British Ability Scales - can I check what the EP said with you?

[KOKOagainandagain]

I had another meeting with the EP about DS2. Usual stuff - needs to take responsibility blah blah plus delaying tactics - ironically DS1s (undiagnosed and unsupported) SN and now boarding at indi ss means that the school/LA have not really been able to understand what is going on with DS2 so their advice is to wait and see what effect this has. What a surprise. Good job I don't actually listen to them.

DS2 recently had assessment with BAS3 where verbal ability was on the 98th percentile, non-verbal reasoning ability was 99.3 and spatial/visual perceptual ability was 81st. GCA was not calculated. I was told that this did not mean anything other than that DS1 did not have any difficulties (unspecified) that prevent him from attaining. In particular it did not mean that the was gifted and talented as, she said, that the scores vary dramatically from day to day and that scores change over time and that as children age (DS2 is 7) their scores drift down to the average. Is there a kernal of truth hidden amongst the bullshit?

TIA

So if the scores don't mean anything what on earth was the purpose of the test?

They are standardised assessments, designed to give an accurate a picture as possible.

Yes there can be some variability but those scores show at the very least what your ds is capable of. He might not achieve quite that on another day, or he may achieve hugely more. The point is, regardless, you have evidence that he CAN achieve at the level reported and this is a very good indicator of the very LEAST that he is capable of.

So, you know, put it in writing to EP to clarify that she has no faith in her own standardised testing!

If the scores tend to drift down to average with age that means the standardisation isn't very good! Or is she trying to say that there is a wider, flatter distribution curve at a young age, with much more variability and a taller, narrower curve as they get older? That might actually be the case, I suppose, but he's still currently getting very high scores for his age. In the top 2 percent for his age. It is a snapshot of his ability, I guess, but I would think that it's easier to do badly on a bad day and get an artificially low score than to somehow do exceptionally well on a good day and get an artificially high score!

At 5 yo my DS's scores varied between 99th centile for non verbal reasoning and 5th centile for language comprehension. He's no genius at 13, though. Maths is his strongest subject but I'd guess he's only 75th - 80th centile for that and pretty average at everything else. But that is due to his autism.

Your DS getting such good scores across the board is very encouraging. He has the ability to learn, despite his difficulties. He has potential. You mustn't let his strengths mask his weaknesses, though, as it will make getting the appropriate support harder.

Btw that would give him a rough IQ at 131.

And all of what Ellen said.

I intend to email the EP to confirm what she said and, as she is a trainee, her supervisor will be copied in to the original email and the reply. However, unlike the EP I prefer to check my facts and I don't like to ask questions that I don't already know the answer to.

Logically, it doesn't make sense - the assessment's validity is assumed in measuring cognitive weaknesses (low scores) but high scores are considered to be an invalid measure of cognitive strengths.

Googling has failed to confirm what the EP says but I would prefer actual knowledge. If I phone the company behind the assessment I will just get a sales person.

I think that the tactic may well be to hide the discrepency between ability and attainment. I know that the General Conceptual Ability (GCA) is used as an equivalent to IQ and that it is derived using the scores given and I suspect it may well be a deliberate omission to not include this. I can't find out how to calculate this myself.

I find it enormously frustrating that my ignorance allows people to lie to me. This is why you end up paying for indi reports.

Plus DS2 is due an IEP review but the EP started reviewing his IEP in the meeting, without getting feedback from the TA or CT, arbitrarily announcing that he had made great progress. She was being particularly celebratory about the vast reduction in the number of times he called out or made innappropriate noises but then realised that she had misread 'minumum of 5/10' as 'maximum of 5/10'. I was also holding a teacher ABC form at the time relating to just such an incident.

I have now been fobbed off by the person at the end of the line so it is time to apply for SA - again.

Star - how the fuck did you work that out?

Ellen - the trouble is that weaknesses are masking strengths. DS2 has SLCN and can be difficult for strangers to understand. I think the school have assumed below average/average ability. DS2 is a major problem for teachers as he does not follow instructions or even respond to his name even though he has heard and understands. Teachers have asked that I have his hearing tested and check with the comm paed that he is not epileptic. They have also been pushing for further investigation for ADD and he had been referred to a specialist nurse for home/school observation. He has had lots of assessment with SALT and OT and is seen termly by both. His IEP is informed by SALT and OT.

At home there is a marked difference between literacy and maths (he hates writing, hypermobility difficulties etc). He told me that he had only managed to complete just over half of the KS1 lit paper but that he whizzed through the maths paper and finished another one. His CT confirmed that he had sat level 3 maths. At the meeting though his SENCO said that his levels for the end of the year were writing, 2c, reading 2b and maths, 2a. Is the maths level 3 actually a separate paper? 2a would suggest that he had an absolute disaster and got most of the answers wrong but he is convinced that he knew or could work out most of the answers. Is it possible that we were not given the mark for that paper? How many questions would he have to get wrong?

Yes - if a child attains 2A on the basic maths test, there's an extra paper to see if they get level 3
www.emaths.co.uk/KS1SATS/2004TG.pdf

Probably well placed to answer some of this

GCA from BAS is not exactly equivalent to IQ. The BAS does not include a measure of working memory or processing speed in their GCA measure, so it's more a measure of reasoning power than an IQ, which incorporates impact of working memory and processing speed on reasoning abilities.

Some children's cognitive profiles change somewhat, but I would be confident that your ds has high reasoning ability. It doesn't make sense to say there is a drift to the centre when talking about percentiles, the whole point is that they are a rank. Someone will be at 99th percentile if they score in the top 1% of their age range, it is immaterial if it is a score of 12 or of 273 or of 7863, if it is in the top 1% of the age range it is at 99%ile. The full range of 0.1 to 99.9 percentile is quoted from youngest to oldest age range on the tests.

It is not good practice to quote a GCA if there is a large spread of scores, it is possible that that 85th centile raw score is too far away from those 98 percentile plus scores to allow an accurate GCA. I know the maximum gap between lowest and highest raw scores on WISC (alternative test) is 23 points, but am not sure on BAS. You could easily find out online I expect. Reason why its poor practice is because it hides the strengths and weaknesses in a profile which may be more important (eg verbal IQ 50, Non verbal IQ 150, overall IQ 100 ie average, would be a nonsense.)

Bye!

Thanks ilike - why can't all EPs be like you? Thank you for not abandoning us

The report does mention 'significant difference' and 'relative weakness' but does not say this is why there is no GCA.

I don't understand why the EP would claim that the scores are meaningless but also that in terms of the way that interventions are delivered and in the classroom in general, it is important to ignore high scores.

I have read about the similarity in behaviour with regard to attentiveness in ADD and potentially high cognitive ability. He also has sensitivities/sensory issues and OT and SALT issues. He has SLCN but also has a sibling on the spectrum.

The EP has conveniently bracketed the SALT and OT issues, no longer backs/believes teachers accounts of inattentiveness (because my home questionnaire is negative) and is claiming that all is well - assessment shows that he can make average progress or attain average grades.

I thought that they would consider whether the ability/attainment gap and inattentiveness were related to cognitive ability alone or in combination with SLCN which can itself be primary or secondary to ASD. I guess the option of doing nothing was easier/cheaper.

I had a horrible sinking feeling of deja vu in the meeting as the EP claim that DS1 had no reason not to attain was interpreted by the teachers as DS1 had no excuse not to work.

He has no reasoning abilities not to attain. However hehasn't had working memory or processing assessed (which is why I prefe the wisc) and saying he is clever enough to be doing well therefore he must be doing well is frankly not sufficient. If he isn't attaining at least in upper half of class, then something is going wrong between his raw reasoning ability and what is getting down on paper.
Could be anything, observation and further assessment should ideally help pinpoint what.
Ask her if he had scored in the lowest 1percent if she would have considered that he had learning difficulties, or if all scores are meaningless.

My DS had the BASII and they didn't calculate the GCA because of the huge differences. 99.5, 77 and 82 percentiles. I don't agree with what your EP is saying. I have read that you cannot overachieve on an IQ test but you can however underachieve. I also read that any one score above 130 would be considered G&T. A Head of Clinical Psychology did my son's test and he said that having one score in the top 1% was an Oxbridge level. I asked about the lower scores and he said that there were Professors there at the hospital that couldn't take away a game of darts! My DS has dyslexia and is terrible at maths!

You could try a Google on "twice exceptional" or "dual exceptional" and you will find information about children with disabilities that are hidden by their abilities. Perhaps you need some further testing. For example, my DS has phonological knowledge on the 6th percentile. How did your DS do in the numeracy, spelling and reading part of the BAS test? I would have thought that someone with those scores should be sailing through school unless there is something else going on.

Sorry to over post but subject close to heart.

You could try NAGC for advice: www.potentialplusuk.org/

School EP (whose incorrect observations sent us there in the first place) refused to look at our report from CP and said that "anyone could score highly in an IQ test". This was refuted by NAGC.

Thanks nice

I have contacted PP and joined so that I can access all the factsheets for free. I had considered having an assessment carried out with them as the LA EP did not carry out the subtests for numeracy, spelling and reading so there is no evidence relating to difference between attainment and ability. When I asked her in the meeting if there were going to be further assessment of processing speed and working memory she said that we don't want to go there because we might discover issues that would complicate things and muddy the water. God forbid they should identify an issue and then have to make provision! No, we'll go with 'he should be able to do it and he would if only you were not such bad parents/he was not so naughty (delete as appropriate)'.

He is going to be seen by an independent SALT in a couple of weeks (she did a report for the LA in DS1's recent tribunal and is very good) and I am debating whether he should be assessed at PP or whether I should get an indi EP to assess him using WISC. In your experience did the school/la dismiss PP?

Keep ds's scores aged 5 and half verbal 84, non verbal reasoning 93, spatial 90, GCA 93 centile or IQ 127 'potentially placing him within the bracket of gifted learners'

ds's score aged 6 and half verbal 79, non verbal 66th, spatial 99, she also did working memory, processing speed and concludes GCA not appropriate to compute due to the amount of scatter between sub tests. She also tested word reading 7 years, reading comprehension 11 years, math reasoning 6 years.

ds's score aged 9 verbal 8 (scores that range from 7 to 13 are deemed average) ds then refused all other tests, so GCA not available.

I would say that ds has the 'potential' to learn and achieve but he has far too many difficulties to obtain that.

I have also read 'Dabrowski's Overexcitabilities and twice exceptional' and 'gifted' children also have lots of ASD like difficulties too.

In my opinion all these centiles and formal assessments don't mean a thing, its functional ability.

DS1's centiles also dropped quite dramatically over time with regard to processing speed and working memory. I think that this may be an indication that the increase in his needs was not met and so did not keep up with the demands of the curriculum in KS2.

LA have an argument either way - either the child is too able to warrant funding provision or not able enough to warrant funding provision.

I think that assessments can help inform the picture and rule some things out as there can be mulitple causes of the same behaviour such as not following instructions. The trouble is that either the LA/NHS is very reluctant to start the process and even when they are repeately prodded into action, have a tendency to stop before finding the cause(s) (and therefore having to make provision). When the experts stop we have little choice but to privately fund indi profs who will complete the process - ie tell us what the issues are and specify and quantify the necessary provision.

This is from the SENCOP. If your DS is highly able (as suggested by his BAS scores) but is sauntering along somewhere in the middle of the class, then his SEN are preventing him from making adequate progress and this needs to be addressed. If the LEA did insist that he was too able, then that would be contrary to the SENCOP.

5:41 The key test of the need for action is evidence that current rates of progress are
inadequate. There should not be an assumption that all children will progress at the same
rate. A judgement has to be made in each case as to what it is reasonable to expect a
particular child to achieve. Where progress is not adequate, it will be necessary to take
some additional or different action to enable the pupil to learn more effectively. Whatever
the level of pupils? difficulties, the key test of how far their learning needs are being met
is whether they are making adequate progress.
5:42 Adequate progress can be defined in a number of ways. It might, for instance,
be progress which:
closes the attainment gap between the child and their peers
prevents the attainment gap growing wider
is similar to that of peers starting from the same attainment baseline, but less than
that of the majority of peers
matches or betters the child?s previous rate of progress
ensures access to the full curriculum
demonstrates an improvement in self-help, social or personal skills
demonstrates improvements in the child?s behaviour.

Exactly Keep at 5 and half (only just started school) he was in the bracket of gifted learners. He was able to achieve those scores too with injuries (self inflicted) all over his body (due to starting school) and was hospitalised for 2 weeks the day after that assessment due to his injuries. Imagine what he could have achieved if that wasn't the case. Ds scores highly in all assessments ie SALT and OT too.

Yet the 'gifted learner' has been reduced to not being able to attend school within a couple of years. Why? because his needs are not being met. Why are his needs not being met, because he can achieve those scores in assessments and assessments do not assess functional ability.

Every expert who has observed ds in school have observed he is confused, did little work, not paying attention, not interacting, not be able to follow his conversation etc, etc. Yet he can score above average in assessments across the board.

More emphasis should be placed on functional ability and observations, instead of wheeling out centiles.

Keep
Junior school were not interested in CP report but Secondary School has been much much better. They get it.

I don't think you need another IQ type test as you already have one that shows high ability. You need a different kind of assessment that will find where the difficulties are.

At the end of the day, if children are attaining within the average then nothing is likely to be done, no matter if there are huge discrepancies or underachievement. The school EP was insistent that DS's numeracy and spelling results on the BASII were of no significance because they were within the average bracket, albiet at the very bottom of average and despite his other scores being above average and verbal in the top 1%.

The CTOPP test is a useful one for phonological processing. I use the WRIT as a cognitive test but it is flawed in my opinion on the verbal side relying too much on existing knowdge. However, it gives me a ball park idea to compare with literacy. No test is without its flaws. However, even taking into account confidence levels, those percentiles are mahousive and clearly he is a very bright boy for his age. Now what the EP might be suggesting is that there is a possibility that he continues to score the same raw score but because of his increased age, the standardised scores and thus the percentiles go down. I would have thought that he's too young for this to happen. There are some children who get say a raw score of 43 aged 12 and thus get a SS of 103 in a reading test. Then aged 15 they. Still get 43 but because if the increase in age, the SS goes down to 89.

I think 7 is too young to remain static.