward
Link
5. Reinforcement system is necessary
Intervention Programs that Improve EF
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Cognitive Behavior Therapy
I Can Problem Solve
Skill-Streaming
Social Skills Training
Cognitive Strategy Training
Working Memory Training
Study Skills
Programs for ADHD
EF Strategies for the Classroom (Kryza)
1. Help students understand how their brains
learn and function so that they realize they
have control over their own learning
2. “What do you know about yourself as a
learner that can help you learn and master
this material?”
3. Have them self-assess during the learning
process, “Is my study method working?”
EF Strategies for the Classroom (Kryza)
1. Intentional and transparent teaching
1. Help students understand why we are learning
this skill/material
2. How it will benefit them
3. What strategies students can you use to learn
the material?
EF Strategies for the Classroom (Kryza)
1. Help student develop an internal locus of
control
2. Attribute outcomes to their own efforts and
strategies (not so much to abilities)
3. Basically, attributing success more to EF
rather than IQ, knowledge, and skills
Increasing Homework Completion
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Organizing materials
Using an assignment notebook
Time Management
Getting started on homework
Don’t provide too much help; guide student
through the processes needed
6. Routinely preview and review upcoming
tasks
Help Teachers Understand
1. The extent of the EF demands they make on
students and how these overwhelm students
with slower EF development
2. How EF deficits contribute to academic
production problems
1. Students with EF deficits get referred first
McCloskey Self-Regulation EFs
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Perceiving
Focusing
Sustaining
Initiating
Energizing
Inhibiting
Stopping
Pausing
Being Flexible
Shifting
Monitoring
Modulating
Correcting
Balancing
Sensing Time
Pacing
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Using Routines
Sequencing
Holding/Working
Storing/Retrieving
Gauging
Anticipating
Estimating Time
Analyzing
Evaluating
Generating
Associating
Organizing
Planning
Prioritizing
Deciding