[blindkid] IQ testing

Wed Mar 21 21:05:34 UTC 2012

This is a very interesting report.  Thanks for sharing it, Gina.

I appreciate the delineation of factors that can complicate the 
testing of blind individuals.  What keeps bothering me, tho, is this 
complete acceptance of slow--really slow--Braille reading rates.  It 
is hard for me to believe that this is true across the board, as my 
own daughter was always an average speed (compared to sighted 
classmates) reader throughout her school years.

I am about to delve into the sources for these sad statistics to see 
if they are "the usual"--based on a very few children, without 
adjustment for relevant differences and factors, and very 
OLD.  Braille is read letter by letter?   Really?  I have seen with 
my own eyes that that simply is not true!

Well, wish me luck.  I'll try to report back.

Carol

Carol Castellano
President, Parents of Blind Children-NJ
Director of Programs
National Organization of Parents of Blind Children
973-377-0976
carol_castellano at verizon.net
www.blindchildren.org
www.nopbc.org

At 01:55 PM 3/21/2012, you wrote:
>Sorry for the delayed response...
>
>In response to the original question, yes, a visual impairment *is* 
>a valid reason not to give a child a "complete"
>Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-fourth edition (WISC-IV). 
>When a test such as the WISC-IV is standardized, it is given to many 
>children (in this case, over 2000). The performance of all children 
>within specific age groups is then ranked from very low to very 
>high. Once the test is published, the performance of a child who 
>takes the test is compared to that of others in the standardization 
>sample who are within his/her age group. That child is then ranked 
>based on how his/her performance compares to the sample. To my 
>knowledge, the WISC-IV standardization sample did not include any 
>students with uncorrectable visual impairments.
>
>Many of the nonverbal (visual) subtests of the WISC-IV are not only 
>visual tests, they are timed tests. If a blind or visually impaired 
>student takes one of those subtests, his/her performance, including 
>the time it takes him/her to complete the task, is compared to that 
>of sighted kids. So if a child with low vision takes, say, 35 
>seconds to arrange a specific array of colored blocks based on a 
>pictorial representation of the blocks, while the average fully 
>sighted child took 8 seconds to complete the array, the child with 
>low vision would receive a very low score. Obviously, such a 
>comparison would be completely invalid. On top of that, scores from 
>those visual tests are combined into composite scores which are used 
>to describe the child's overall "ability" or IQ. Again, it would not 
>be valid to give a child an IQ score based on a timed comparison 
>with a sighted child. Additionally, there are legal and ethical 
>guidelines for choosing tests that are validated for the specific
>  purpose for which they are being used.
>
>While it would be possible to adapt the tests, for example, ask the 
>child to arrange blocks that have been modified to have different 
>textures rather than different colors, the available standardized 
>scores would still only be based on the sighted performance rather 
>than the adapted performance, so the scores would lack validity 
>(especially for timed tests). Also, ethical guidelines prohibit 
>using standardized scoring procedures when a test has been modified 
>and given in a drastically different (non-standardized) way.
>
>The Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB, a British 
>organization) just released a comprehensive report in February 2012 
>about the issues surrounding psychometric assessment of B/VI 
>individuals. Although it is British, they discuss a number of US 
>tests as well as the many factors to be considered when assessing 
>someone with vision loss. It also addresses issues relating to 
>reading speed, decoding, and comprehension for B/VI students. Given 
>the recent threads on this list about reading speed, this article 
>may interest some of you.  At the end there is a long list of 
>references for those interested in learning more about the research 
>on this subject. It is a very fascinating read! Here is a link to the article:
>
>http://www.rnib.org.uk/aboutus/research/reports/2012/psychometric_testing_report.doc
>
>In response to the person who commented, "I have always been 
>curious, has there been any attempt to make these tests accessible 
>to blind and visually impaired children?" the answer is that there 
>has. However, these attempts have been few and far between. One of 
>the most common tests is the Blind Learning Aptitude Test (BLAT). 
>Unfortunately, this test has not been re-standardized since it came 
>out in the 1970's, so it is no longer considered a valid test. The 
>reason there are not more tests specifically developed for assessing 
>the blind is, in my opinion, simple: Money. It costs test publishers 
>many tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars to develop, 
>standardize, print, and market these types of tests, and they want 
>to make their money back plus a hefty profit. The numbers of people 
>who would purchase these kinds of tests are too low for test 
>publishers to feel motivated to develop them. Most school districts 
>have at the very least one WISC-IV test kit (at a cost of $1000+ for
>  each kit, not to mention the cost of replenishing the test 
> protocols as they are used). Large school districts such as Los 
> Angeles Unified probably have well over 100 WISC-IV kits. Multiply 
> that by the nearly 100,000 schools around the country and it's a 
> pretty huge number. While a district as big as LAUSD might purchase 
> one or two cognitive tests specifically designed for blind or 
> visually impaired kids (if they were available), most smaller 
> districts would probably be less likely to purchase a kit given the 
> low incidence of visual impairment compared to other 
> disabilities... And test publishers know this. Thus, a lack of 
> tests. While there are researchers working on these tests, I think 
> finding a test publisher willing to publish a test with low 
> projected sales rates is a big part of the problem.
>
>In regards to the Woodcock-Johnson-III available from APH, this is 
>the academic version of the WJ-III. The cognitive (IQ) version of 
>the WJ-III has not been developed into an accessible format.
>
>Sorry for the long message, but I hope the information is helpful.
>
>Best,
>Gina O.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org 
>[mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Dr. Denise M Robinson
>Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 8:52 AM
>To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
>Subject: Re: [blindkid] IQ testing
>
>The WWJIII is now in a braille format to access blind children and 
>is adapted appropriately--You can get it from APH Denise
>
>On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Patricia <bcsarah.fan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > As a blind aspiring counsellor who has my Bachelors in psychology, I
> > am familiar with these IQ tests and have always been curious, has
> > there been any attempt to make these tests accessible to blind and
> > visually impaired children? Or is the answer just "they're not, and
> > that's the way it is." I don't expect a definitive answer on this as
> > I'm sure no one here would know, but it's always been one of those
> > things that I've been curious about.
> >
> > Patricia
> >
> > On 3/19/12, Tom and Deb OConnor <toc6642 at charter.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Is a vision impairment a valid reason not to give a child a "complete"
> > > Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-fourth edition?  The final
> > > conclusion was that it would be inappropriate?  Given 5 subtests only.
> > >
> > > Thanks for any information on this.
> > >
> > > Tom & Debbie O'Connor
> > > toc6642 at charter.net
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > blindkid mailing list
> > > blindkid at nfbnet.org
> > > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
> > > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
> > > for
> > > blindkid:
> > >
> > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/bcsarah.fan%40gm
> > ail.com
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > blindkid mailing list
> > blindkid at nfbnet.org
> > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> > blindkid:
> > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/deniserob%40gmai
> > l.com
> >
>
>
>
>--
>  Denise
>
>Denise M. Robinson, TVI, Ph.D.
>CEO, TechVision, LLC
>Specialist in Technology/Training/Teaching for blind/low vision
>509-674-1853
>
>Website with hundreds of informational articles & lessons all done with
>keystrokes: www.yourtechvision.com
>
>"The person who says it cannot be done, shouldn't interrupt the one 
>who is doing it." --Chinese Proverb
>
>Computers are incredibly fast, accurate, and stupid: humans are 
>incredibly slow, inaccurate and brilliant; together they are 
>powerful beyond imagination.
>--Albert Einstein
>
>It's kind of fun to do the impossible.
>--Walt Disney
>_______________________________________________
>blindkid mailing list
>blindkid at nfbnet.org
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>for blindkid:
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/gouellette%40csb-cde.ca.gov
>
>_______________________________________________
>blindkid mailing list
>blindkid at nfbnet.org
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>for blindkid:
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/blindchildren%40verizon.net