Transcript PEPNet

Equity Issues in
Assessments for
Individuals who are
Deaf or Hard of
Hearing
Ann Moxley, Ph.D.
California School for the Deaf Fremont
Overview of Issues
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Test instruments themselves
Reliability and validity
Deaf norms
Use of Interpreters
Translations into sign language
Language issues
Cautions
Best Practices & Recommendations
Testing Problems In This Population
•
•
•
•
Most tests not normed on the population
Therefore, scores may not be valid
Modifications of procedures may invalidate
Lack of language to understand directions or
express response
• Few examiners can communicate directly with
individuals in their language
Reliability
• Consistency means that the same estimate of
performance each time the test is used
• Poor reliability means very different scores at
different times and with different examiners
– Cannot rely on results or diagnosis
– Tests may not be reliable for all groups
• Need Reliability Coefficient > .80
Validity
• Test measures what it claims to measure
• Cannot be Valid if not Reliable
• A good standardized test must be both reliable
and valid to predict or be useful
Norms
• Few tests designed for or normed on
Deaf/Hard of Hearing
• Depends on purpose of assessment &
comparison group
• Problems with “Deaf Norms”
– Heterogeneity of population
– Secondary handicaps
– Often not well constructed instruments
Assessing In Primary Language
• Possibilities: ASL, SEE, MCE, PSE, spoken English
• Best if assessor is fluent in client’s language
• Lack of qualified assessors fluent in client’s
language
• May require an interpreter
Interpreting Issues
• Should be qualified: registered and skilled in
client’s mode of communication
• Must understand testing process & avoid
invalidating test results or changing responses
• Client may not know how to use
• Introduces another person violating standardization
• Can alter rapport with examiner
Translation Issues
• May change test items affecting reliability and
validity
• Should be “back” translated to check accuracy
• Each interpreter will sign differently
• There may be no sign equivalent
• Words have different frequencies and
development courses in each language
Cautions
•
•
•
•
•
Scores are not everything
Test don’t measure all skills (creativity, talents)
People, not tests, diagnose
Cannot base diagnoses only on test results
Test results are merely observations of performance
at a given time & circumstance
• They do not tell why
• All behavior is multi-determined: an effect may not
be the consequence of a particular cause
Cautions (Continued)
• Need insightful, competent examiner with
experience, clinical skills & judgment
• Test data have to be confirmed by other
observations and data
• Scores on a test may not represent typical
performance
– An individual who works at optimum level during
testing may not work at the same level outside
– An individual who does poorly during testing may
perform well in other situations
Factors Adversely Affecting
Performance
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Poor comprehension of English or ASL
Temporary states: fatigue, anxiety, stress
Uncooperative behavior
Limited motivation
Temperamental or personality disturbance
Physical illnesses or disorders
Other sensory deficits, especially visual
Best Practices
• Test allows gesture, demonstration, or simplified
communication without modifying or deviating from
standardized administration procedures
• Examiner can communicate directly with individual
without an interpreter
• Examiner should have good grasp of normal
development
• Recognize 45% of this population has one or more
additional problems
Addressing The Problems
• Use nonverbal tests: If the test is a nonverbal
one and the only change is the language in
which the directions are given, then the norms
based on directions in English may be
appropriate.
• Compare the student to himself
• Use a developmental approach
– non-standardized tests