Educational implications of a dynamic approach in the assessment of learning propensity: case discussion Jo Lebeer, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine

1
Educational implications of a dynamic approach in
the assessment of learning propensity case
discussionJo Lebeer, University of Antwerp,
Faculty of Medicine

• Dynamic Assessment and Inclusive Education
• International Network Conference 22 November 2004
  
• Università degli Studi di Milano Bicocca

2
Central problem

• What to do with a child who does not learn
• or keep up with our expectations?

3
Testing paradigm

• 1. Test the child

• 2. Adapt teaching to test results

• How, what, what for?

4
Static testing paradigm
1.Subject the child to a number of diagnostic
tests to find out what goes wrong

• IQ, DQ, EQ, neuropsychology, neuropsychiatrytesti
  ng of knowledge skills
• psychometric testing

5
Statis testing paradigm

• 2. Label

Learning disability, NLD, DYS-calculia, -
grafia, lexia, PDD, ASD ODD, .
6
Static assessment

• Monologue
• Essentially quantitative - normative
• Static no examiners interference
• Measurement of actual performance
• Time-limited
• Standardized
• Pathogenic looks at defects
• Individual out of context
• Deterministic

7
Dynamic assessment

• Dialogue
• Qualitative
• Evaluates change of cognition, motivation,
  learning disposition, efficiency
• effect of context and mediation
• examiner intervenes to obtain modifiability
  looks for optimal conditions, gives feedback,
  teaches, mediates

8
Case 1 Harry

• 1989
• History of autistic behaviour from kindergarten
  auditory hypersensitivity, withdrawal, screaming
• Etiology ? Hypothesis perinatal brain damage
  due to difficult forceps delivery immune
  reaction after MMR vaccination
• 5years Enrolled in international school (other
  language than mother tongue) big cognitive
  social difficulties needs individual instruction
  
• Diagnosis of autism at age 9
• 9 years Transfer to special school for children
  with learning difficulties learning remains
  difficult in group academic retardation (
  aritmetics, reading, spelling)
• Parent-induced therapies Son-Rise ( Option
  Institute US Mass.), diet ( glutenfree,
  milkfree), auditory integration Tomatis,
  osteopathy

9
Case 1 Harry conclusions static test reports

• 9 years IQ 64, way below average limited
  cognitive potential , language retardation,
  information processing, perceptual organisation
  defects in social skills, personality
  disturbance, lack of phantasy, lack of impulse
  control
• 11 years WISC-R t IQ vIQ71 pIQ 78 difficulties
  with verbal comprehension, maths concepts,
  representational thinking, planning,
  eye-handco-ordination, visual memory, but
  improved as compared to 9 years problems with
  attention, self-organisation, oppositional, lack
  of perseverance
• 12,5 years IQ 92 ( after cognitive-mediational
  intervention)

• Referral to special school ZML low level
• Offer structured environment
• Reduce too stressing situations

10
Case 1 Harry, dynamic assessment

• Method of assessment used Feuersteins LPAD (
  Learning Propensity Assessment Device)
• 5x 2-3 hours individual assessment

11
Characteristics of Feuersteins LPAD

• Profile of modifiability on 4 domains
• Cognitive functions
• Mental operations
• Affective/ motivational factors
• Efficiency
• Modifiability test- mediation - retest
• Evaluation of context family, support, school
• Evaluation of the needs for mediation to bring
  about necessary changes

12
LPAD instruments

• Tests for visuo-motor perception, organisation
  planning
• Organisation of Dots (Feuerstein-Rey) (OD)
• Complex Figure (Rey, adapted by Feuerstein
  (CFD)
• Test for analogical thinking
• Ravens matrices (RCPM and RSPM)
• Feuersteins Variations on Raven (VAR II,
  A,B, C )
• Memory tests
• Visual Memory Associative Recall Functional
  Reduction Test Feuerstein.
• Auditory Memory 16 Word Memory Test (Rey,
  adapted by Feuerstein (WMT)
• Spatial Memory Plateaux, (PTX) (Rey, adapted by
  Feuerstein)
• Higher logical relations
• Representational Stencil Design (RSDT)
  (Feuerstein
• Organiser (ORG) van
  Feuerstein
• Seriation
• Numerical progressions (NP) ( Feuerstein)

13
Case 1 Harry test results Complex figure of Rey
First copy
First memory
14
Complex figure mediation

• Analysis naming what structures can you
  discover?
• Important questions what? (Gives information
  about shape) Where? ( gives info about place),
  How? ( info about orientation and position) How
  long, how big ( size) when ( order), how many (
  number), how far from each other ( distance)
• Vocabulary of shapes
• Vocabulary of spatial concepts horizontal,
  vertical, diagonal, right angles, parallel, at
  the same height, etc.
• Comparison where is that point in relation to
  the two others?
• Regulation of impulsivity
• Need to count and be precise
• Relationships between parts and whole, and
  between parts
• Planning what do to first in order to ensure
  that everything will be on the right place, the
  right size, etc.
• Systematic exploration doing first the inside,
  then the outside
• Precision of data gathering and of output in
  drawing
• Combining all the criteria

15
Case 1 Harry results after mediation
Second copy, 1st trial
Second copy, 2nd trial
Second memory
16
Case 1 Harry tests for analogical thinking
(Raven)
17
Case 1 Harry tests for analogical thinking
(Raven)
18
Case 1 Harry visual memory tests

• Associative Recall Functional Reduction
• Pre-mediation 12/20
• Post-mediation 20/20

19
Case 1 Harry auditory memory tests

• 16 Word memory ( Feuerstein, based on André Reys
  15 word memory test)
• pre-mediation 6/16
• Mediation of categorisation and summative
  behaviour 16/16 after 9 trials

20
Case 1 Harry Spatial Memory

• Plateaux (André Rey)

Number of errors
Number of trials

• Mediation of refraining impulsivity
• Stop trial and error
• Name position with 2 dimensions
• Mediated repetition

21
Case 1 Harry higher tests

• Organiser ( Feuerstein)
• Potentially good inferential thinking, but bad
  reading, interprets wrongly
• Poor hypothesis generation and verification
• Normalizes after mediation
• Numerical Progressions ( Feuerstein)
• Inefficient arithmetics, but able to learn and
  apply rules
• Representational Stencil Design

22
Case 1 Harry dynamic conclusions LPAD

• Cognitive deficiencies, but highly modifiable
  with mediation
• Unfocused look c focused
• Unsystematic impulsive data gathering c more
  systematic
• Unstable spatial reference frame c adequate use
  of spatial concepts
• Inefficient reading c after regulation,
  understands better
• Diff. with hypothesis generation, checking,
  planning
• Blocks stops searching c learns to be more
  flexible in choosing strategy
• Affective/motivational factors
• Autistic withdrawal symptoms stress induced, also
  highly modifiable
• Cooperative, motivated, easy to mediate
• Bright without mediation in some areas ( coloured
  pattern analysis, organisation according to
  model)
• Bright in all areas with relatively little
  mediation

23
Case 1 Harry recommendations

• LPAD test report
• Academic domain
• Daily reading comprehension tasks
• Daily maths, increase level steadily
• General subjects
• Cognitive rehabilitation domain
• Feuersteins Instrumental Enrichment, individual
  group
• Mediation cognitive analysis in daily life
  situations
• Modifying environment
• Teach how to cope with changes
• Schoolng with non-disabled children
• Suggestions for incresing MLE by teachers
  parents
• Suggestions for improving cognitive functioning

• Static test report
• Reduce stress
• Lower academic level
• Special school
• Avoid too many changes
• Medication for behaviour control

24
Case 1 Harry Suggestions for increasing MLE by
teachers parents (extract)

• Example of mediation of intentionality and
  reciprocity
• Explain clearly what you want him to learn and
  why
• Explain your goals (short term and long term)
• Start with something which elicits his motivation
  and curiosity
• Obtain his cooperation by joining him a while, do
  a game, a physical game, or something else, and
  then take over the lead
• Clarify the task what do we have to do here?
  Where would you start looking? What do you know
  already? Where is the information?
• Vocabulary how do you call this?
• Analysis what are the properties? (the ngive
  vocabulary to name the characteristics)
• Repeat until mastery is reached
• Etcetera for 12 criteria of MLE

25
Case 1 Harry sugestions for improving cognitive
functions

• 1. Suggestions to improve perception of data
• First look carefully, focus what do you see
  here? (help focussing)
• Be more systematic dont look here and there,
  but step by step, from left to right, from top to
  down, in the direction of reading. This by
  regulating strongly stop impulsivity, point
  trythmically here and here, etc.
• Use the right labels a circle is a circle. A
  diamond is not the same as a tilted square. Name
  the shapes use the concept shape
• Use correct words to indicate place and position,
  e.g. left, right, horizontal, vertical, in the
  middle, between, top-left, etc.
• Use correct words to indicate time and sequence,
  e.q. what comes first? Is there any indication?
• Be more precise when you gather the data
• Help to consider two characteristics
  simultaneously ( e.g. height and shape), to
  combine sources of information

26
Dynamic Assessment 2 Michael

• 1984
• Brain tumor (R temporal lobe astrocytoma) at age
  2,5 and age 8 with epilepsy behaviour
  disturbance
• Post-op good language development, positive
  behavioural changes but left spastic hemiplegia,
  wheelchair bound cognitive deficits, regression
  to mental age of 3, dependence on maternal care

27
Dynamic Assessment 2 Michael Schooling

• Elementary school has to relearn to read and
  write
• initially wheel chair bound
• Relearns to walk and leaves wheelchair behind
• Serious depression because he feels he has lost
  many capacities
• he works daily with a dedicated speech therapist
  
• at 15 he finishes the medium school with a
  serious cognitive gap and retardation of
  schooling at that time a diagnosis is requested

28
Michael static assessment data (age 15)

• medium to light mental retardation
• IQ v75, IQp 48, IQt 59
• defects in visuo-spatial functions
• difficulties in linguistic integration,
  spelling, writing
• STM and LTM memory and memorisation deficit
• automatisation problems in arithmetics
• Problem solution difficulties
• typical problems with planning, control,
  generalisation and constant need for a mediator

29
Michael static assessment data (age 15)
recommendations

• work at adaptation skills
• teach how to use public transport, money, social
  contacts outside school
• vocational training

30
Michael dynamic assessment data (age 15)
Results pre-test Results post-test
Reys complex figure (parallel test) - With mediation 36/36
Ravens Coloured Progressive Matrices 23/36 36/36
Feuersteins Variations on B8-12 26/30 30/30
Feuersteins Variations I 9/12 12/12
Associative Recall and Functional Reduction 7/20 18/20
16 Word Memory 8/16 16/16 after 8 trials
Positional Learning Test 16 trials 14 10 trials
Representational Stencil Design 0/20 5/20
31
Michael dynamic assessment conclusions

• Cognitive deficiencies unsystematic data
  gathering, lack of spatial concepts, lack of
  concepts to relate, to compare, to make
  hypotheses, to plan, to have strategies,
  impulsivity
• All cognitive deficiencies were modifiable, with
  relatively little mediation
• Potentially bright
• Memory skills O.K. when mediated to organise
  look for relationships
• Visuo-motor function O.K. after mediation
• Higher logical abstract thinking potentially O.K.
• Learning disposition O.K. when properly mediated
• Psychological difficulties with self-acceptance
• Low learning efficiency improves when cognitive
  functions improve

32
Case 1 Michael dynamic recommendations

• Academic continue general education in liceo
  scientifico with general knowledge subjects
  languages, maths, history, geography, philosophy,
  art
• IEP reduce level of complexity, select key
  concepts, reduce quantity, individualize
  evaluation, give more mediation for each subject
• Cognitive rehabilitation Feuersteins
  Instrumental enrichment mediated learning
• Intensive, daily mediation in academic matters
• Modifying environments teach autonomy skills in
  a structural way how to get somewhere, learn to
  deal with complexity, how to make keep social
  relationships

33
Michael progress
Maturità liceo scientifico Patente Entra la
facoltà
34
Case 3 Willy, a boy with Down syndrome

• 1994
• 9th child out of 11 children
• Goes to normal kindergarten
• School refuses entrance to primary school on
  grounds of static test reports language delay
  and intellectual deficit are considered too big
• Change to different primary school dynamic
  assessment (DA) requested IEP formulated on the
  basis of DA report
• Successful 1 2nd elementary school problems
  in 3rd grade school requests testing

35
Case 3 Willy test results

• 4 y Reynell language tests and SON IQ tests
  delay 2 years
• 5 y static cognitive tests delay 2 years
  conclusion low concentration behavioural
  difficulties, difficult cooperation, too much
  withdrawal, language gap referral to special
  school
• 5 y dynamic assessment conclusions same
  cognitive, behavioural language deficits found
  as other tests, but modifiability is evident he
  is open to learning, has a very good LTM, can be
  taught concepts. Recommendation inclusive
  primary school, start reading writing
• 6y DA despite big cognitive difficulties (lack
  of focussing, lack of concepts, lack of
  comparative behaviour) and attention span
  shortness (1/2 h) , signs of modifiability
  retention of learnt concepts, motivation to
  learn, less repetition needed, able to understand
  relationships

36
Case 3 Willy primary school IEP programme

• Participate with all classroom activities
• Reading programme same as others
• at home extra reading with other family members,
  with reading cards
• at home extra individual work on maths
• increased cognitive MLE activation home
  programme to teach concepts ( colour, size,
  shape, numbers, direction, time) operations
  (categorisation, seriation, analogies), executed
  by volunteers ,students, brothers parents

37
Willys IEP programme learning context

• IEP is highly flexible, regularly evaluated
• IEP works with some, but not all teachers
• Person of teacher more important than programme
• Characteristics of succesful teacher individual
  mediators
• - not necessarily specialists teacher never had
  experience with Down S.
• - spontaneous good mediators
• - synthesis of being very firm (good regulation
  of behaviour and clear intentionality), creative
  (in obtaining reciprocity) optimistic (strong
  beliefs in modifiability) challenging
  mediating feelings of competence welcoming (
  med. feeling of belonging) individualizing

38
Illustration of teacher as mediator
39
Teachers as mediators
40
Willys assessment age 10

• 10y static tests add label of autism school
  threatens to exclude , either by referring to
  special school or by excluding him from
  classroom teaching
• New DA requested

41
Willys dynamic assessment age 10
Visual organisation planning Feuersteins Organisation of dots Focussing vis.motor diff. concepts not acquired
Abstract thinking Ravens coloured Progressive matrices 11/36 pre to 30/36 post-med
Visual memory Feuersteins associative recall-basic 1/10 to 9/10 and 10/10 reduced
Spatial memory Tzuriel s cognitive modifiability battery CMB 3 trials to remember 4 positions
Logical inference Part-whole relations ( Feu LPAD-basic) 8/22 pre to 22/22 post
CITM Tzuriel ( inferential thinking) 100 mediation needed
Inclusion/exclusion ( Feu-LPAD basic) Retention of concepts
42
Case 3 Willy conclusions from DA

• Potential for academic skills learning is
  present, but this is hampered by cognitive
  deficiencies ( unsystematic search, superficial
  perception, no model, lack of spatial reference,
  impulsivity, lack of integration of information,
  lack of control
• Benefits from imitation, group learning
• Withdrawal symptoms context dependent and because
  of lack of mediation
• Strong, intensive mediation needed

1. Organize a meeting with parents, teachers, school
   psychologist, assistants
2. Make a new IEP based on DA outcome
3. Intensify work on cognitive dysfunctions both at
   home school
4. Child will stay in classroom most of lesson hours
   individual tutoring 5h/week at schoolpeer
   tutoring
5. Teach teacher some principles of mediation

43
General conclusions

• Static, psychometric testing , confirms IQ-based
  categorisation in different classes of mentally
  retarded, based on a static model of intelligence
  and makes minimalistic recommendations
• Static, psychometric testing IS NOT a valid test
  for evaluation of learning processes, potential,
  propensity
• Static psychometric testing DOES NOT allow
  prediction of future educational performance
• Static testing may do harm for the childs
  reputation and future

44
General conclusions

• The deficiencies found in Dynamic evaluation (
  LPAD) - the pre-test scores - are usually
  compatible with static IQ other test results
• The changes observed after mediation, however,
  give an indication of modifiability
• Dynamic assessment is MORE VALID to assess
  learning processes, potential propensity

Planning of educational intervention should be
based on Dynamic Assessment
45
General conclusions Psychometrics - Dynamic
Assessment

• mechanistic paradigm

• ecological paradigm

Macrosystem society
exosystem
Mesosystem family, school, therapists
Microsystem child
Assessment without ecological intervention does
not make sense
46
General conclusion

• Inclusive education, but with continuing classic
  static assessment, risks to block modifiability
• Dynamic Assessment without vigorous, ecological,
  intervention does not make sense

47
Contact

• INCLUES www.inclues.org
• Jo Lebeer, coordinator INCLUES
• University of Antwerp (Belgium), Project of
  Learning Enhancement and Inclusion
• UA, Campus Drie Eiken, S5
• Universiteitsplein 1, B-2610 Wilrijk
• tel [phone] www.inclues.ua.ac.be
  jo.lebeer_at_ua.ac.be
• The full text of this ppt. Presentation has been
  published Lebeer, J. (2005), Shifting
  perspective dynamic assessment of learning
  processes in children with developmental
  disabilities, Erdélyi Pszichológiai Szemle
  (Transsylvanian Journal of Psychology), Special
  Issue on Dynamic Assessment, 1,55-81