<p>Well, I hope they start doing studies that answer more precise and pressing questions- there are so many of those that are not answered.</p>
<p>In the “olden” days, many school systems provided services if the student was 2 years behind grade level or there was a significant discrepancy between potential and performance. Hence, if your IQ score wasn’t high enough, the student probably would not meet criteria to demonstrate performance well below “ability” (ie potential) as measured by IQ or other indices. And, by the time the poor kid was identified as being at least 2 years below grade level, they had a lot of catching up to do. Research has shown that the earlier one identifies and remediates reading disorders, the more successful the remediation has been. </p>
<p>So in all likelihood this study was funded, not because it is painfully obvious, but because it opens doors to qualifying students for services by providing evidence in support of eliminating the IQ criteria for definiton of a learning disability within the public school system.</p>
<p>^ Likes.(10)</p>
<p>OK, but I really hope that good things come from the study rather than a ton of related studies that consume resources that could be better spent helping these folks and also figuring out how to better work with them to overcome their struggles. Have seen WAY too many studies that are copycat studies that don’t seem to advance much of anything, other than being another feather in the researcher’s caps, consuming MEGA resources.</p>
<p>Schools will likely continue to stall trying to provide these services to kids–at least I am pretty sure our public school system will. :(</p>
<p>Do public school systems give IQ tests?
I thought an IQ test had to be individually administered- to be accurate- at least the ones I know of are. <-----not an expert.
Our district has never given IQ tests to determine placement in SPED or gifted programs to my knowledge.</p>
<p>This is the main test they currently administer- ( the former superintendent was on the board at the time of adoption)
[MAP®</a> | Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA)](<a href=“http://www.nwea.org/products-services/computer-based-adaptive-assessments/map]MAP®”>http://www.nwea.org/products-services/computer-based-adaptive-assessments/map)</p>
<p>They also use the CogAT</p>
<p>In my school district IQ tests (usually DAS for black kids, WISC for everyone else) are administered individually, but as far as I know, primarily for elgibility for services for a specific LD, not for gifted programs.</p>
<p>Each state, and sometimes each county has had its own specific criteria to qualify for services. There are school psychologists, whose education and training is slightly different than clinical psychologists. In some states people with masters degrees can be called school psychologists within the school system (ie not requiring a Ph.D. or Ed.D.) But regardless, yes, there are individuals within the public school systems trained to administer IQ and psychoeducational evaluations. In this day and age, very few insurance companies will cover what they consider an educational evaluation for assessment of “developmental or learning” problems, and they very often will not cover an evaluation for ADHD. So more and more of these types of evaluations are being completed in the school systems to see if the students qualify for services.</p>
<p>Why are they using the DAS only for the AA students, Shrinkrap?</p>
<p>Here, the media claimed that too many students who could afford private psychs were getting identified as “gifted”, so they now use different criteria and no longer accept private evals.</p>
<p>When I taught, we administered a wide battery of tests when kids were referred to us for an evaluation. We used a variety of different tests, including intelligence, achievement, hearing, visual and psychological testing. We did not rely on the results of tests that were already on file. One of the requirements for my M.Ed. was giving various tests over and over again so we were very familiar with the procedure. We all tested our friends, families, neighbors, anyone we could get to sit still for a few minutes.</p>
<p>^ Yes, lots of need to do practice administrations, but they aren’t valid for a variety of reasons. When my mother was training to be a schools psychologist she practiced on us (I was in HS then). I was purposely messing with her and on some of the vocabulary words I purposely gave the definition of a word that sounded similar but meant something totally different (one of the words I messed around with is still on the test so I can’t share it) but I told her an edifice was a complex where you loved your mother 
. The other one was equally flippant. It was kinda like playing Emily Litella from SNL, before her character was invented.</p>
<p>*In my school district IQ tests (usually DAS for black kids, WISC for everyone else) *
is there a reason why the different tests? That seems really odd.</p>
<p>Im very aware that ins doesn’t cover what they consider to be " educational" unfortunately.
Our kids had IQ testing covered simply because they qualified from birth to be in a special study ( they were both in the NICU- one for 8 weeks, one for a couple days)
But any additional testing or therapy connected with their learning differences wasn’t covered because it wasn’t medical. ( outside of what they received at the university)</p>
<p>I don’t know what criteria our district uses for SPED- the district OT/PT who tested D & noted she didn’t track through midline and who taught me how to do brushing for sensory integration admitted that she could benefit from therapy, but she didn’t meet the districts standard to receive services.
( she did qualify for " pullout" for “specific learning disability”- but I was never told exactly what that learning disability was.)</p>
<p>The district uses MAP scores to qualify for gifted programs, but since principals aren’t all on board with having a gifted program in their school, even if they had enough seats for all students that qualify- placement really depends on what school you get into.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I had friends who played with us on the testing too, but the results didn’t matter. It was just a matter of getting familiar with the administration so that our unfamiliarity with the test didn’t factor into the result. When I tested kids of friends or neighbors, I only did it if they agreed I would not give them the result.</p>
<p>
BINGO. That is the key. </p>
<p>When I was learning the Rorschach, I had to test an undergrad who volunteered (as part of their requirement to participate in training/research). It was a very disturbing protocol and I had to get supervision from my advisor as to what to do. (She wasn’t messing around. )</p>
<p>“Why are they using the DAS only for the AA students, Shrinkrap?”</p>
<p>“is there a reason why the different tests? That seems really odd.”</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.caspsurveys.org/new/pdfs/lp2.pdf[/url]”>http://www.caspsurveys.org/new/pdfs/lp2.pdf</a></p>
<p>I am much more familiar with the WISC, and that might be my problem, but nobody EVER seems to qualify with the DAS, and I wonder if they can tweak it more easily. </p>
<p>In California we are also no longer allowed to say mentally ■■■■■■■■.
<a href=“http://blog.govdelivery.com/usodep/2010/10/president-obama-signs-rosas-law.html[/url]”>http://blog.govdelivery.com/usodep/2010/10/president-obama-signs-rosas-law.html</a></p>
<p>Maybe this doesn’t just apply here.</p>
<p>Shrinkrap-
That is most perplexing. The first link is to an old presentation (2008 as follow-up to one given in 2006) and references very old versions of many tests. For example, the WISC is now the WISC-4 and has been extensively renormed with a large standardization sample. The WPPSI 4 is coming out soon as well, but the WPPSI III has been around for quite a while. Ditto for the Peabody, its now up to the PPVT-4. Here is the website for the company that produces those tests [Welcome</a> to Pearson Assessments & Information / Clinical Assessments](<a href=“http://www.pearsonassessments.com/pai/ca/cahome.htm]Welcome”>Professional Assessments) They surely can provide information about their normative populations and show that these tests are appropriate for many populations if it isn’t readily accessible on the site.</p>
<p>I dont pretend to keep up with psych testing, although I end up reviewing some several times a week. I was trying to post a link explaining my understanding of why they dont use the WISC for black kids. I am not taking on the California school system regarding that law, but I will “take on” individual test results. I actually post a LOT of my specific psych testing questions on the psychiatry forum on medscape, because I really don’t know what I am looking at sometimes, but suspect things aren’t always as they seem. I think you are saying you think this ruling is outdated?</p>
<p>Re: Specific Learning Disability</p>
<p>This was Happykid’s diagnosis back in the day. I always understood it to mean that there very specifically was a learning disability, but that it fell into some category that didn’t meet the criteria necessary to qualify for a name such as “dyslexia” or “ADHD” or “Executive Function Disorder”. Kind of a disability-lite or a no-name-yet situation.</p>
<p>happymom-
My guess that your school used the term “SLD”
to comply with federal regulations (heres an old link) [Specific</a> Learning Disability - Special Education](<a href=“http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/links/learndisability.html]Specific”>Specific Learning Disability - Special Education) That link happens to be from MA, but many states used the SLD term per the federal guidelines</p>
<p>Yup, that sure looks like a match. Thanks for the link!</p>
<p>The scary thing is that the term “minimal brain dysfunction”, as listed in that regulation, went out with the dinosaurs.</p>