WISC-V & EF

Questions about Intelligence

Advanced Interpretation of the WISC-V and Executive Functions

 What is Intelligence?  Why do you assess intelligence?  What theoretical model guides your interpretation of intelligence test results?  What type of mindset do you apply to intelligence testing?

George McCloskey, Ph.D. Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine [email protected] [email protected]

2 1

Questions about Intelligence

Contemporary Intellectual Assessment Edited by Dawn P. Flanagan And Patti L. Harrison

 Do you believe it is possible to raise a child’s FSIQ from 70 to 100 through intervention?  Can it be done in 6 months? A year? Two years?

4

3

Ability Deficits • The conventional wisdom regarding ability deficits represents a fixed mindset. • What is needed is a new perspective that embraces a growth mindset. • A growth mindset suggests that abilities are not innate; they can be changed. 5

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

6

1

WISC-V & EF

From Ability to Skill

From Ability to Skill

The most critical shifts in educational thinking involve:

2) implementing and refining the techniques needed to change abilities into skills so that they are taught instead of merely measured.

1) engendering a strong belief in the growth mindset that asserts that ability IS malleable. 7

8

From Ability to Skill Marzano, Pickering & Pollock provided a blueprint for turning abilities into skills in their book “Classroom Instruction That Works: Research-based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement.” (2001)

Marzano, Pickering & Pollock (2001)

9

10

From Ability to Skill

Strategies discussed include:

– Teaching Similarities and Differences – Teaching Hypothesis Testing – Teaching Vocabulary

2nd Edition Dean, Hubbell, Pitler, & Stone (2012) 11

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

12

2

WISC-V & EF

From Ability to Skill

Martin’s WISC Score Changes

If these research-based strategies have been shown to work, why would it not be commonplace to expect to be able to increase “verbal ability” with good teaching practices?

11/2010 70 FSIQ 83 GAI 73 VCI 94 PRI/FRI -VSI 62 WMI/AWMI 68 PSI

Martin’s Achievement Score Changes

71

94

98

Wd Decoding

81

97

98

Rdg Fluency

66

95

100

Rdg Comp

--

87

82

Rdg Vocab

--

93

112

 FULL SCALE  PRIMARY INDEX SCALES  ANCILLARY INDEX SCALES  COMPLIMENTARY INDEX SCALES

WISC-V 4 Levels of Interpretation • It is important to note that the 4 level interpretation model is not a theoretically-based model and does not necessarily reflect a specific meaningful hierarchy for guiding interpretation.

WISC-V What is General Ability and why do we assess it ?

17

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

9/2015 103 108 106 112 111 94 98

WISC-V: 4 Levels of Interpretation

11/2010 4/2013 9/2015 Wd Reading

4/2013 99 105 95 117 -97 85

18

3

WISC-V & EF

WISC-V

FSIQ Interpretation • The FSIQ is not really a score based on the Full Scale (all 21 subtests). • The FSIQ is based on a sampling of behavior from each of five subdomains: verbal comprehension (2), fluid reasoning (2), visualpatial (1), working memory (1) and processing speed (1).

What’s so “Full” about the FSIQ?

19

20

WISC-V

FSIQ Interpretation • The FSIQ is intended to be a measure of general intelligence. • In many instances, general intelligence is considered to be synonymous with the construct of “g” • Controversy can occur regarding what type of tasks should be included in a g measure: a full range of sampling of possible intellectual domains or a concentrated sampling of high g loaded domains.

What is g?

21

g and Psychometrics

Jensen on “g” and Intelligence

• Spearman identified g based on his work with the correlation of results of different tests of mental abilities. • In all analyses, a single factor emerged that reflected the positive relationship among all tests of mental abilities. • While the existence of g is not controversial, there is no consensus on what causes the pattern of test correlations that produces g.

• “…task complexity and the amount of conscious mental manipulation required seem to be the most basic determinants of the g loading of a task. If we distill this summary generalization still further, the amount of conscious mental manipulation set off by the input would seem to be the crucial element.” • A.R. Jensen. (1998). The g Factor, p. 232. 23

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

22

24

4

WISC-V & EF

Spearman on general intelligence

What do Intelligence Tests Measure?

“As for the prevalent procedure of throwing a miscellaneous collection of tests indiscriminately into a single pool this-whether or not justifiable by the theory which gave birth to it-certainly cannot be justified simply by claiming that the results give a “general level,” and “average,” or even a “sample.” No genuine averaging, or sampling, of anybody’s abilities is made, can be made, or even has really been attempted. When Binet borrowed the idea of such promiscuous pooling, he carried it into execution with a brilliancy that perhaps no other living man could have matched. But on the theoretical side, he tried to get away too cheaply. And this is the main cause of all the present trouble.” (1927, p.70-71)

• It is important to note that neither of the concepts of general intelligence nor “g” were intended to be used to guide clinical practice. In fact, early intelligence researchers eschewed the idea of general intelligence tests.

25

Spearman on Global IQ

Wechsler on Intelligence and FSIQ

“… let us compare a person’s mental measurement (his intelligence quotient” or “IQ”) as based on averaging or sampling with his record in any other sphere of activity, say that of sports. Suppose some lad to be the champion of his school in the 100 yards race, the ¼ mile, the ½ mile, and also in the high and broad jumps. Could all this be taken as a representative sample of his sporting ability in general? So far as here indicated, he might perform very badly indeed in countless other branches of sport, such as cricket, lawn tennis, shooting, baseball, rowing, putting the weight, riding, mountaineering or flying. And even if he were to be measured in every one of these also, how could the result be pooled into any sort of average? Shall all sports mainly dependent on the “eye” as cricket, tennis, billiards, etc. be reckoned as one ability? Or as a myriad?... In a rough way, no doubt, a person can be said to have had much success at such sports as he has attempted. But there appears no serious prospect of calculating his “S.Q.” to several places of decimals, and then piling upon this result a mass of higher mathematics.” (1927, p. 69). 27

“If the different tests were taken to represent generically different entities, one could no more add the values assigned to them in order to obtain an [IQ] than one could add 2 dogs, 3 cats and 4 elephants, and expect the unqualified answer of 9. That, of course, does not mean that their addition is impossible. If instead of being concerned with the characteristics of the dog, the cat and the elephant, which differentiate them from one another, we restrict our interest to those which they all have in common, we can say that 2 dogs, 3 cats and 4 elephants make 9 animals. The reason we can get an answer of 9 here is because dogs, cats and elephants are in fact all animals. The addition would no longer be possible if for cats we were to substitute turnips.” Wechsler, D. (1958). The Measurement and Appraisal of Adult Intelligence, p. 7

WISC-V FSIQ vs WJ-IV GIA

Interpretive Level 1: Full Scale

Full Scale IQ

26

Similarities Vocabulary Naming Speed Literacy Information Naming Speed Comprehension Quantity Matrix Reasoning Figure Weights Immediate Picture Concepts Symbol Translation Arithmetic Delayed Block Design Symbol Translation Visual Puzzles Recognition Digit Span Symbol Translation Picture Span Letter-Number Sequences Coding Symbol Search Cancellation

WISC-V FSIQ

WJ-IV GIA

Similarities Vocabulary Matrix Reasoning Figure Weights Block Design Digit Span Coding

Oral Vocabulary Number Series Verbal Attention Letter-Pattern Matching Phonological Processing Story Recall Visualization 30

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

5

WISC-V & EF

Jensen on Intelligence

FSIQ and Clinical Practice

My study of these two symposia and of many other equally serious attempts to define “intelligence” in purely verbal terms has convinced me that psychologists are incapable of reaching a consensus on its definition. It has proved to be a hopeless quest. Therefore, the term “intelligence” should be discarded altogether in scientific psychology, just as it discarded “animal magnetism” and as the science of chemistry discarded “phlogiston.” “Intelligence” will continue, of course, in popular parlance and in literary usage, where it may serve a purpose only because it can mean anything the user intends, and where a precise and operational definition is not important. Largely because of its popular and literary usage, the word “intelligence” has come to mean too many different things to many people (including psychologists). It has also become so fraught with value judgments, emotions, and prejudices as to render it useless in scientific discussion.” A.R. Jensen. (1998). The g Factor, p. 48.

• For clinician’s, the primary question is not whether general intelligence is a valid construct. • The primary question is whether general intelligence has clinical utility. • The clinical utility of general intelligence and “g” is thought to be its predictive power. • The greater the complexity of the task, the greater the predictive power. 31

32

What Do Intelligence Tests Measure?

The publishers of the WISC-V emphasize in the Technical and Interpretation Manual the use of intelligence test scores to predict achievement. Other purposes are mentioned only briefly. = EF? 34

Executive Functions and Intelligence

Executive Functions and Intelligence

Research suggests that measures of self-control in preschool are better predictors of later school achievement than Full Scale IQ scores.

If measures of self-control in preschool are better predictors of later school achievement than Full Scale IQ scores, then why are we still endorsing the use of intelligence tests if their primary purpose is to predict = EF? achievement?

= EF?

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

6

WISC-V & EF

g and Brain Function

What do Intelligence Tests Measure?

• Spearman: g is equivalent to mental energy. • Jensen: g represents individual differences in the speed and/or efficiency of the neural processes associated with mental abilities. • Wechsler: g is a general property of overall brain function.

“Intelligence tests measure more than mere learning ability or reasoning ability or even general intellectual ability; in addition, they inevitably measure a number of other capacities which cannot be defined as either purely cognitive or intellective,— abilities heavily loaded with factors like " X " and "Z" mentioned above. Hitherto, authors of intelligence scales when recognizing this situation, looked upon these factors as disturbing elements and tried as far as possible to eliminate them. Unfortunately, experience has shown that the more successful one is in excluding these factors, the less effective are the resulting tests as measures of general intelligence.” Wechsler, D. (1958). The Measurement and Appraisal of Adult Intelligence, p. 11 37

Executive Functions and Intelligence “Wechsler believed that performance on measures of cognitive ability reflected only a portion of what intelligence comprises. He defined intelligence as the “capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment (1944, p.3). Wechsler was keenly aware that the results of factor-analytic studies accounted for only a portion of intelligence, and he believed that another group of attributes contributed to intelligent behavior. These attributes included planning and goal awareness, enthusiasm, field dependence and independence, impulsiveness, anxiety, and persistence.” WISC-V T&I Manual, page 3.

= EF?

Executive Functions and Intelligence 



The concept of executive functions is not synonymous with the traditional concepts of intelligence or “IQ” Executive functions are not directly assessed with standard intelligence tests = EF?

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

Executive Functions and Intelligence Spearman (1927) offered this observation about factors that emerged in his studies of mental abilities: • “Still another great functional unity has revealed its existence; this, although not in itself of cognitive nature, yet has a dominating influence upon all exercise or even estimation of cognitive ability. On trying to express it by any current name, perhaps the least unsatisfactory – though still seriously misleading – would be “self-control.” It has shown itself to be chiefly responsible for the fact of one person’s ability seeming to be more “profound” or more inclined to “common sense” than that of persons otherwise equally capable.” P. 413.

= EF?

Measuring Executive Functions with a Reasoning Task

Directions for the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST): I can’t tell you much about how to do this task. Which of these do you think this one goes with? I’ll tell you if your answer is right or wrong. = EF?

7

WISC-V & EF

Transitioning from Intelligence Testing to Cognitive Assessment

Neuropsychological Process Approach to Cognitive Assessment

• Replacing the concept of Intelligence with Cognition • Recognizing that Cognition is an amalgam of multiple mental constructs including:

The ultimate purpose of psychoeducational assessment is to enable a clinician to characterize an individual’s cognitive and adaptive capacities and academic skill proficiencies in the most accurate and effective manner possible.

– Attention, Initial Registration/Encoding, Working Memory – Long-Term Storage and Retrieval, Executive Functions, – Language, Visuospatial, Reasoning, Motor Production

• Understanding the role of cognition in social/emotional functioning and academic skill development 43

44

The CHC Model of Intelligence is based on a Narrow Definition of Intelligence; Intelligence is represented by the scores from multiple broad ability factors. Comprehension/ Knowledge Fluid Reasoning

Phonemic Processing

CHC MODEL

Processing Speed

Visual/ Spatial Short Term Memory

Long Term Retrieval Working Memory

Interpretive Level 2: Primary Indexes Verbal Comprehension Index Fluid Reasoning Index Visual Spatial Index Working Memory Index Processing Speed Index

Similarities Naming Speed Vocabulary Literacy Information Naming Speed Comprehension Quantity Matrix Reasoning Figure Weights Immediate Picture Concepts Symbol Translation Block Design Delayed Symbol Translation Visual Puzzles Recognition Arithmetic Symbol Translation Digit Span Picture Span Letter-Number Sequences Coding Symbol Search Cancellation

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

46

Interpretive Level 3: Ancillary Indexes Similarities Vocabulary Information Comprehension Matrix Reasoning Quantitative Figure Weights Picture Concepts Reasoning Arithmetic Index Block Design Visual Puzzles Digit Span Picture Span Letter-Number Sequences Coding Symbol Search Cancellation

Naming Speed Literacy Naming Speed Quantity

Immediate Symbol Translation Delayed Symbol Translation Recognition Symbol Translation

8

WISC-V & EF

Interpretive Level 3: Ancillary Indexes

Auditory Working Memory Index

Interpretive Level 4: Complimentary Indexes

Similarities Vocabulary Information Comprehension Matrix Reasoning Figure Weights Picture Concepts Arithmetic Block Design Visual Puzzles Digit Span Picture Span Letter-Number Sequences Coding Symbol Search Cancellation

Naming Speed Literacy Naming Speed Quantity

Immediate Symbol Translation Delayed Symbol Translation Recognition Symbol Translation

Neuropsychological Models Emphasize Multiple Cognitive Components within Broad Functional Categories of Cognition Reasoning (V, NV, Q) Visual (Ortho, NV)

Language (R, E, F, S, PA)

NEURO MODEL

Memory (I, WM, LTR)

Visual/ Spatial

Similarities Naming Speed Vocabulary Literacy Naming Speed Information Index Comprehension Naming Speed Matrix Reasoning Quantity Figure Weights Storage and Retrieval Index Picture Concepts Arithmetic Immediate Block Design Symbol Translation Visual Puzzles Symbol Translation Digit Span Index Delayed Picture Span Symbol Translation Letter-Number Sequences Coding Recognition Symbol Search Symbol Translation Cancellation

WHY NOT? INDEXES Naming Speed Similarities Literacy Vocabulary Naming Speed Information Quantity Comprehension Matrix Reasoning Immediate Figure Weights Symbol Translation Picture Concepts Delayed Arithmetic Symbol Translation Block Design Recognition Visual Puzzles Symbol Translation Digit Span Picture Span Letter-Number Sequences Coding Symbol Search Cancellation

WHY NOT a Reasoning With Verbal Content Index (RVI)?

Motor Functioning

Processing Speed Executive Functions

WHY NOT? INDEXES

WISC-V Naming Speed Literacy Naming Speed Quantity

WHY NOT a Retrieval from Long-Term Storage Index (RLTI)?

Similarities Vocabulary Information Comprehension Matrix Reasoning Immediate Figure Weights Symbol Translation Picture Concepts Delayed Arithmetic Symbol Translation Block Design Recognition Visual Puzzles Symbol Translation Digit Span Picture Span Letter-Number Sequences Coding Symbol Search Cancellation

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

5 Complementary Subtests

WHY??? Naming Speed Literacy Naming Speed Quantity

Immediate Symbol Translation Delayed Symbol Translation Recognition Symbol Translation

9

WISC-V & EF

Questions about Intelligence

WISC-V 5 Complementary Subtests

WHY??? The following statement(s) appear in the description of each Complementary subtest: This subtest was not designed as a measure of intelligence but as a measure of cognitive processes… …associated with academic learning …related to learning difficulties …that may be interfering with academic learning …related to learning

Interpretive Levels Framework Global Composite (Full Scale IQ/GAI Level)

The addition of the 5 complementary subtests raises important questions about constructs associated with thinking:  What’s the difference between an ability, a process, and a skill?  Does intelligence testing involve assessing abilities, processes or skills?

56

Interpretive Levels Framework General Ability Model

Global Composite Level Full Scale IQ/GAI Specific Composite

Specific Composite Indexes / Clinical Clusters Level

Indexes Level Clinical Clusters Level Subtest Level

Subtest Level Item Level Cognitive Constructs Level

Interpretive Levels Framework

Subtest Level Item Level Cognitive Capacities Level

Item Level Task Specific Cognitive Capacities Level

Cognitive Neuropsychological Model

Interpretive Levels The Process Approach requires a clear understanding of what a task measures so that performance can be effectively task analyzed to characterize a person’s cognitive capacities as accurately as possible. 60

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

10

WISC-V & EF

Michael Posner

Stanislas Dehaene 61

62

– Naïve: First exposure to the task; responses required immediately. – Practiced: Time given to rehearse responses to the task; responses delivered after rehearsal period. 64

System 1 – Fast, effortless, automatic

Things that are Taught to Automaticity in Early Elementary School 

Basic math facts and multiplication tables

System 2 – Slow, effortful, non-automatic

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

11

WISC-V & EF

Things that are Taught to Automaticity in Early Elementary School   

Basic math facts and multiplication tables The alphabet and sight word recognition Graphomotor functioning for quick handwriting of letters and words

– Novel: Second exposure to the task, but responses required immediately to a set of all new items.

– Naïve: First exposure to the task; responses required immediately; high demand for executive functions (EFs) – Practiced: Time given to rehearse responses to the task; minimal demand for EFs – Novel: Second exposure to the task, but responses required immediately to a set of all new items; moderate demand for Efs – Source: Posner, M.I. & Raichle, M.E. (1994). Images of Mind.

70

Subtest/Item Level Process Approach Example

Kaplan, E. (1988). A process approach to neuropsychological assessment. In T. Boll & B.K. Bryant (Eds.) Clinical neuropsychology and brain functions: Research, measurement, and practice (pp. 125-167). American Psychological Association.

What’s the difference between a WISC-IV Similarities Scaled Score of 12 and a WISC-IV Similarities Scaled Score of 12? 71

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

72

12

WISC-V & EF

Subtest/Item Level Process Approach Example

Retrieval of verbal information from long-term storage vs Reasoning with verbal information

Subtest/Item Level Process Approach

Specific Behavior Observation Examples will be provided in the Neuropsychological Approach to WISC-V Interpretation Chapter (McCloskey, et. al.) in Essentials of WISC-V Assessment (spring 2016).

73

74

Subtest/Item Level Process Approach Example

What Does Block Design Measure? Consider the following quote from John Carroll (Human Cognitive Abilities, 1993, page 309) : 75

Subtest/Item Level Process Approach Example What Does WISC/WAIS Block Design Measure? “…difficulty in factorial classification arises from the fact that most spatial test tasks, even the “simplest,” are actually quite complex, requiring apprehension and encoding of spatial forms, consideration and possibly mental manipulations of these forms, decisions about comparisons of other aspects of the stimuli, and making a response – often under the pressure of being required to respond quickly.” 77

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

76

What Does Block Design Measure? From Carroll’s description, Block Design can be measuring at least 5 distinct cognitive processes:  Visual perception and discrimination  Reasoning with visual stimuli  Visualization (optional)  Motor dexterity  Speed of motor response 78

13

WISC-V & EF

What Does Block Design Measure?

Measuring Problem-Solving or Executive Functions with a Block Design Task

Who will have the best Block Design score?

Raw Score

16

20

22

79

56 14

56 14

43 10

80

The Process Approach to Analysis of Block Design

What Does Block Design Measure?

Consider the following quote from Carroll (1993, p. 309): …considerable confusion exists about the identification of factors in the domain of visual perception… Some sources of confusion are very real, and difficult to deal with. This is particularly true of confusion arising from the fact that test takers apparently can

From Carroll’s description of Block Design, which of the 5 distinct cognitive processes do you think Subject 3 lacked? • Visual perception and discrimination • Reasoning with visual stimuli • Visualization (optional) • Motor dexterity • Speed of motor response

arrive at answers and solutions – either correct or incorrect ones – by a variety of different strategies. French (1965)

81

What Does Block Design Measure?

demonstrated that different “cognitive styles” can cause wide variation in factor loadings; some of his most dramatic cases had to do with spatial tests, as where a sample of subjects who reported “systematizing” their approach to the Cubes test yielded a large decrease of the loading of this test on a Visualization factor (that is, decreased correlations of Cubes with other spatial tests), as compared to a sample where subjects did not report systematizing. It has been shown (Kyllonen, Lohman, & Woltz, 1984), that subjects can employ different strategies even for different items within the same test. Lohman et al. (1987) have discussed this problem of solution strategies, even rendering the judgment that factor-analytic methodology is hardly up to the task of dealing with it because a basic assumption of factor analysis is that factorial equations are consistent over subjects.

82

What Does Block Design Measure?

Carroll’s description leaves out a critical 6th cognitive process, or group of processes, essential for effective performance of Block Design – the ability to initiate, focus, sustain, coordinate/balance, and monitor the use of the other cognitive processes – i.e., Executive Function processes.

An appropriate statement regarding the performance of the third subject would be: “John’s superior capacity for problemsolving with nonverbal visual material was applied inconsistently resulting in a Block Design Subtest Score in the average range.” 83

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

Scaled Score

84

14

WISC-V & EF

Identifying Task Component Constructs

 An Information Processing Model provides a theoretical framework for understanding cognition and its role in learning.  An information processing model represents a dynamic model of cognition rather than a taxonomy of cognitive abilities.

Long-Term Memory

Active Working Memory

Processing detail

Sensory Memory

Attention

kinesthetic

Initial Registration

Sensory Input

87

WISC-V VCI

Sensory Input

86

• Subtests/tasks involve more than one Cognitive Process. • The format of the task can greatly affect performance levels. • Processing preferences and strategy selection can greatly affect performance levels. • The cognitive processes involved in performing a task often vary based on the age, cognitive capacity, and strategy selection of the examinee. • To truly understand a person’s performance, you must know not just the score obtained, but how the person performed the task to obtain the score. 88

What do VCI Subtests assess?

VCI Subtests:

Assess multiple component processes: – – – – –

Auditory Discrimination (ALL) Language Comprehension (ALL) Reasoning (most likely to be assessed only by S, C) Verbal Knowledge Store (V, I, S*) Free Recall Retrieval from Long-Term (Recent or Remote) Storage (V, I) – “On Demand” Retrieval Efficiency (Word-Finding Ability) (I, V) – Expressive Language Ability (V, S, C, I*)

Similarities (SI) Vocabulary (VC) Information (IN) Comprehension (CO) 89

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

Sensory Memory

Process Approach Summary

Lexicons

pattern

detail Attention

kinesthetic

Initial Registration

Mental Representation Active Working Memory

Processing pattern

Motor Output

Long-Term Memory

Lexicons Mental Representations

85

indicate Executive Functions at work

Motor Output

indicate Executive Functions at work

90

15

WISC-V & EF

VCI and Academic and Job Performance

What Does Similarities Measure?  Similarities can be an effective measure of reasoning with verbal concepts provided the person:

 V, I, and S all reflect verbal abilities that act as constraints on understanding and depth of processing of information in the classroom; participation in discussions and written expression production all can suffer when these are weak.  Performance with math can be constrained by lack of verbal abilities when instructional approaches emphasize verbal presentation and discussion of quantitative concepts.  S and C often reflect reasoning with verbal information capacities that act as constraints on verbal comprehension when listening or when reading.

 has not already learned and stored the conceptual relationships, making them available for retrieval from long-term storage  perceives the task to be a measure of reasoning and engages reasoning processes when responding

 The speed and content of response can be important indicators of whether or not reasoning ability is being used to respond. 91

What Does Vocabulary Measure?  Vocabulary is primarily a measure of retrieval of verbal information from lexicons (long-term knowledge stores), not a measure of reasoning ability.  The critical question that must be asked when assessing vocabulary knowledge: Is the ability to explain the meaning of words equivalent to the abilities of comprehending or using those same words in natural contexts? In other words, does format matter when assessing verbal abilities such as vocabulary knowledge?

92

Does Format Matter in Assessment? The task input format, the internal processing demands (primarily represented by different long-term storage retrieval demands) and the output format all impact on performance and can produce highly variable results for any given person, even those from the “general” population. 93

94

What Does Information Measure?

Process-Oriented Analysis of Verbal Responses

 Earliest items emphasize common knowledge easily learned outside of formal educational sources.  Most items emphasize knowledge related to specific topics typically addressed in school (or in televised educational programs on networks like TLC, Discovery, History Channel, Science Channel, PBS, CNN, etc)  Items can be categorized by content areas (e.g., History, biology, literature, geography).

 Observe speed of lexical access as reflected in speed of responses  Observe organization of verbal storage as reflected in type of response (direct, specific vs nonspecific, rambling, etc.)  Observe quality of verbal expression (grammar/syntax of responses, vocabulary use, prosody, quality of ideas, organization of thought  Observe effects of executive function demands  Observe concrete vs abstract language use  Process test the effects of shaping and/or cueing on responses 95

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

96

16

WISC-V & EF

WISC-V FRI

Fluid Reasoning Index (FRI)

FRI Subtests:

It is clinically important to make the distinction between nonverbal reasoning and reasoning with nonverbal visual material. Nonverbal reasoning implies that language is not being used to perform a task. Use of visual stimuli as input for a task provides no guarantee that the person will process the task without the use of language abilities.

– Matrix Reasoning (MR) – Figure Weights (FW) – Picture Concepts (PCn) – Arithmetic (AR) 97

FRI & Academic Performance

98

Fluid Reasoning and Processing Speed  Speed of information processing is a major factor in Figure Weights.  Item level performance on MR, FW and PCn can be timed to help understand a person’s cognitive processing approach to these tasks.

Although some research has identified a correlation between Fluid Reasoning scores and Reading Comprehension. It is important to note that the abilities most likely to be assessed by the FRI tasks, are not effective measures of the cognitive processes that most constrain the development and/or use of reading and writing skills in the classroom. 99

What Does Matrix Reasoning Measure?

Role of Executive Functions

Visual Perception and Discrimination Visual Analysis and Organization Attention to Visual Details Nonverbal AND/OR Verbal Abstract Reasoning Abilities and Concept Formation  Working Memory also likely to be involved  Speed of visual processing can be observed by process-oriented assessment technique (time performance on each item)    

• MR, PCn and FW all require direction of attention to detail and inhibition of impulsive responding as well as monitoring and checking responses and efficient management of time.

101

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

100

102

17

WISC-V & EF

What Does Figure Weights Measure?

What Does Figure Weights Measure?  Working Memory is highly likely to be involved for more difficult items  Speed of visual processing may play a significant role (30 second time limit per item)  Speed of visual processing can be observed by process-oriented assessment technique (time performance on each item)

 Visual Perception and Discrimination  Visual Analysis and Organization  Attention to Visual Details  Quantitative and/or Nonverbal and/or Verbal Analogical Reasoning Abilities and Concept Formation

103

104

What Does Picture Concepts Measure?

What Does Arithmetic Measure?

• Visual Analog to Similarities • Reasoning either nonverbally or verbally, without demand for verbal explanation of response. • Increased frequency of use of verbal mediation with increased age is highly likely. • Consider age and reasoning processes applied by child when interpreting performance. • Fluid reasoning measure that correlates well with MR. • Creative responses scored as incorrect a possible but not very probable event.

 Arithmetic is a complex task requiring multitasking of several mental capacities including:  Initial registration of auditorily presented stimuli  Attention to details  Quantitative Problem-solving ability  Retrieval of math knowledge from long term storage (facts and/or procedures)  Use of working memory resources to set-up problems and complete calculations in mind  Executive Function coordination of multitasking

105

106

WISC-V VSI

FRI: Academic Performance  MR and FW most closely reflect application of reasoning abilities that act as constraints on understanding and depth of processing of information in classrooms when nonverbal visual conceptualization and/or nonverbal quantification is emphasized. This is most likely to occur in courses involving math, science, engineering, architecture and visual design.  Performance in math can be constrained by lack of nonverbal reasoning abilities when teaching approaches emphasize nonverbal presentation and assessment of quantitative concepts.  MR, FW and PCn may be assessing complex visual processing abilities that can act as constraints on learning when visual materials are used in instruction. 107

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

VSI Subtests: – Block Design (BD) – Visual Puzzles (VP)

108

18

WISC-V & EF

Visual Spatial Index (VSI)

VSI & Academic Performance

The VSI reduces the demand for reasoning with visual information and increases the demand for effective visual perception and discrimination capacities applied with speed. Because they do not use orthographic images (letters or numbers), they do not directly relate to basic reading and writing skills and often do not play a role in early rote math learning.

It is important to note that the abilities most likely to be assessed by the VSI tasks are not effective measures of the cognitive processes that most constrain the development and/or use of reading and writing skills in the classroom and may not necessarily constrain performance with math. 109

110

What Does Block Design Measure?

Visual Tasks and Processing Speed  Speed of information processing is a major factor in performance only for VP at all ages.  Speed can be a factor in performance of BD for older children.  Item level performance on VP can be timed to help understand a person’s cognitive processing approach to this task.

 Visual perception and discrimination  Reasoning with visual stimuli  Visualization (optional)  Motor dexterity  Speed of motor response  Executive functions involved in strategy generation, balancing pattern and detail, monitoring performance and correcting errors

112

111

What Does Visual Puzzles Measure?

Block Design Process Scores

Visual Perception and Discrimination Visual Analysis and Organization Attention to Visual Details Spatial Visualization and Organization Nonverbal and/or Verbal Abstract Reasoning Abilities may be applied but not required  Working Memory also may be involved  Speed of visual processing plays a significant role (30 second time limit per item)     

 BDn (no time bonus),  BDp (correct blocks placed),  BDde (occurrence of broken configuration),  Bdre (occurrence of reversals)

113

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

114

19

WISC-V & EF

WISC-V WMI /AWMI

Role of Executive Functions

WMI Subtests:

• BD requires complex EF direction of performance. • BD, MR, VP, PCn and FW all require direction of attention to detail and inhibition of impulsive responding as well as monitoring and checking responses and efficient management of time.

– Digit Span (DS) – Picture Span (PS) – Letter-Number Sequences (LNS) 115

116

Working Memory Index (WMI)

WISC-V Changes: Digit Span

The WMI combines an immediate visual memory task with an immediate/working memory auditory memory task. The different formats of the two working memory subtests necessitates interpretation at the subtest level.

Subtest Level Changes: •Digit Span Subtest item content revised:

A third item type has been added- Digit Sequencing 117

What Does Picture Span Measure?

What Does Digit Span Measure?

 Picture Span assesses the ability to initially register and hold for approximately 6-10 seconds visually presented images of common objects  Picture span can be processed as a visual memory task or verbally mediated and processed through, and rehearsed in, the articulatory loop, thereby transforming it into an immediate verbal memory task.

 Digit Span is an aggregate measure;  DS Forward assesses initial registration and repetition of stimuli (immediate memory)  DS Backward assesses working memory applied to initially registered information.  DS Sequencing assesses working memory applied to initially registered information along with sequencing capacity

 Separate Scaled Scores are provided for all three DS tasks 119

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

118

120

20

WISC-V & EF

What Does Picture Span Measure?

What Does Letter-Number Sequencing Measure?

 Letter-Number Sequencing

 Picture Span does not use orthographic stimuli (letters and/or numbers) thereby reducing or negating its connection with cognitive processes that most constrain the development and/or use of reading and writing skills in the classroom.  Picture Span may provide useful information related to academic tasks that require the initial registration and holding of nonverbal visual information.

 Assesses initially registering, holding and manipulating in working memory auditorily presented verbal information  Directions provide the child with a strategy for making the random series more contextually meaningful; for some children, this results in improvements over Digit Span performance  Revised scoring prevents a child who only repeats the series verbatim to earn a scaled score of 10 (now earns only a 5) 121

122

AWMI and Academic Performance

Accounting for Variability in Working Memory Subtest Performance: DSB > DSF

Working Memory abilities applied to verbal information act as constraints on many classroom learning activities including listening, written expression, note-taking, test-taking, math problem-solving, and reading comprehension.

Although neuropsychologically speaking it is impossible to actually be more capable with DSB than with DSF, many referred children do in fact correctly repeat more digits backwards than forwards. The clinical question to be posed is why the child did not perform up to their capacity on DSF. 123

124

Accounting for Variability in Working Memory Subtest Performance: DSB > DSF

Accounting for Variability in Working Memory Subtest Performance: Subtest Profiles

Reasonable hypotheses for DSB >DSF performance involve limitations of executive function processes, in particular difficulties with initiation and modulation of effort.

Although memory process tasks can be ordered from least complex to most complex, it is not true that this ordering reflects a hierarchy of constraints on task performance. Many children show varied performance profiles that do not conform to the task complexity hierarchy. 125

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

126

21

WISC-V & EF

Accounting for Variability in Working Memory Subtest Performance: Subtest Profiles

Accounting for Variability in Working Memory Subtest Performance: Subtest Profiles

DSF, DSB, DSS and LNS are more likely to be problematic than AR for a child with sequencing problems. In these cases, material might all be encoded and manipulated intact, but the final sequence of the response is not accurate.

Example: It is just as likely to find: AR > LNS > DS As it is to find: DS > LNS > AR 127

128

Accounting for Variability in Working Memory Subtest Performance: Subtest Profiles

Accounting for Variability in Working Memory Subtest Performance: Subtest Profiles

In the case of AR > LNS > DS and DS > LNS > AR Tasks are ordered in terms of the amount of context provided for the performance of the memory task.

DSF DSB and DS Sequencing can be more difficult than LNS for persons with sequencing problems because there is no contextual basis for the ordering of the numbers. LNS offers two modestly contextual bases to guide performance; the order of the alphabet and the order of numbers. 129

130

Accounting for Variability in Working Memory Subtest Performance: Subtest Profiles

Accounting for Variability in Working Memory Subtest Performance: Subtest Profiles

 The more instruction requires literal, rote skill for registering information exactly as presented– like digit span – the more a person with the AR > LNS >DS profile is likely to struggle.  The more instruction incorporates meaningful context for cueing and guiding manipulation of information in working memory, the better a person with the  AR > LNS >DS profile is likely to perform.

Person’s exhibiting a pronounced AR > LNS > DS pattern are more likely to be strong with classroom and workplace memory tasks when a strong context is provided for the processing of the task.

131

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

132

22

WISC-V & EF

Accounting for Variability in Working Memory Subtest Performance: Subtest Profiles

Accounting for Variability in Working Memory Subtest Performance: Subtest Profiles

It is likely that children exhibiting a pronounced DS > LNS > AR pattern are at greater risk of struggling with meaningful classroom learning than are children who demonstrate a pronounced AR > LNS > DS pattern.

Person’s exhibiting a pronounced DS > LNS > AR pattern are more likely to be strong with classroom and work place memory tasks that are short, rote and list-like in nature.

133

WISC-V PSI

Processing Speed Index (PSI)  Assesses multiple component processes:

PSI Subtests:

Visual Perception and Discrimination Processing Speed and Processing Accuracy Graphomotor Skill (Cd) Executive direction of focusing and sustaining attention and effort and monitoring performance  Executive Coordination of Visual Skills, Motor Skills, Speed, and Accuracy (Cd)    

– Coding (CD) – Symbol Search (SS) – Cancellation (CA)

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

134

135

136

137

138

23

WISC-V & EF

139

140

PSI and Academic Performance

What Does Cancellation Measure? Visual Perception and Discrimination Processing Speed Processing Accuracy Inhibition of impulsive responding Executive Coordination of Visual Skills, Speed, Inhibition and Accuracy  Performance likely to be enhanced by the use of working memory  Visual Search Efficiency can be assessed with process-oriented technique (number of seconds required per line of symbols; number and type of errors)     

 Processing Speed abilities applied to nonverbal visual information might act as constraints on some classroom learning activities such as note-taking, test-taking, math problem-solving, and written expression.  Processing speed tasks are most effective as measures of capacity for sustained attention and effort. 141

PSI and Academic Performance

PSI and Academic Performance It is important to note that visual processing speed with nonverbal visual material is not necessarily reflective of visual processing speed with orthographic codes (letters, words, numbers). Tasks specific to reading, such as Rapid Automatic Naming and paragraph reading speed need to be used to assess visual processing speed in reading and alphabet writing and sentence copying tasks are better indicators of grapho-motor functioning.

A relatively low score on the Coding Subtest frequently cooccurs with low scores on written expression assessments and poor production on written expression classroom and homework assignments.

143

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

142

144

24

WISC-V & EF

Accounting for Variability in PSI Subtest Performance

What Does the PSI Measure? • Coding and Symbol Search measure distinctly different task component processes in addition to a common core of processing speed with visual nonverbal material. • Performance on Coding and Symbol Search frequently vary by more than 3 scaled score points (Cd > SS 15%; SS > Cd 15%) and should be interpreted separately in these instances.

• Coding requires multitasking requiring continuous motor production while processing associations from a code key. • This multi-tasking effort must be coordinated by executive functions involving focusing and sustaining attention and effort, pacing and balancing work effort (speed vs accuracy) and monitoring for accuracy. • Coding has predictable elements that can help to improve performance.

145

Accounting for Variability in PSI Subtest Performance

146

Process Interpretation of PSI Tasks

 Symbol Search assesses processing speed applied to a series of unique visual discrimination tasks with only a minor motor response component.  Every symbol search item is a unique task requiring attention to new visual details.  Executive functions are required to direct focusing and sustaining attention and effort, pacing and balancing work effort (speed vs accuracy) and monitoring for accuracy.

The most effective way to assess the use of executive functions in directing the focusing and sustaining of attention and effort is through the use of 15 or 30 second interval task performance recording. 148

147

Process Interpretation of PSI Tasks Interval Recording:

0 – 30 0-15 16-30

31 – 60 31-45

46-60

61 – 90 61-75

76-90

Interval Recording: 91 – 120 91-105 106-120

Typical performance on both Coding and Symbol Search reflects steady, consistent attention and effort, with only slight improements or declines in the final 30 seconds.

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

Process Interpretation of PSI Tasks

149

Patterns that deviate substantially are often indicative of difficulties with executive direction of attention and effort, regardless of level of scaled score performance. 150

25

WISC-V & EF

Process Interpretation of PSI Tasks Interval Recording:

Memory processes are not required to perform either Coding or Symbol Search, but memory processes can be recruited for the performance of both of these tasks if the persons chooses to engage them.

Examples of clinically relevant patterns of performance:

0 – 30

31 – 60

61 – 90

Process Interpretation of PSI Tasks

91 – 120 151

152

Process Interpretation of PSI Tasks Memory processes can be used to learn the code associations in Coding and to hold visual images during comparisons on Symbol Search. Choosing to use memory processes to help perform these tasks reflects the use of executive functions to alter test taking strategy. Use of memory processes for these tasks does not, however, guarantee improvement in performance.

WISC-V Complementary Subtests: – Naming Speed Literacy (NSL)) – Naming Speed Quantity (NSQ)

153

154

WISC-V

Thoughts

Complementary Subtests:

EFs

– Naming Speed Literacy (NSL)) – Naming Speed Quantity (NSQ)

Emotions

Perceptions

Actions

155

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

26

WISC-V & EF

EF as the Conductor of the Brain’s Orchestra (i.e., EF as “g”)

Key Concept Executive Functions:     

EF

Directive capacities of the mind Multiple in nature, not a single capacity Part of neural circuits that are routed through the frontal lobes Cue the use of other mental capacities Direct and control perceptions, thoughts, actions, and to some degree emotions

Executive Functions Are Not a Unitary Trait

Key Concept

Appropriate Metaphors for Executive Functions: The conductor and section leaders of the mind’s Orchestra The management structure of a multinational mind corporation The coaching staff of team mind

Executive Functions cue and direct in different ways at different levels. 160

Co-Conductors in a Holarchical Model of EF EF

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef

ef ef

ef ef

EF

Self-Generation

EF

Self-Realization

Co-Conductors in a Holarchical Model of EF

Trans-Self Integration

ef ef

ef

ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef

Self-Realization ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

Self-Generation

EF

Self-Determination

ef

Trans-Self Integration

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef ef

ef ef

ef

Self-Regulation

Self-Activation

Activation

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

Self-Determination ef

ef ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef

Self-Regulation

Self-Activation

Activation

27

WISC-V & EF

Holarchy vs Hierarchy

Domains of Functioning Directed by Executive Functions Action Executive control of modes of output including behavior in the external world and storage and retrieval of internal representations

Action

E m o t i o n

Hierarchy

Cognition Executive control of thoughts and thought processing

Cognition

Perception Executive control of modes of perceptual input including external sensory stimuli (visual, auditory, kinesthetic) and internal (representational) stimuli

Perception

Emotion Executive control of moods, feelings, and the processing of emotions

Holarchy

33 Self-Regulation EFs

EF Tiers within the Holarchical Model of Executive Functions EF Trans-Self Integration Self-Generation EF

Self-Realization ef

Self-Determination

Self-Awareness Other-Awareness Self-Analysis

ef

Goal setting Long-range Planning & Foresight

Self-Regulation ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef ef

ef ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef

ef ef ef

Perceive Focus Sustain Energize Initiate Inhibit Stop Interrupt Flexible Shift Modulate

Monitor Correct Balance Gauge Anticipate Estimate Time Analyze Generate Associate Organize Prioritize

Plan Evaluate/Compare Decide Sense Time Pace Sequence Execute Hold Manipulate Store Retrieve

Self-Activation

Self-Activation

          

Balance Monitor Correct Gauge Anticipate Est Time Analyze Generate Associate Plan Organize

          

Prioritize Compare/Eval Decide Sense Time Pace Sequence Execute Hold Manipulate Store Retrieve

Executive Functions involve the part of the executive network that that is used to become aware of the need for the use of executive skills and other mental capacities and used to cue and direct the use of the needed executive skills.

It is important to distinguish between

Executive Functions and

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

Perceive Focus Sustain Energize Initiate Inhibit Stop Interrupt Flexible Shift Modulate

Self Regulation Executive Functions

Key Concept

Executive Skills.

          

167

168

28

WISC-V & EF

Self Regulation Executive Skills

Co-Conductors in a Holarchical Model of EF

Executive Skills are responsible for cueing the specific areas of the brain needed to perform specific tasks (e.g., attending, inhibiting, modulating, planning, organizing, associating).

EF

Executive Capacities

EF

ef

Executive Functions

ef

Executive Skills

ef

ef ef

ef

ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef ef

ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef ef

ef

ef

ef

ef ef

ef ef

ef ef ef

ef

169

Self Regulation Executive Function “Clusters”

Key Concept

ENGAGEMENT

Self-regulation Executive Functions can be organized into 7 basic clusters.

171

The Multidimensional Nature of EF Assessment  The Multidimensional Nature of the use of Executive Functions necessitates a Multidimensional approach to their assessment.  Assessment of Executive Functions needs to address the use of Efs within all four domains of functioning and across all four arenas of involvement

ATTENTION Perceive Focus Sustain

MEMORY Hold Manipulate Store Retrieve

Energize Initiate Inhibit Stop Pause Flexible Shift

OPTIMIZATION EFFICIENCY Sense Time Monitor Pace Modulate Sequence Balance Execute Correct

INQUIRY Anticipate Gauge Analyze Estimate Time Compare

SOLUTION Generate Associate Prioritize Plan Organize Decide 172

Key Concept Effective EF assessment is multidimensional in nature and addresses the use of Efs within all four domains of functioning and across all four arenas of involvement. 174

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

29

WISC-V & EF

EF Assessment Perspective x Method Assessment Perspective

Indirect Perspective – Collecting information in a manner that does not require direct contact with, or observation of, the client

Key Concept

Assessment Method Formal Methods – Using interviews, records reviews, and observation and interpretation methods that make use of standards established through normative comparisons

Informal Methods – Using interviews, records reviews, and observation and interpretation methods that do not make use of standards established through normative comparisons

Behavior Rating Scales Parent & Teacher Behavior Rating Scales Self-Report Rating Scales (e.g., BRIEF or MEFS Parent, Teacher and Self Rating forms)

Interviews of Parents, Teachers (e.g., use of the EFSO) Review of School Records Process-oriented Interpretation of Parent and Teacher Ratings and Self Reports

Direct Perspective – Individually-Administered Collecting information Standardized Tests through direct (e.g., D-KEFS, interactions with, or NEPSY-II, WCST, through direct BADS, BADS-C) observations of, the client

The most effective approach to EF assessment involves

1) Clinical interview(s) 2) Use of additional data collection methods to test hypotheses generated from the interview(s)

Child Interview Systematic and Nonsystematic Behavioral Observations (e.g., use of the EFSO and EFCO) Process-oriented Interpretation of Standardized Test Performance and Classroom Work Samples

Assessment of Executive Functions

Norm-referenced assessments of executive functions are currently available, including:

176

Assessment of Executive Functions

The limitations of the current methods available need to be understood and taken into account when conducting an assessment.

 Individually-administered tests  Behavior rating scales

EF Assessment Using Individually Administered Tests

Key Concept Standardized, individually-administered measures of executive functions only assess the use of executive functions within the Symbol System Arena.

Perception

Emotion

Cognition Action

Self Others Environment Symbol Systems

X

X

X

179

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

30

WISC-V & EF

Key Concept

The Multidimensional Nature of EF Assessment

Although limited in scope, individually-administered assessment of executive functions can provide valuable information about the clients capacities to selfregulate perception, cognition and action within the Symbol System arena, especially in school.

The most effective approach to EF assessment involves:

• Conducting a thorough clinical interview(s) • Using additional data collection methods to test hypotheses generated from the interview(s)

181

The Multidimensional Nature of EF Assessment

Conducting a thorough clinical interview:  Identify arenas of involvement that are of concern, within the arenas of concern:  Identify domains of functioning that are of concern  Identify the specific executive function levels that are of concern  Identify the specific executive functions that are of concern within the level

Parent, Teacher, Child & Adult Inventories

BRIEF (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functions; 1996) D-REFS (Delis Rating of Executive Function; 2012) BDEFS-CA (Barkley Deficits in Executive Functioning Scale; 2012) CEFI (Comprehensive Executive Functions Inventory; 2013)

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

The Multidimensional Nature of EF Assessment Use additional data collection methods to test hypotheses generated from the clinical interview:

 Parent, Teacher, Self Report and Adult Inventories  Background information/Records review  Individually-administered standardized testing (for Symbol System arena concerns)

BRIEF INHIBIT SCALE Item Description WILDER than others INTERRUPTS others OUT OF SEAT OUT OF CONTROL BLURTS OUT TOO WILD Trouble STOPPING TROUBLE when NOT SUPERV TOO SILLY Talks at WRONG TIME NO THOUGHT BEFORE ACT IMPULSIVE TOLD to STOP NO THOUGHT BEFORE ACT

Executive Functions Likely to be Associated with Behaviors

P x x x x x x x x x x

T PRIMARY EF

SECONDARY Efs

MODULATE INHIBIT INHIBIT MODULATE INHIBIT MODULATE STOP

MONITOR MONITOR MONITOR MONITOR MONITOR MONITOR MODULATE MONITOR

x INHIBIT MODULATE INHIBIT x ANTICIPATE x INHIBIT x STOP x ANTICIPATE

MODULATE MONITOR MONITOR MONITOR

x x x x x

MONITOR MONITOR 186

31

WISC-V & EF

Parent, Teacher, Child & Adult Inventories

Ideally, behavior rating inventories would offer coverage of a broad array of executive functions across all 4 domains within all 4 arenas of involvement.

Self Regulation Executive Function “Clusters”

ATTENTION Perceive Focus Sustain

MEMORY Hold Manipulate Store Retrieve

OPTIMIZATION EFFICIENCY Sense Time Monitor Pace Modulate Sequence Balance Execute Correct

INQUIRY Anticipate Gauge Analyze Estimate Time Compare

SOLUTION Generate Associate Prioritize Plan Organize Decide 189

Key Concept EFs in the Symbol System arena are best assessed by using methods that can reveal Cascading Production Decrements or Cascading Production Increments 191

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

The McCloskey Executive Function Scales (MEFS) assess 33 selfregulation executive functions across multiple domains of function within multiple arenas of involvement.

MEFS Rating Options

ENGAGEMENT Energize Initiate Inhibit Stop Pause Flexible Shift

EF Rating Inventories

Always or almost always does this on his or her 5 AA own. Does not need to be prompted or reminded (cued) to do it. 4 F Frequently does this on own without prompting 3

S Seldom does this on own without being prompted, reminded, or cued to do so. 2 AP Does this only after being prompted, reminded, or cued to do it. Only does it with direct assistance. Requires 1 DA much more than a simple prompt or cue to be able to get it done in situations that require it. 0 UA Unable to do this, even when direct assistance is provided.

Cascading Production Decrement Construct Start here

Construct + EF Construct + + EF

Progressive deterioration of performance is observed as executive function demands (+ EF) become greater.

Construct+ + + EF

32

WISC-V & EF

Individually-administered Assessments of EF

 Identify a specific cognitive construct baseline using a measure that minimizes EF involvement.  Select and use a measure that adds executive function demands to the baseline construct and observe the results.  Continue to add additional EF demands and observe results.

Design Copying Ability + EF: BVMGT Ability + + EF

Progressive deterioration of performance is observed as executive function demands (+ EF) become greater.

Start here

Progressive deterioration of performance is observed as executive function demands (+ EF) become greater.

Reasoning Ability + + + EF: WCST

Assessing Retrieval Fluency

Cascading Production Decrement Visuo-motorAbility: Start here

Cascading Production Reasoning Ability: Decrement Matrix Reasoning

Ability + + + EF: RCFT

Examples:  Naming animals in 60 seconds  Naming foods in 60 seconds  Naming words that begin with the letter “s” in 60 seconds  Naming words that begin with the letter “f” in 60 seconds 196

Assessing Retrieval Fluency

Assessing Retrieval Fluency

Examples of response patterns:  Semantic “Flooding” – Retrieval with minimal executive direction; uncontrolled flow of words  Controlled Access – Executive Functions used to organize retrieval of words by semantic clusters

Examples of response patterns:  Semantic “Flooding” results in uneven performance across a 60 second interval with decreased production in each successive 15 second interval.

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

197

198

33

WISC-V & EF

Assessing Retrieval Fluency

Assessing Retrieval Fluency

1” – 15”

Largest number of responses

15 responses

16” – 30”

Reduced number of responses

4 responses

31” – 45”

Reduced number of responses

1 response

46” – 60”

Few, if any, responses

0 responses

Examples of response patterns:  Controlled Access typically results in a more even distribution of responses across a 60 second interval. Responses are often reflect organized, sequential access of various subcategories (e.g., water animals; flying animals; farm animals; forest animals; jungle animals;

199

Assessing Retrieval Fluency 1” – 15”

16” – 30”

31” – 45”

6 responses

Similar numbers of responses for each interval

46” – 60”

Cascading Production Decrement Start here

6 responses

Retrieval Ability: Semantic Fluency Retrieval Ability + EF: Initial Letter Fluency

5 responses

5 responses

201

Progressive deterioration of performance is observed as executive function demands (+ EF) become greater.

An Integrative Model Specifying Processes, Abilities, Knowledge Bases, Skills, Memory and Achievement in Reading

Key Concept Executive functions are used to cue, direct, coordinate and integrate all the processes, skills, abilities, and knowledge bases used when reading writing or doing math. 203

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

200

indicate Executive Function processing at work Retrieval from Long Term Storage Working Memory Initial Registration (Immediate Memory)

General & Specific Knowledge Lexicons

Language

Semantic Lexicon Word & Phrase Knowledge

Visuospatial

Reasoning

Comprehending Words and Text Decoding Unfamiliar and/or Nonsense Words

Speed + Prosody = Reading Rate aka “Fluency”

Reading Familiar (Sight) Words

Phonological Processing

Oral Motor Functioning

Orthographic Processing

204 Copyright © 2007

34

WISC-V & EF

Assessing Executive Functions Related to Reading

Assessing Executive Functions Related to Reading

Example of D-KEFS Color-Word Interference Inhibition task:

Example of D-KEFS Color-Word Interference Word Reading task:

“Look at this page…read these words as quickly as you can without making any mistakes.”

“Look at this page…the color names are printed in a different colored ink. You are to name the color of the ink that the letters are printed in not read the word.”

205

Assessing Executive Functions Related to Reading Example of D-KEFS Color-Word Interference Inhibition-Switching task:

“This time, for many of the words you are to name the color of the ink and not read the words. But if a word is inside a little box, you should read the word and not name the ink color.” 207

EF Involvement in Reading Essentials of Executive Functions Assessment Rapid Reference 6.2:  Description of EF involvement in the act of reading  Lists the EFs most likely to be involved in various facets of reading  Describes task behavior likely to be indicating a lack of effective EF use

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

206

Cascading Production Decrement

Process: D-KEFS Color & Word Naming

Process + EF: D-KEFS CWI Progressive Inhibition deterioration of performance is observed Process + + EF: as executive function D-KEFS Inhibition/ demands (+ EF) become Switching greater.

Interventions for Executive Functions Difficulties Related to Reading

Many executive functions difficulties related to reading are the result of a lack of adequate maturation of the neural networks involved in the use of these executive functions for reading. 210

35

WISC-V & EF

Interventions for Executive Functions Difficulties Related to Reading

Source Acknowledgements

The most effective form of intervention for maturational difficulties with executive functions cues is increased practice of the complete act of reading, i.e., applying the integration of all processes, skills, abilities and lexicons while reading connected text while receiving feedback from an external source. 211

An Integrative Model Specifying Processes, Abilities, Knowledge Bases, Skills, Memory and Achievement in Writing indicate Executive Function processing at work Initial Registration (Immediate Memory) Working Memory Retrieval from Long Term Storage

General & Specific Knowledge Lexicons

Language

Semantic Lexicon Word & Phrase Knowledge

Idea Generation

Reasoning

212

Writing as a Holarchically Organized Process PLAN

Visuospatial

Text Generation

Text Editing & Revising

Text Generation

ORGANIZE

Reviewing/Revising

Text Transcription & Spelling

Text Production Automaticity

PLAN

Text Transcription Language Representation

Visuospatial Processing

GraphoMotor Processing

Orthographic Processing

Phonological Processing 213

Idea Generation

Copyrig ht ©

Text Transcription Difficulties

Text Transcription Improvement

Academic Skills: •

Academic Skills:

Alphabet Writing

•

215

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

214

Alphabet Writing

216

36

WISC-V & EF

Text Transcription Improvements

Text Transcription Difficulties Academic Skills:

Academic Skills:

•

•

WJ-III Writing Fluency Nov 2010

WJ-III Writing Fluency August 2012

217

Text Transcription Improvements

218

Text Transcription Improvements

Academic Skills:

Academic Skills:

•

•

WJ-III Writing Fluency August 2012

WJ-III Writing Fluency August 2012

219

Text Generation Difficulties • What Evan wrote for me: My favorite game is … “mabul roling it is fun. I like making the box to role in to. Iam prety gode as well. It is rell inters ing. It is so fun

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

220

Adequate Language Representation • What Evan told me: “My favorite game is rolling marbles. I think it is fun. I just learned it yesterday. It can be pretty hard at times. It can be fun and it’s interesting if you make it challenging. I like making the boxes to roll the marbles into. You probably need to be pretty skilled with eye hand coordination to do it. To get up the ramp you need to roll it really fast.”

37

WISC-V & EF

Language Representation to Text Generation Difficulties • What Evan told me: “My favorite game is rolling marbles. I think it is fun. I just learned it yesterday. It can be pretty hard at times. It can be fun and it’s interesting if you make it challenging. I like making the boxes to roll the marbles into. You probably need to be pretty skilled with eye hand coordination to do it. To get up the ramp you need to roll it really fast.”

 What Evan wrote: My favorite game is…“mabul roling it is fun. I like making the box to role in to. Iam prety gode as well. It is rell inters ing. It is so fun

EF Involvement in Writing Essentials of Executive Functions Assessment Rapid Reference 6.3: • Description of EF involvement in stages of writing • Lists the EFs most likely to be involved in that stage • Describes task behavior likely to be indicating a lack of EF use

Cascading Production PAL-II Alphabet Decrement Writing & PAL-II Copying A & B WIAT-III Sentence Composition and/or Progressive PAL-II Sentence Writing deterioration of performance is observed WIAT-III as executive function Essay demands (+ EF) become Composition greater.

Executive Functions and Mathematics

226

226

Math EF Difficulties: Case Example

Math EF Difficulties: Case Example

 Low scores on both WIAT-III Numerical Operations and Math Problem-Solving, failing Algebra II, but…  Grades on tests inconsistent, some A’s, some F’s, homework not completed resulting in failing grade; grade of B in Algebra I, grade of B in Geometry. History and present behavior assessment indicating ADHD.

 Standard Score of 120 on Math ProblemSolving, but Standard Score of 80 on Numerical Operations.  Process-oriented examination of student response booklet reveals several very easy calculation items incorrect due to misreading the operation sign and/or errors in basic addition or subtraction when borrowing and carrying. Numerical Operations items reflecting math skills being taught this school year performed much more effectively than items assessing skills taught in previous years.

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

38

WISC-V & EF

Math EF Difficulties: Case Example • Standard Score of 70 on Numerical Operations during first assessment session but Standard Score of 92 during second assessment session three days later. • Process-oriented examination of student response booklet reveals easy calculation items incorrect due to operation sign errors and/or errors in basic addition or subtraction. Numerical Operations items reflecting math skills currently being taught performed much more effectively than items assessing skills taught in previous years.

EF Involvement in Math

Functional Behavior Assessment

B

C

In traditional functional behavior assessments antecedents are said to TRIGGER the behavior that results in the consequences, but the reasons WHY the antecedents trigger the behavior is not really addressed.

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

Most common features of poor math production likely to be indicating EF difficulties:  Easy calculation items incorrect, more difficult calculation items correct.  “Careless” errors, misreading operation signs, basic addition and subtraction errors, despite capable performance with most item types.  Inconsistent grades on classroom tests.  Math problem-solving skills much better than math calculation skills.

Functional Behavior Assessment

Essentials of Executive Functions Assessment Rapid Reference 6.3: • Description of EF involvement in mathematical thinking • Lists the EFs most likely to be involved in specific tasks • Describes task behavior likely to be indicating a lack of EF use

A

Math EF Difficulties

The focus of a traditional FBA: “Behavior support plans are designed to alter patterns of problem behavior. The process by which this is done, however, involves change in the behavior of family, teachers, staff, or managers in various settings. Plans of behavior support define what we will do differently. It is the change in our behavior that will result in improved behavior of the focus person.” (O’Neill, Horner, Albin, Sprague, Storey, & Newon, 1997, p. 65).

FBA: Is A-B-C Enough?  Since the antecedent does not trigger the same undesirable behaviors in ALL students in the same situation, there must be something about the students that differs in an important way.  Functional behavior assessment ignores internal considerations (i.e., perceptions, emotions, thought) and focuses on applying external control to effect change in behavior.

39

WISC-V & EF

A

The EF Driven FBA

Key Concept An EF-Driven FBA enables problems to be clearly stated in terms of perceptions, emotions, thoughts or actions that can be changed through intervention.

Informed by knowledge of executive functions, the functional behavior assessment model can be revised as follows:

A

B

C B

EF Behavior Response

Antecedents

Perception

Emotion

Cognition

Consequences

C

Action

236

EF- Driven FBA

Progress Monitoring

The goals of an EF-driven FBA are: 1) to help the child, the parents, and professionals to understand the nature of the deficit and 2) through proper intervention, to assist the child or adolescent in changing the behavior from a negative to positive.

Progress monitoring techniques for interventions targeting the improvement of the use of executive functions.

238

DAILY PROGRESS BY CLASS ENGAGEMENT Math Science Social Studies English Reading Math Facts

WEEK 1 4-Feb 5-Feb 6-Feb 7-Feb 8-Feb 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 0 0 3 3 3

ENGAGEMENT Math Science Social Studies English Reading Math Facts

WEEK 5 4-Mar 5-Mar 6-Mar 7-Mar 8-Mar 3 3 3 1 3 0 2 1 3 3 3 2 1 3 2 2 3 1 3 3 3 2 3 0 3 0 3 3

ENGAGEMENT Math Science Social Studies English Reading Math Facts

WEEK 9 1-Apr 2-Apr 3-Apr 4-Apr 5-Apr 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

ENGAGEMENT Math Science Social Studies English Reading Math Facts

WEEK 2 11-Feb 12-Feb 13-Feb 14-Feb 15-Feb 0 2 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 2 3 3 3 3 0 3 0 0 3 3 3 0 0 3 0 3 0

WEEK 6 11-Mar 12-Mar 13-Mar 14-Mar 15-Mar 3 2 1 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

WEEK 10 15-Apr 16-Apr 17-Apr 18-Apr 19-Apr 3 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 3 3 1 3 3 3 2 0 1 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 0 3 3 3

WEEK 13 6-May 7-May 8-May 9-May 10-May 0 1 0 1 2 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

WEEK 3 19-Feb 20-Feb 21-Feb 22-Feb 23-Feb 1 0 3 0 3 3 3 2 0 0 3 3 3 3 3

WEEK 4 25-Feb 26-Feb 27-Feb 28-Feb 1-Mar 0 3 2 2 3 0 2 2 0 2 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 3 3

WEEEK 7 18-Mar 19-Mar 20-Mar 21-Mar 22-Mar 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0

WEEK 11 22-Apr 23-Apr 24-Apr 25-Apr 26-Apr 0 0 3 3 3 3 0 3 1 3 1

13-May 2 0 0 2

14-May 0 1 3 3

WEEK 14 15-May

WEEK 8 25-Mar 26-Mar 27-Mar 28-Mar 29-Mar 1 0 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

WEEK 12 29-Apr 30-Apr 1-May 2-May 3-May 3 0 0 3 3 2 2 1 2 2 0 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3

16-May 1 1 0 2 2

17-May 1 0 0 0 3239 3

ATTENTION Math Science Social Studies English Reading Math Facts

WEEK 1 4-Feb 5-Feb 6-Feb 7-Feb 8-Feb 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 3 3 3 1 0 0 3 3 3

ATTENTION Math Science Social Studies English Reading Math Facts

WEEK 5 4-Mar 5-Mar 6-Mar 7-Mar 8-Mar 3 2 2 1 3 0 3 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 2 3 1 3 0 3 0 3 3

ATTENTION Math Science Social Studies English Reading Math Facts

WEEK 9 1-Apr 2-Apr 3-Apr 4-Apr 5-Apr 2 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 3

ATTENTION Math Science Social Studies English Reading Math Facts

WEEK 2 11-Feb 12-Feb 13-Feb 14-Feb 15-Feb 0 2 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 0 0 3 3 3 0 0 3 0 3 0

WEEK 3 19-Feb 20-Feb 21-Feb 22-Feb 23-Feb 1 0 2 0 2 3 3 3 0 0 3 3 3 3 2

WEEK 6 11-Mar 12-Mar 13-Mar 14-Mar 15-Mar 3 1 1 3 0 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3

WEEK 10 15-Apr 16-Apr 17-Apr 18-Apr 19-Apr 3 0 0 3 3 0 0 1 3 3 0 3 3 3 2 0 2 3 3 2 1 2 3 3 0 1 3 3

WEEK 13 6-May 7-May 8-May 9-May 10-May 0 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 3 1 2 3 2 0 3 0 1 2 1 3 3 3 3 3

WEEEK 7 18-Mar 19-Mar 20-Mar 21-Mar 22-Mar 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 3 3 3 2 3 1 3 1 2 2 2 3 3 2 1 3 3 3 0

WEEK 11 22-Apr 23-Apr 24-Apr 25-Apr 26-Apr 0 0 3 3 3 3 1 3 1 3 1

13-May 2 0 0 1

WEEK 4 25-Feb 26-Feb 27-Feb 28-Feb 1-Mar 0 3 2 2 3 1 2 2 0 2 3 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 0 3 3 2

14-May 0 1 2 3

WEEK 14 15-May

WEEK 8 25-Mar 26-Mar 27-Mar 28-Mar 29-Mar 1 0 1 3 3 2 3 0 2 3 3 3

WEEK 12 29-Apr 30-Apr 1-May 2-May 3-May 0 0 0 3 2 2 0 2 2 2 0 2 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3

16-May 1 1 0 2 2

17-May 1 0 0 1 3 3

240

40

WISC-V & EF

WEEK 1 WORK CONPLETION4-Feb 5-Feb 6-Feb 7-Feb 8-Feb Math 3 3 3 3 2 Science 3 3 3 Social Studies 3 3 3 3 0 English 3 3 0 3 0 Reading 3 3 3 3 0 Math Facts 0 3 3 3

WEEK 5 WORK COMPLETION4-Mar 5-Mar 6-Mar 7-Mar 8-Mar Math 3 1 2 1 3 Science 0 2 1 3 Social Studies 2 1 0 0 2 English 3 2 2 1 3 Reading 2 3 1 3 Math Facts 0 3 0 2 2 WEEK 9 WORK COMPLETION1-Apr 2-Apr 3-Apr 4-Apr 5-Apr Math 2 1 Science 3 2 Social Studies 2 English 2 3 Reading 3 3 Math Facts 3 2

Zach T. WORK COMPLETION Math Science Social Studies English Reading Math Facts

WEEK 2 11-Feb 12-Feb 13-Feb 14-Feb 15-Feb 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 2 0 3 3 0 3 0 0 3 3 3 0 0 3 0 3 0

WEEK 3 19-Feb 20-Feb 21-Feb 22-Feb 23-Feb 1 0 2 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 2

WEEK 6 11-Mar 12-Mar 13-Mar 14-Mar 15-Mar 3 0 0 0 0 2 3 3 2 3 1 3 3 3 WEEK 10 15-Apr 16-Apr 17-Apr 18-Apr 19-Apr 3 0 0 3 3 0 0 1 3 2 0 3 2 1 1 0 2 3 3 2 1 2 3 3 0 0 3 3

WEEK 13 6-May 7-May 8-May 9-May 10-May 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 2 3 3 3 3 3

WEEK 4 25-Feb 26-Feb 27-Feb 28-Feb 1-Mar 0 3 2 0 3 0 2 0 0 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 3 3

WEEEK 7 18-Mar 19-Mar 20-Mar 21-Mar 22-Mar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 2 1 1 3 0 2 1 2 3 1 2 1 3 3 3 0

WEEK 11 22-Apr 23-Apr 24-Apr 25-Apr 26-Apr 0 0 3 3 3 2 0 3 2 3 3

13-May 0 0 0 1

14-May 0 1 2 3

WEEK 8 25-Mar 26-Mar 27-Mar 28-Mar 29-Mar 1 0 0 3 3 2 3 0 2 3 3 3

WEEK 12 29-Apr 30-Apr 1-May 2-May 3-May 0 0 0 3 2 2 0 2 2 1 0 2 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3

WEEK 14 15-May

16-May 0 1 0 3 2

17-May 1 0 0 1 3 3

241

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

END OF YEAR SUMMARY ALL CLASSES ENGAGEMENT Rated 3, 2, or 1 Rated 0 ATTENTION Rated 3, 2, or 1 Rated 0 WORK COMPLETION Rated 3, 2, or 1 Rated 0

% 78% 22% % 78% 22% % 70% 30%

242

41