Testing for Intelligence

Since the beginning of my educational journey in the summer of 2005, I was made aware of the ongoing debate which involved finding the most effective method to measure children’s minds and abilities.  As a licensed day care owner/provider part of my job is to complete assessments and evaluations on the children in my care.  The areas that are required to be covered are:  communication; gross motor; fine motor; problem solving; personal-social; as well as social-emotional.  I agree that these areas should be assessed (especially at the ages I work with); since any sign of needed help means assistance will be given sooner rather than later.  Often times, I see nothing being done until the child(ren) enter into the public/private school system.

The most frequent forms of assessment used with students with learning disabilities, according to Heward (2006), are:  standardized tests; criterion-referenced tests; informal reading inventories; curriculum-based measurement; and direct daily measurement. (Heward, 2006). 

Standardized intelligence and achievement tests are widely used with children with learning disabilities.  This is because, according to Heward (2006), a discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement is the primary factor in determining eligibility for special education services (Heward, 2006).  I personally do not like standardized tests.  In my state we have the MCAS tests and every student regardless of their abilities/disabilities have to take these tests at specific times in order to be eligible for graduation.  One reason I do not like standardized tests is because students with diverse backgrounds and skill levels are expected to answer questions that are more or less written for the white, abled majority.  English language learners take tests in English before they have been able to master the language.  Special education students take the same tests as all the other children (receiving few of the accommodations usually provided to them as part of their IEPs (Individualized Education Plans) (standardizedtests.pro.com. org).

Criterion-referenced tests differ from norm-referenced tests since a child’s score on a criterion-referenced test is compared with a predetermined criterion rather than with normed scores of other students (Heward, 2006).  These tests are helpful in identifying the specific skills the child has already learned and the skills that require further instruction (Heward, 2006).

Informal reading inventories usually consist of a series of progressively more difficult sentences and paragraphs that a student is asked to read aloud.  Direct observation/recording aspects of the child’s reading skills (i.e. mispronounced vowels, consonants, omissions, reversals, substitutions, and comprehension) the teacher can determine the level of reading material that is most suitable for the child as well as the specific reading skills that require remediation (Heward, 2006).

Curriculum-based measurement involves frequent assessment of a child’s progress in learning the objectives that make up the curriculum in which the child is participating in (Heward, 2006).

Direct daily measurement basically means observing and recording a child’s performance on the specific skill being taught each day as it is taught.  One advantage to this method is that it gives information about the child’s performance on the skill under instruction.  Another advantage is this information is available on a continuous basis so that the teacher/instructor can modify instruction in accordance with changing/unchanging performance (Heward, 2006).

An example of how performance testing is done in other areas of the world is the Primary Schools Baseline Assessment (PIP-BLA).  This example is discussed in an article by Helen Wildy and Irene Styles (2011) and Western Australia is the region discussed.  The PIPS BLA was developed by the CEM Center and is administered within the first six weeks of a child starting compulsory education on an individual basis.  The test takes approximately 20 minutes per child.  The content is based on areas of children’s development which have been shown to be the best predictors of later success or difficulty at school (Tymms, et., al., (2004).

References

2002, M. (n.d.). Standardized Tests - ProCon.org.

     Retrieved August 06, 2011, from

     http://standardizedtests.procon.org/#pro_con

Heward, W. L. (2006). Exceptional children: an introduction to

     special education. Upper Saddle River, NJ:

     Pearson Education/Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Tymms, P., Merrell, C., & Jones, P. (2004). Using baseline assessment

     data to make international comparisons. British Educational Research

     Journal, 30(5), 673-689. doi:10.1080/0141192042000234647

Wildy, H., & Styles, I. (2011). Measuring What High-achieving

     Students Know and Can Do on Entry to School: PIPS 2002-2008.

     Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 36(2), 51.