Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Advance testing report
Transcript of Advance testing report
brain damage Top 10 most widely used
assessment instruments Assessing learning disability
( reflects an impairment in
Central Nervous System
functions) Test- Retest reliabilities vary
greatly according to
scoring system Provide a good index of perceptual- motor development Limitations Administration and Scoring Administration Test Description
Administration of the Bender- Gestalt II consists of 2 phases:
Copy Phase – Examinee is shown stimulus cards with designs and asked to copy of the designs on a sheet of paper
Recall Phase – Examinee is asked to redraw designs from memory
Motor and Perception supplemental tests screen for specific motor and perceptual abilities/ difficulties
Kit consists of Examiner’s manual, 16 stimulus cards, observation form, motor test, and a perception test
2 pencils with erasers
10 sheets of drawing paper
Administer test on a table, seated across from the examinee if possible
Supply one pencil and one sheet of paper ( vertically in front of examinee)
Show the stimulus cards to the examinee one at a time ( aligned with the top of drawing paper)
Administer stimulus cards in correct numeric sequence and do not allow examinee to turn or manipulate them
Begin test with the appropriate card
Examination Information – Name, Gender, Hand Preference
Physical Observations – Sensory impairments or movement restrictions
Test- Taking Observations – Carelessness, indifference, inattentiveness, unusual or unique behaviors
Copy Observations – Examinee’s approach, drawing process
Recall – Amount of time needed to recall designs and the order in which designs are recalled
Summary – Overview of information collected Copy Phase
Inconspicuously measure how long the examinee takes to complete the items – record time in minutes and seconds
Document your observations – carefully note the examinee’s approach to drawing each design
Administered immediately following the copy phase
Examinee is given a new sheet of paper and asked to draw as many of the designs that were previously shown Motor Test
2- 4 minutes
Draw a line between the dots in each figure without touching the borders
Circle or point to a design in each row that best matches the design in the box
Scoring Global Scoring System used to evaluate each design to examine draws during the Copy and Recall phases
5 point rating scale
Higher scores better performance
Using the different areas of the Observation Form:
Total raw scores
Record any observations noted during administration
The examinee’s age
Test-taking times for the Copy and Recall phases
Supplemental Test Scores:
Now refer to the appendixes in the manual for the corresponding standard scores, percentile ranks, and other scores.
Scoring the Supplemental Tests:
Each correct response is scored one (1) point
Each incorrect response is scored zero (0) points Reliability of such system has been questioned
There was no systematic scoring procedure for performance on these designs
Correlations with scores on intelligence and achievement test are low to moderate
The Bender should not be used as an overall measure of either aptitude or achievement
Difficult to interpret result in terms of score patterns Interpretation History and Development Typically used with children, the subject is asked to draw a picture of a man, a woman, and themselves. No further instructions are given and the pictures are analyzed on a number of dimensions. Aspects such as the size of the head, placement of the arms, and even things such as if teeth were drawn or not are thought to reveal a range of personality traits (Murstein, 1965). Reliability and Validity Assets and Limitations Assets Limitations Reliability Easy to administer (only about
20-30 minutes plus 10 minutes
of inquiry) Helps people who have
anxieties taking tests
(no strict format) Can assess people with communication problems
Relatively culture free
Allow for self administration Difficulty establishing the reliability and validity of projective drawings
Questionable validity in specific psychiatric classifications Many of the interpretive hypotheses have
not been fully investigated.
No agreed upon interpretation
or scoring system. Administration Test takers is given a blank, unlined sheet of paper
and a pencil with eraser, and instructed to draw a person. After completing the drawing, the test taker is given new materials and asked to draw a figure of its opposite se from the first one. During the drawing process, the examiner takes
notes on the order of drawing elements, the comments made by the test takers, and the test taker’s nonverbal behavior during the task. Scoring and Interpretation “the need is not so much for more tests as it is for a better and more
complete utilization of existing tests.”
-Koppitz (1963) FOR MULTIDIMENSIONAL INTERPRETATION
-”…time and energy…curtailed…rarely unproductive..” Visual problems
Physiological limitations associated with illness, injury and fatigue.
Or muscular weakness
Physically disabling conditions, such as low birth weight
Cerebral palsy, or sickle cell anemia
Social or Cultural deprivation ADDITIONAL FACTORS Maturation
Executive Skills INTERPRETATION Taking an excessively long time to complete the task.
Tracing the design with a finger before drawing it
“Anchoring” by placing a finger on each portion of a design while drawing it.
Glancing briefly at a design and then drawing it from memory.
Turning the design card or drawing paper in order to complete the drawing. The interpretation depends on the form of test in use Florence Goodenough a child psychologist,
in 1926 Goodenough first became interested in figure drawing when she wanted to find a way to supplement the Stanford-Binet intelligence test with a nonverbal measure. Draw-a-Man task as a basis for estimating intelligence. Subsequently,
psycho-dynamically minded psychologists adapted the procedure to
the projective assessment of personality Over the years, the test has been revised many times with added measures
for assessing intelligence (Weiner & Greene, 2008). Harris later revised the test including drawings of a woman and of themselves. Now considered the Goodenough-Harris Test
it has guidelines for assessing children from ages 6 to 17 (Scott, 1981). Karen Machover (1949, 1951)
was the pioneer in this new field. Her procedure became known
as the Draw-a-Person Test(DAP). Her test enjoyed early popularity and
is still widely used as a clinical assessment tool. measure expressing that the features of the figures drawn reflect underlying attitudes, concerns, and personality traits. In her test, she included a suggestion to ask about the person they have drawn. is a psychological assessment instrument used to evaluate visual-motor functioning and visual perception skills in both children and adults. Scores on the test are used to identify possible organic Brain damage and the degree maturation of the nervous system.
The Bender Gestalt was developed by psychiatrist Lauretta Bender in the late nineteenth century. -Bender first described her Visual Motor Gestalt Test in an 1938 monograph entitled: A Visual Motor Gestalt Test and Its Clinical Use. The figures were derived from the work of the famous Gestalt psychologist Wertheimer.
The original test consists of nine figures, each on its own 3 × 5 card. The subject is shown each figure and asked to copy it onto a piece of blank paper. The test typically takes 7–10 minutes, after which the results are scored based on accuracy and other characteristics The impetus for the clinical use of the Bender Gestalt came in the late 1930s when
Max L. Hutt, an Instructor at the Educational Clinic of City College of New York became interested in developing a non-verbal projective personality test.
Hutt subsequently developed a series of "test factors" with suggestions as to the personality characteristics with which they might be associated.
However, nothing regarding this preliminary work was published and it remained out of the main stream of Educational Psychology, which at that time was virtually limited to intelligence , ability and vocational interest testing. United States entering into World War II in 1941, Hutt was commissioned in the U.S.Army and assigned as a consultant in Psychology to the Surgeon General's Office in Washington.
The Army was experiencing a need to quickly train and deploy both Psychiatrists and Psychologists to meet the vastly increased need of professionals to diagnose and treat the emotional problems that develop in the stress of wartime military duty. Subsequently,Elizebeth M. Koppitz adopted several of the Hutt and Briskin scoring factors in her subsequent work, "The Bender-Gestalt Test for Young Children, N.Y. Grune and Stratton, 1964
-The test has been used as a screening device for brain damage. Bender herself said it was "a method of evaluating maturation of gestalt functioning children 4-11's brain functioning by which it responds to a given constellation of stimuli as a whole, the response being a motor process of patterning the perceived gestalt." Originally published by the American Orthopsychiatric Association, it was purchased in the 1990s by Riverside Publishing company and released with a revised qualitative scoring system as the Bender-II. The Bender-II contains 16 figures versus 9 in the original. The new or revised scoring system for the Bender-II was developed based on empirical investigation of numerous scoring systems.
The Global Scoring System was, tangentially related to Bender's original scoring method and a revision of a system devised by Branigan in the 1980s, was selected based on reliability and validity studies, as well as its ease of use and construct clarity. Elizabeth Koppitz, a clinical child psychologist and school psychologist (who worked most of her career in the Mount Kisco schools in New York), developed a scoring system in the 1960s devoted to assessing the maturation of visual-motor skills in children. Illustrative Interpretations of the Draw-a-Person Test Sign Hypothesized Interpretive Significance
Disproportionately Organic brain disease; previous brain surgery;
Large Head preoccupation with headaches
Deliberate omission Evasive about highly conflictual interpersonal
of Facial Features relationships
Mouth drawn with Verbally aggressive, over-critical, and sometimes
heavy line slash sadistic personality
Chin changed, erased, Compensation for weakness, indecision, and
or reinforced fear of responsibility
Large male eyes w/ lashes Homosexually inclined male, often very extraverted
Hair emphasis,e.g.,a beard An indication of a striving for virility
Graphic emphasis of the neck Disturbed about the lack of control over impulses
Conspicuous treatment of Preoccupation with masturbation
index finger, thumb
Anatomical indications of Found only in schizophrenic or actively manic
internal organs patients Sattler (1992,30) states: “The validity of a test refers to
the extent to which a test measures what it is supposed
to measure and, therefore,the appropriateness with
which inferences can be made on the basis of the
Three principal domains of validity are usually considered:
content, criterion related and construct validity.
This relates to the question of whether the items in a test are representative of the
skill areas the test intends to measure.Sattler (1992, 30) gives three considerations
which can be used to judge this issue:
Are the test questions appropriate and does the test measure the domain of interest?
b) Does the test contain enough information to cover appropriately what it is supposed to measure?
c) What is the level of mastery at which the content is being assessed?
If we consider these questions the following conclusion can be drawn:
a) In our case, the items consist of visible aspects of the human figure that have
been studied extensively in the child development literature and are considered
to be key elements that characterize the evolution of children’s drawings with age
and increasing maturity. It seems obvious that the aspects considered in the evaluation
of these drawings developed by Goodenough (1926) and improved and standardized
by Harris (1963) and Naglieri (1988) contribute to measuring the domain of interest.
Specifically, the criteria pertaining to the correct positioning of body parts
as well as aspects of proportion and detail all give information as to what
extent the child has assimilated a concept of a universally encountered shape, the human figure.
They indicate to what degree these elements are reproduced
in a way that represents a growing degree of cognitive complexity or
intellectual maturity.25 Through the selection of 14 aspects of the human figure drawing
and the application of several criteria (presence, details, proportion),
the evaluation of the human figure drawing follows the
developmental literature as to the evolution children’s drawings
and therefore covers appropriately what it is supposed to
c) The level of mastery at which the drawings are being
assessed ( criterion c) is clearly stated in Naglieri’s scoring
system for the Draw a Person Test.