|
I have a dear friend who, as
our Consulting Resource Teacher, does much of the special
education testing in our school district. Recently,
I asked her what information teachers can give to
help her know exactly what to look for in each child
she tests.
This is what she told me:
Most of the teachers do a
wonderful job with the referral forms. However, it is NOT
helpful to me when a teacher writes, "... is
below grade level in reading," or "... is
not working up to his potential in math."
This is too general. I like it when a teacher gives me
specifics such as, "The child...
a. ...cannot
follow more than a two-step direction."
b. ... seems to know his sight words one day,
but then the next day, it's like he's never seen
them before."
c. ... is easily distracted."
d. ... has a very short attention span,
especially when it comes to his written work, but during
show and tell or read-aloud, he's very
attentive."
e. ... seems to have a better visual than
verbal memory."
f. ... does not know the letter names, but
when given the name and asked to point to them, he is able
to do so (It could be numbers instead of letters).
g. ... is well liked and has many friends (or
the opposite)."
h. ... functions best in the morning (or
afternoon)."
i. ... understands what he reads very
well."
j. ... contributes a great deal of information
during class time."
The more detail the teacher
can give me the better.
a. Does he
notice number and letter reversals, inversions, etc.?
b. Can she follow print?
c. Does he get mixed up when doing addition or
subtraction on an unlined piece of paper?
d. Does she rub her eyes, squint, turn her
head to one side or the other?
This is all helpful
information.
When I get a referral that
says, "Johnny cannot read and is not working up to
grade level", with no more information than
that, I do the standard battery of tests. Then, when
I learn later in conversation with that same teacher
that Johnny can't sit still, or Johnny can't attend
for anymore than two minutes, or Johnny has missed X
number of days of school, or Johnny recently
lost an uncle, I realize that perhaps I used the
wrong test.
If I had known this
information first, I might have given a different test,
perhaps one for Attention Deficit Disorder. So
I have to go back and do that test afterwards. That
information also affects HOW I give the test.
Perhaps I could have given it in shorter time spans.
My friend had some
excellent points. The more specific information you can
give, the better it is for the child. Testing
is difficult enough on any child, but when the
person doing the testing doesn't have the right
information, or not enough information, it can make
testing more difficult.
I always found it helpful
when teachers would show me as the evaluator, any concrete
illustrations of the child's problems, such as
written work that shows how he spells, or
documentation of specific instances of difficulty in
the classroom, like his trouble with being able to
copy information from the board. I realize that
teachers have a tremendous work load, but any specific
information you can give about that child will help the
child not just on the testing, but in the future as well.
And, after all, isn't that student's success in life what
education's all about?
For more plain talk about
learning disabilities, please visit us at www.ldperspectives.com.
|
About
The Author
Sandy
Gauvin is a retired educator who has seen
learning disabilities from many
perspectives - as the parent of a
daughter with learning disabilities, as
the teacher of children with
learning disabilities, and as an advocate
for others who have diagnosed and
unrecognized learning disabilities.
Sandy shares her wisdom and her resources
at www.LDPerspectives.com. |
|
|
