Diagnostic Procedures (PSY 435)

Evidenced Based Practices in Academic Assessment and Intervention (PSY 435) Illinois State University Spring 2011

Professor: Gary L. Cates, Ph.D., NCSP Office Hours: T &W 10-11 and by appointment Office: 443 DeGarmo Phone: 438-3123 Email: [email protected] Web: http://www.ilstu.edu/~glcates

Course Description: This course will focus on the assessment, treatment, and prevention of academic skills deficits and learning problems. This course will provide you with an opportunity to develop skills in the areas of academic assessment, empirical treatment of learning problems, analysis of research, and report writing.

NASP Standards Addressed STANDARD 1: Data-Based Decision Making & Accountability STANDARD 2: Consultation & Collaboration STANDARD 3: Learning & Instruction STANDARD 5: Student Diversity in Development & Learning STANDARD 6: School & Systems Organization, Policy Development, & Climate STANDARD 11: Technology

Course Objectives: Upon successful completion of this course you will be able to: 1. Conduct a norm reference standardized assessment of academic skills 2. Conduct a curriculum based assessment/evaluation 3. Link an academic assessment to an intervention 4. Demonstrate the ability to utilize assessment and intervention procedures that encompass individual differences in student learning. 5. Present scholarly work to other school psychologists and/or school psychology students 6. Write an academic assessment report 7. Utilize technology in the management and presentation of data 8. Review and critique an academic rating scale. 9. Demonstrate an understanding of a response to intervention model

Required Texts: (C)Cates, G. L., Blum, C., & Swerdlik, M. E. (2011). Effective RTI Training and Practices: Helping School and District Teams Improve Academic Performance and Social Behavior. Research Press: Champaign, IL. (S) Shapiro, E. S. (2010). Academic Skills Problems (4th ed.). Guilford Press. (W)Shapiro, E. S. (2010). Academic Skills Problems Workbook (Revised Edition). Guilford Press. (H)Howell, K. W. & Nolet, V. (2000). Curriculum-Based Evaluation: Teaching and Decision Making (3rd ed.). Belmont CA: Wadsworth. (SR) Supplemental Readings: See below

Other Materials: Stop watch, clipboard, three ring binder, and other supplemental readings at my discretion Course Requirements

Exams (200 points; 40%) You will be administered two take home exams. You will have two weeks to complete the exams. Your answers should be your own. Responses should be typed in times new roman 12 point font double spaced. All citations should be referenced in a separate section. Each exam is worth 50 points. Details are important.

Norm Referenced Standardized Achievement Measures (120 points; 24%) Each student in the course will sign up to administer the Woodcock Johnson Test of Achievement – III (WJTA- III), the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test- II (WIAT-II), and the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (KTEA). You will complete a protocol for each of these administrations. You will also video tape each administration. The protocols will be graded and the video tapes reviewed by a GA. Each protocol will be evaluated for the accuracy of scoring judgments as well as clerical calculations. Errors on any of the following will result in deduction of 1 point per error: Standard procedures followed (basal & ceilings, discontinuations, etc.) Responses recorded verbatim and scored accurately Credit complete & accurate Front page of protocol complete & accurate clerically Calculations, transfer of scores, and tables read correctly Scoring judgments match standards and criteria in manual

When protocols are returned to you, you will be asked to correct scores that were affected by your errors. You will turn in protocols within one week of administration along with behavioral observations, a description of child strengths and weaknesses (both inter and intra), and recommendations Note: 1 point is subtracted for each error. Errors that change the standard score beyond the standard error of measurement will require re- administration for credit. You do not have an opportunity to earn these points back and you can earn negative numbers. The purpose of this task is to familiarize and prepare you to conduct such assessments.

Curriculum Based Assessment Probe Proficiency (40 points; 8%) You will administer and score a reading (R), writing (WE), spelling (S), and math (M) curriculum based measurement probe. You will administer 3 of each at the correct grade level and the median score will be reflected in your respective brief report. These probes will be turned in to be checked by a GA within one week of their completion. You do not have an opportunity to earn these points back and you can earn negative numbers. The purpose of this task is to familiarize and prepare you to conduct such assessments.

Brief Assessment Reports (40 Points; 8%) You will be required to write 3 brief reports. These reports will be written on your administration of the three standard tests (WJTA-III, WIAT-II, KTEA) and one combined CBA. Your reports are expected to be technically correct (i.e., classification ranges, percentile ranges, strengths & weaknesses, & interpretation). You will also integrate fictitious background information, test observations, and empirically supported recommendations in the interpretation. You will be asked to make corrections to your reports after grading. Note: Errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation, & word usage will result in a deduction of points. The purpose of this task is to prepare you to write like a psychologist.

Academic Rating Scale Critique (15 points; 3%) 1. You will write a critique of an academic skill related rating scale your choice. You will gather information from other reviewers (e.g. test critiques, tests in print, Burros mental measurement yearbook etc.) and journal articles. You will provide your classmates with a copy of your respective critique. You will also be asked to be part of a presentation proposal submitted to ISPA next year as a group to present this information. The purpose of this task is to prompt your awareness of the importance of the technical adequacy of assessment instruments in addition to the resources for which you may find such information.

Scholarly Paper (3 Options) Research Proposal – Doctoral Students preferred You will conduct a literature review and write a research paper on academic intervention for a specific area of your choosing. The area you choose however cannot be one already chosen by one of your peers. This will be written in APA format and be 12-15 pages long. The paper should include a title page, abstract, introduction, method section, and reference section. The purpose of this task is to provide you an opportunity to read more extensively about academic intervention research and to think critically about current research in addition directions for future research.

Intervention Bank – Specialist Students preferred You will construct a comprehensive intervention bank (at least 10) for a specific academic domain (e.g. reading fluency, comprehension, written expression, spelling, math computation, math applications etc.) The area you choose however cannot be one already chosen by one of your peers. This will be written in APA format and be 12-15 pages long. A one page synopsis including but not limited to: age ranges, target population, intervention times (session/total), cost, publisher, indication of effectiveness should be included for each intervention. In addition, an empirical research article related to the intervention must be included. A summary table comparing all interventions should also be provided. The purpose of this task is to provide you an opportunity to learn more about specific academic interventions and how to think critically about them.

Intervention Literature Review – Specialist or Doctoral Students You will conduct a literature review and write an informative paper on a specific academic intervention of your choosing (Cover Copy & Compare; Interspersing; Computer Assisted Instruction; etc.). The intervention you choose however cannot be one already chosen by one of your peers. This will be written in APA format and be 12-15 pages long. The paper should include a title page, abstract, introduction, conclusion, and reference section. The purpose of this task is to provide you an opportunity to read more extensively about a specific academic intervention \to think critically about current research in addition directions for future research.

Whichever option you choose two things are certain. First, you will share your product with your peers in electronic format. Second, you will be asked to submit your paper to ISPA as a presentation next year. You therefore should take much pride in this project.

Presentation (25 points; 5%) You will provide a presentation to your peers related to your scholarly paper. Handouts or access to your materials is encouraged as is the use of technology. Your peers will be required critique the quality of your presentation and this will be factored into the grading of the presentation (not the paper itself). The purpose of this task is to provide you an opportunity to a) present in front of an educated audience, b) defend your logic, c) provide a learning experience related to your paper to your peers and d) provide a learning experience with regard to reviewing the work of colleagues.

Additional information: The GA will evaluate CBM and test administration as well as scoring of protocols and probes. The instructor will review them before they are returned to you. The instructor will evaluate your reports. Work is due at the beginning of the period on the date noted. Late work will only be accepted if approved by the instructor, and then at a 10% penalty per day. If at any time you are caught cheating, you will earn a zero on the assignment in question, an F for the course, reported to the school psychology curriculum committee (SPCC) and the university and I will vigorously seek to have your expelled. If you have a disability that requires accommodations please contact disability concerns at 305 Fell Hall or call 309-438-5853/8620 (TTY) GRADING Points Due Date Skill Development 200 WIAT Proficiency 40 1 week after administration -Brief Report 10 (see rotation) WJTA Proficiency 40 1 week after administration - Brief Report 10 (see rotation) KTEA Proficiency 40 1 week after administration - Brief Report 10 (see rotation) CBE Probe Proficiency (R, WE, S, & M) 40 1 week after administration - Brief Report 10 (see rotation) Rating Scale Critique 25 February 14th Scholarly Paper 50 April 18th Presentation 25 Last two weeks of classes Mid-term Exam 100 March 23rd Final Exam 100 As indicated via ISU ______Total 500

A = 90 – 100% B = 80 – 89% C = 70 – 79% D = 60 – 69%

Test Administration Rotation

Round 1 WIAT WJ KTEA Lilian Filka Sandy Benicia Verenice Allison Jayme Jennifer Tom Kaylynn Erica Allysa Round 2 WJ KTEA WIAT Lilian Filka Sandy Benicia Verenice Allison Jayme Jennifer Tom Kaylynn Erica Allysa Round 3 KTEA WIAT WJ Lilian Filka Sandy Benicia Verenice Allison Jayme Jennifer Tom Kaylynn Erica Allysa Tentative Schedule of Events Date Topics Activities Readings Jan 10 High Stakes Achievement Testing Introductions, Course Syllabus, SR: 12 syllabus Jan 12 Diagnosing Learning Disabilities Syllabus/Test Manuals SR: 1 & 7; S: Ch1 Jan 17 MLK Day No Class Jan 19 Generic Model of Learning and The reading SR: 19; H: Ch. 1-2 process Jan 24 Learning and Instruction as a science SR: 13; H: Ch. 3-4

Jan 26 No Class CDSPP Round 1 Due Jan 31 Assessment of the Learning Environment S: Ch 3; W: Step 1; Feb 2 Introduction to Response to Intervention C: Ch.1; SR: 8 Feb 7 Tier I Assessment: Curriculum Based C; Ch. 2:, SR: 11; WB: Step Measurement and Universal Screening 2 Measures Feb 9 Tier II Diagnostic Assessment: Curriculum Probe Practice C: Ch. 3; S: Ch4; Based Assessment and Commercial NRA Feb 14 Tier III Diagnostic Assessment: Curriculum S: Ch. 2; H: Ch. 6, 8 & 9 Based Evaluation Reading Feb 16 Tier III Diagnostic Assessment: Curriculum H: Ch 11-12 Based Evaluation Math Tier III Diagnostic Assessment: Curriculum Based Evaluation Writing Feb 21 NASP No Class Round 2 Due & 23 Feb 28 Mid Term In Class Exam pt. 1 Mar 3 Mid Term In Class Exam Pt. 2 Mar. Spring Break No Class 7-10th Mar. Setting Goals and Writing IEP for academic Academic Rating Scale C: Ch. 4; S: Ch. 7 & 8 14-16 problems and Data-base decision making Critiques Due Mar Functional Analysis of Academic Responding SR: 1, 2, 4, & 6; S: Ch. 5 & 21-23 & Academic Intervention 6; W: Step 3 Mar Functional Analysis of Academic Responding Probe Proficiency Deadline SR: 1, 2, 4, & 6; S: Ch. 5 & 28-30 & Academic Intervention 6; W: Step 3 Apr 4- Special Topics in RTI Round 3 Due C; Ch. 6; SR: 5 & 10 6 Apr Intervention Presentations 4 Presentations 11-13 PAPER DUE Apr 18 Intervention Presentations 4 Presentations -20 Apr.25 Intervention Presentations 4 Presentations -27 May Final Exam Per University Schedule 2nd-6th Supplemental Readings In addition to the list of readings below, test manuals should be read. They are located in the testing kits. The administration manuals for AIMSWEB can be found on the AIMSWEB Website.

1.Barnett D. W., Daly, E., & Martens, B. (2004). Empirically based special service decisions from single case designs and increasing and decreasing intensity. Journal of Special Education, 38, 66-79. 2. Cates, G. L. & Thomason, K. (2006). Data-Based Decision Making: Considering Comprehension Levels When Conducting an Experimental Analysis of Reading Interventions. Journal of Applied School Psychology. 3. Cates, G. L., Skinner, C. H., Watson, T. S., Meadows, T. J., Weaver, A., & Jackson, B. (2003). Instructional effectiveness and Instructional Efficiency as considerations for data based decision making: An evaluation of interspersing procedures. School Psychology Review, 32, 601-616. 4. Daly, E. J., Murdoch, A., Lillenstein, L., Webber, L., & Lentz, F. E. (2002). An examination of methods for testing treatments: Conducting brief experimental analysis of the effects of instructional components on oral reading fluency. Education and Treatment of children, 25, 288-316. 5. Dawson, P. (2004). Homework: A guide for parents. http://www.naspcenter.org/parents/homework.html 6. Eckert, T. L. Ardoin, S. P., Daly, E. J., & Martens, B. K. (2002). Improving oral reading fluency: A brief experimental analysis of combining an antecedent intervention with consequences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 271-281. 7. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Compton, D. L. (2004). Identifying reading disabilities by responsiveness-to- instruction: Specifying measures and criteria. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27, 216-227. 8. Gresham, F. M. (1991). Conceptualizing behavior disorders in terms of resistance to intervention. School Psychology Review, 20. 19. Haring, N. G., & Eaton, M. D. (1978). Systematic instructional technology: An instructional hierarchy. In N. G. Haring, T. C. Lovitt, M. D. Eaton, & C. L. Hansen (Eds.), The fourth R: Research in the classroom (pp. 23-40). Columbus, OH: Merrill. 10. Harvey, V. S. (2004). Study Skills: A handout for parents. NASP Communiqué, 26 (6). 11. Marstone, D. B. (1989). A curriculum-based measurement approach to assessing academic performance: What it is and why do it. In Shinn, M. (Ed). Curriculum Based Measurement: Assessing special Children. Guilford Press: New York. 12. Skinner, B. F. (1984). The shame of American education. American Psychologist, 39, 947-954. 13. Skinner, C. H. (1998). Preventing academic skills deficits. In T. S. Watson & F. M. Gresham (Eds.) handbook of Child Behavior Therapy (pp. 61-82). Plenum: New York