SLD Academy 1.0
Houston Independent
School District
Academy Goals





Understand the flaws of the traditional
discrepancy model
Avoid the use of the discrepancy model in SLD
identification
Explore assumptions of CHC theory and
principles of XBA assessment
Identify narrow abilities linked to academic
learning
Understand normative versus relative
weaknesses to identify SLD
HISD Core Initiatives





Effective Teacher in Every Classroom
Effective Principal in Every School
Rigorous Instructional Standards and
Supports
Data Driven Accountability
Culture of Trust through Action
HISD’s Special Education
Mission

To support students with disabilities in
gaining college and career readiness
through active engagement in the grade
level curriculum.

Why is quality SLD evaluation needed to
enable students to access grade level
curriculum?
Understand the Flaws of the
Traditional Discrepancy Model

“Given what we now know about LD, it is
irresponsible to continue current policies
that dictate inadequate early
identification practices.”
-Rethinking Special Education for a New Century
What is wrong with using the overall
IQ in SLD identification?
Matthew’s Effect
Limits of potential?
Individual
Differences
CHC Theory
1. Represents individual
differences
2. Fades emphasis on an overall
IQ when applied to eligibility
determination
3. Aligns to academic learning
4. Establishes a nomenclature for
psychological-educational
assessment
General
Conceptual
Ability
(GCA)
Fluid Reasoning
(Gf))
ComprehensionKnowledge
(Gc)
Short-term Memory
(Gsm)
Long-term Retrieval
(Glr)
Auditory Processing
(Ga)
Processing Speed
(Gs)
Visual-spatial
(Gv)
HISD Assumptions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
RtI and identification via the ability-achievement discrepancy
model alone are currently not sufficient for SLD identification.
Comprehensive evaluation should occur once a student has
failed to respond to general education interventions.
Assessment of cognitive and neuropsychological process are
used not only for identification, but to allow ARD committees to
better understand individual differences.
Assessment of cognitive and neuropsychological processes
are used to identify potential barriers in accessing the gradelevel curriculum and provide recommendations to mitigate the
effects of a SLD.
The identification of SLD must involve the investigation of a
pattern of psychological processing strengths and deficits, and
the relation the deficits have and may not have to formal and
classroom achievement.
Relationship to Academics
Gc
Verbal ability
Gf
Fluid Reasoning
Glr
Long-Term
Retrieval
Gsm
Short-Term
Memory
Strong and consistent across all
academics and ages
Significant across all academics,
especially with higher level skills
Significant and moderate across
all academics, especially in
primary grades
Significant across all academics,
Working memory especially
relevant to higher level skills
© 2008 Statewide Leadership: Evaluation
Relationship to Academics
Gv
Visual
Processing
Ga
Auditory
Processing
Gs
Processing
Speed
No significant relationship as
measured in IQ tests currently
except with higher level math.
Significant relationship across all
academics during early grades
Significant to all academics
especially in early to mid-grades
© 2008 Statewide Leadership: Evaluation
Crystallized
Knowledge (Gc)
Process
Declarative
Lexical Knowledge
General Knowledge
Listening Ability
Language
Development
Fluid Reasoning
General Sequential
Reasoning
Ability to problem
solve when rules
are given
Quantitative
Reasoning
Classroom Related
Based on formal
instruction
Induction
Ability to discover
rules
Short-term Memory
Working Memory
Memory Span
Visual Organization
of information
Recall within 7
seconds
Long Term
Retrieval
Associative
Memory
Naming Facility
One thing reminds
us of another
Rapidly produces
names of concepts
Using CHC Theory in SLD
identification



Use at minimum two qualitatively different
narrow abilities when assessing a broad ability
Assess narrow abilities that are associated to
the academic deficits and narrow abilities that
are not associated to the academic deficits
Attempt to measure all seven broad abilities
Practice

Select either a Secondary or Elementary
example from the Assessment Planning
Exercise and plan a SLD evaluation.
Do cognitive deficits occur that are aligned
with classroom functional limitations?
•
•
•
•
•
A priori
A posteriori
Confirmatory bias
Null Hypothesis
Ipsative
Does a functional limitation exist (normative
weakness) in the classroom?
Does formal academic achievement
assessment confirm the presence of a
functional limitation?
A Priori





You know it is true simply by sitting on
the “couch.”
Knowledge gained from deduction,
independent from experimental
evidence.
Based on theory
Example: A bachelors are unmarried
Reading Comprehension is related to Gc
A Posteriori




Knowledge gained from experimental
evidence
Truth is not known without investigation
Example: Some bachelors are unhappy
Example: Gc deficits explain the reading
difficulties for this student
Confirmatory Bias


Avoid beginning assessment with a
preconceived notion
Avoid becoming predisposed to seeing
patterns to support prevailing
assumption
Null Hypothesis

Represents an assumption that all
children exhibit average abilities, but not
required in report writing.
Ipsative


In relation to one’s self
Example: The IQ-Achievement
discrepancy
Definition
(IDEA, 2004) See Section 300.8(c ) (10)
A disorder in 1 or more basic psychological
processes involved in understanding or in
using language, spoken or written, which
disorder may manifest itself in the imperfect
ability to listen, think, speak, read, write,
spell, or do mathematical calculations.
Includes perceptual disabilities, brain injury,
minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and
developmental aphasia.
Regulation

Child exhibits a pattern of strengths and
weaknesses in performance,
achievement, or both relative to age,
grade level standards, or intellectual
development or intellectual development,
that is determined by the group to be
relative to the identification of SLD
Name:
test
Age:
12
DOB:
12/10/1995
Date of Test: 12/10/2007
WJ III® Data
Normative Weakness
Normative Strength
Average Range
COMPREHENSION/KNOWLEDGE (Gc)
Verbal Comprehension
General Information
LONG-TERM RETRIEVAL (Glr)
Visual-Auditory Learning
Retrieval Fluency
VISUAL-SPATIAL THINKING (Gv)
Spatial Relations
Picture Recognition
AUDITORY PROCESSING (Ga)
Sound Blending
Auditory Attention
FLUID REASONING (Gf)
Concept Formation
Analysis-Synthesis
PROCESSING SPEED (Gs)
Visual Matching
Decision Speed
SHORT-TERM MEMORY (Gsm)
Numbers Reversed
Memory for Words
UNITARY
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 145 150 155 160
Standard Score
Note: Bars represent the obtained standard score +/- 1 SEM (5 points for indexes and clusters and 7 points for subtests), thus yielding an approximate 68%confidence interval for the values
© 2008 Statewide Leadership: Evaluation
Non - UNITARY
UNITARY
Interpreting a cognitive profile



Gc = Non-Unitary: KO 97, VL 75
•
•
•
Rule out examiner error
Rule out examinee error
Assume the weaker ability is anomalous (i.e. not true)
to avoid confirmatory bias & administer a similar
subtest
Gc = Weakness: KO 97, VL 75, VL 73,
Gc = Non-interpretable: KO 97, KO 93, VL
75, VL 73
•
Interpret the clusters independent of one another
Practice

Review the sample evaluation and apply
the Report Review Form.
Performance Assessment