The Empowerment of Teachers:

1

• The Empowerment of Teachers
• The contribution of Test 2r to Assessment
  Learning in the Early Years Classroom

Prepared and presented by Dr Pauline M Cogan
ILSA Conference September 2012
2
Structure of presentation

• Pressure on early years teachers from
  legislation, policy and research re. early
  assessment and intervention.
• Barriers to early identification in Ireland.
• Research reasons for development of TEST2r.
• The promise of TEST2r for elements of National
  Strategy to Improve Literacy Numeracy 2011
  2020.
• TEST2r sound theoretical basis.
• TEST2r phases of development and findings.
• TEST2r future work Phase 3 EAST.

3
1. Pressure on early years teachers from
legislation, policy and research re. early
assessment and intervention
Legislation Policy

• EPSEN Act (2004)
• NCCA (2005)
• NCSE (2006)
• Task Force on Dyslexia (2001)
• Learning Support Guidelines (2000)
• Special Education Circular (24/03)
• National Strategy to Improve Literacy Numeracy
  among Children and Young People (2011 2020)

4
Research

• Gough Juel (1987)
• Carter (1984)
• Strag (1972)
• Brooks (2007)
• Denton, Vaughn Fletcher (2003)
• Nicolson, Fawcett, Moss, Nicolson Reason (1999)
• Hatcher, Hulme, Miles, Carrol, Gibbs, Smith,
  Bowyer-Crane Snowling (2006)
• MacLagan (2001)
• Singleton, Horne, Thomas Leesdale (2003)
• Muter (2003)

5
2. Barriers to early identification in Ireland

• Assessment Tools from other jurisdictions of
  questionable efficacy
• DEST (1996), DEST2 (2004), COPS (2003), EYES
  (1991), MIST (1993)
• Assessment Tools from Ireland
• BIAP (1994)
• DTELS (2010)

6
2. Barriers to early identification in Ireland
(contd)

• Major barrier to early identification is absence
  of evidence-based, reliable classroom assessment
  tool for teachers in infant/early years
  classrooms

7
3. Research reasons for development of
TEST2r
Many reasons for TEST2r

• Need for wide ranging assessment tool
• Grounded in current theories of literacy
  acquisition and literacy acquisition failure
• Suitable for pre-readers
• Suitable for children aged 4, 5 6
• Need to provide basis for classroom intervention
  (assessment for learning, RTI model)

8
4. The promise of TEST2r for elements of
National Strategy to Improve Literacy Numeracy
2011 2020

• Improvement of teacher knowledge/understanding
  of early language and literacy development
• Identification of childrens learning needs as
  early as possible through evidenced-based
  assessment systems
• Assessment of Junior Infants
• Explicit teaching of structure and function of
  written and oral language plus building blocks of
  literacy

9
5. TEST2r - sound theoretical basis

• Phonological Deficit Hypothesis (PDH)
• Working Memory Hypothesis (WMH)
• Double Deficit Hypothesis (DDH)
• Magnocellular Deficit Hypothesis (MDH)
• Cerebellar Deficit Hypothesis (CDH)

10
5. TEST2r - sound theoretical basis (contd)
Phonological Deficit Hypothesis (PDH) Multiple
phonological tests recognition of long
developmental trajectory from earliest to most
sophisticated phonological awareness (alphabetic
principle, co-articulation, visual- verbal
associative memory)
11
5. TEST2r - sound theoretical basis (contd)

• Working Memory Hypothesis (WMH)
• Presence of several short-term memory and working
  memory tests
• Dual route of reading catered for
• Auditory memory (assembled phonology route)
• Spatial memory (direct route to reading
  spelling)

12
5. TEST2r - sound theoretical basis (contd)
Double Deficit Hypothesis (DDH)
DDH theory that children may have literacy
problems due to a single deficit either in
phonological awareness or in rapid naming. Other
children may have both of these deficits hence a
double deficit.
In TEST2r

• Many phonological tests
• Two rapid automatised naming tests

13
5. TEST2r - sound theoretical basis (contd)
Magnocellular Deficit Hypothesis
(MDH)
MDH theory that children may have literacy
problems due to anomalous magno or large cells in
any body system visual, auditory, somaesthetic,
motor
In TEST2r

• Several magnocellular type tests

14
5. TEST2r - sound theoretical basis (contd)
Cerebellar Deficit Hypothesis (CDH)
CDH theory that children may have literacy
problems due to subtle cerebellar differences
difficulty taking literacy skills to automatic
levels.
In TEST2r

• Several cerebellar type tests

15
6. TEST2r - phases of development and findings

• Phase 1 Pilot
• 20 teachers trained in sub-test rationale and
  administration highly specified test
  administration manual
• Sub-tests administered to 100 children in greater
  Dublin area (inner city, suburban, rural)

16
6. TEST2r - phases of development and findings
(contd)

• Phase 1 Pilot
• Data Analysis for
• Floor/ceiling effects
• Test/Re-test reliability
• Refined/reduced number of sub-tests for National
  Study

17
6. TEST2r - phases of development and findings
(contd)

• Phase 1 National Study
• 169 teachers trained in sub-test rationale and
  administration test administration manual
• Sub-tests administered to 1041 children
  nationwide
• Data harvested

18
6. TEST2r - phases of development and findings
(contd)

• Phase 1 National Study
• Factor Analysis of dataset (reduction method)
• 7 Factors revealed (Building Blocks of Literacy?)

19
6. TEST2r - phases of development and findings
(contd)
7 Factors
20
6. TEST2r - phases of development and findings
(contd)
Visual Verbal Correspondence Factor

• Poor readers/spellers have difficulty with
• sound letter mapping, paired associate
  learning difficulty weak word-attack or
  spelling skills

21
6. TEST2r - phases of development and findings
(contd)
Rhyme/Memory Factor

• Poor readers/spellers may have difficulty with
• Rhyme families and short term memory
• Text Comprehension
• Rhyme/Rime connection
• reading by analogy
  spelling by analogy

Recurring visual and auditory word patterns
22
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)
Phoneme Segmentation Factor

• Poor readers/spellers may have difficulty with
• Segmenting words in to their smallest sounds
  (phonemes)
• Mapping sounds on to corresponding letters
  transcription of single phonemes (sounds) to
  corresponding graphemes (letters/letter groups
• Co-articulation
• Recognising were a sound appears in a word

23
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)
Phoneme Segmentation Speed Factor

• Poor readers/spellers may have difficulty with
• Developing automaticity of any skill including
  literacy
• Difficulty with speed of phonemic segmentation
• Difficulty in reaching procedural (automatic)
  level of knowledge cortical cost,
  glucose cost, loss of speed and energy
  attention is engaged in decoding poor
  comprehension

24
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)
Spatial Memory Factor

• Poor readers/spellers may have difficulty with
• Localising/sequencing small targets such as
  letters and letter segments
• Deciding whether lines are oriented at the
  same/or different angles take longer to
  learn letter shapes, names
• Reduced haptic benefit when manipulating letters,
  shapes

25
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)
Motor Speed Factor

• Poor readers/spellers may have difficulty with
• Performing motor tasks
• Slower than normally developing children
  impacting speech rate, rapid naming of objects,
  letters, digits, colours, symbols
• Reduced volume of written work
• Reduced dual task processing e.g. note taking
  while simultaneously listening concentrating on
  spelling and content when writing

26
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)
Balance Factor

• Poor readers/spellers may have difficulty with
• Motor skill automatisation process even for
  most primitive skills such as balance
• Slow in meeting motor milestones as children
  (British 1970 birth cohort)

27
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)

• Phase 2 Development of Second Database
• Psycho-educational assessment of 861 of original
  1041 children at 10th birthday
• WISC-IV (FSIQ/GAI)
• WIAT-II (Word Reading, Reading Comprehension,
  Pseudoword Decoding, Spelling plus other
  measures)
• WRAT-4 Sentence Comprehension
• , ,

28
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)

• Phase 2 Statistical Analysis of both databases
  
• multivariate multiple regression
• TEST2r factors viewed as predictors
• Intelligence was a co-variate
• Attainments on WIAT-II and WRAT4 scores were
  dependent variables
• Gender and DEIS/non DEIS attendance were control
  variables
• , ,

29
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)

• Phase 2 Multiple Regression Results
• 7 TEST2r factors significantly related to
  Reading, Spelling Comprehension
• Strong prediction independent of intelligence
• Analysis of additional variance accounted for by
  TEST2r factors confirmed they added
  significantly to the prediction equation
  independently of IQ mainly for reading and
  spelling
• Multivariate analysis of variants indicates that
  TEST2r is equally applicable to identifying at
  risk learners in DEIS and non DEIS schools

30
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)

• Phase 2 Multiple Regression Results
• 3 VERY POWERFUL FACTORS predicted Reading AND
  Spelling at 4, 5 and 6
• Visual Verbal Correspondence
• Rhyme Memory
• Motor Speed
• 2 POWERFUL FACTORS predicted both Reading and
  Spelling for 5 and 6 year olds
• Phoneme Segmentation not administered to 4 year
  olds
• Spatial Memory

31
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)

• Phase 2 Multiple Regression Results
• Another POWERFUL FACTOR predicted Reading for 5
  and 6 year olds and Spelling for 6 year olds
• Phoneme Segmentation Speed - not administered to
  4 year olds
• Balance Factor was less powerful and predicted
  Reading performance for 4 year olds and Spelling
  for 5 year olds

32
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)

• Phase 2 Results
• Predictive Subtests in Factor 1 (Visual Verbal
  Correspondence)
• Letter Knowledge Upper Case Letter Total
• Letter Knowledge Lower Case Letter Total
• Letter Sound Array Total Number Fully Correct
• Alliteration Total Score
• Alliteration Oddity Total Score
• Phonetic Spelling Total Score

33
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)

• Phase 2 Results
• Predictive Subtests in Factor 2 (Rhyme/Memory)
• Rhyme Recognition 1 Total Score
• Timed Rhyme Generation Average number of
  generated Items
• Digit Span Forward Total Score
• Non-Word Repetition Total Score
• Rhyme Recognition Oddity Total Score

34
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)

• Phase 2 Results
• Predictive Subtests in Factor 3 (Phoneme
  Segmentation)
• Non-Word Reading Total Score
• Phoneme Deletion Final Consonant Real Word
  Remaining Number Correct Within Time
• Initial Phoneme Deletion Initial Consonant
  Cluster Number Correct Within Time
• Final Phoneme Deletion Non-Word Remaining
  Number Correct Within Time

35
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)

• Phase 2 Results
• Predictive Subtests in Factor 4 (Phoneme
  Segmentation Speed)
• Phoneme Deletion Final Consonant Real Word
  Remaining Average Time
• Initial Phoneme Deletion Initial Consonant
  Cluster Average Time
• Final Phoneme Deletion Non-Word Remaining
  Average Time

36
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)

• Phase 2 Results
• Predictive Subtests in Factor 5 (Spatial Memory)
• Spatial Memory Test 1 Forward Total Score
• Finger Localisation Hand Hidden Single Finger
  Touched
• Finger Localisation Hand Hidden Two Fingers
  Touched
• Copy Test Total Score
• Squirrel Memory Forward Total Score For All
  Levels
• Squirrel Memory Reverse Total Score For All
  Levels

37
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)

• Phase 2 Results
• Predictive Subtests in Factor 6 (Motor Speed)
• Dowel Placing Test 1 Speed of Dowel Placement
• RAN Objects Total Score
• RAN Digits Test Total Score

38
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)

• Phase 2 Results
• Predictive Subtests in Factor 7 (Balance)
• Balance Test Total One Foot Dual Task Score
• Balance Test Total One Foot Balance Single Task

39
6. TEST2r - phases of development and
findings (contd)

• Conclusions from Phase 2

• TEST2r
• Significantly predicted literacy difficulties up
  to 6 years post initial screening
• At least one-third of those who experienced
  difficulties could have been predicted 6 years
  earlier
• Prediction was independent of intelligence
• Explained all the variability in literacy
  performance associated with attendance in DEIS
  and non DEIS schools
• Can be used to screen Junior Infants, Senior
  Infants, 1st Class

40
7. TEST2r EAST Future Work Phase 3

• Produce publisher quality subtests
• Fieldwork Test/Re-test reliability study
• Short term validation using Drumcondra Test of
  Early Literacy (D-TELS)
• Reduced number of subtests

41
7. TEST2r EAST Future Work Phase 3
(contd)

• To achieve these objectives
• Collaborate with 200 volunteer early years or
  Learning Support teachers nationally who will
  receive training in the reasons for literacy
  acquisition and failure and training in test
  administration protocols.

42
7. TEST2r EAST Future Work Phase 3
(contd)

• Once identified as at risk for literacy
  failure, what to do for the child?
• Each subtest is a signpost to intervention
• Existing resources identified
• Others resources developed

43
7. TEST2r future work Phase 3 EAST
(contd)

• TEST2r
• Early Assessment Support for Literacy Teaching
• Early screening and diagnostic tests
• Teachers Guide (traditional and interactive
• signposts for intervention)
• Online facility
• Local clusters of expertise
• Online support platform

44
Acknowledgements

• ILSA for funding throughout Phases 12
• DES for funding Phase 2
• INTO and participating primary teachers
• Retired teachers network
• Prof Ray Fuller, School of Psychology, Trinity
  College Dublin
• Dr Michael Gormley, School of Psychology, Trinity
  College Dublin
• Dr Therese McPhillips, St Patricks College,
  Drumcondra
• Dr Donal McAnaney
• The Blackrock Education Centre, Co Dublin
• The Education Centres of - Athlone, Cork,
  Drumcondra, Enniscorthy, Limerick, Sligo
• 200 National Schools and their principals
• Sessional Psychologists and their Supervisors
• 1041 children and their parents
• Reads of Nassau Street (printers)
• Maeve Heffernan Project Co-Ordinator
• Special thanks to Dr Seamus Cannon Mr Pat
  Seaver Blackrock Education Centre

45
The availability of an Early Screening Test
which is valid and reliable makes everybody in
the educational community a winner. Children and
families are helped, teachers are empowered,
schools are more efficient, budgets are reduced
and literacy is raised. TEST2r will soon be
available thanks to children and their parents,
teachers and their schools and all stakeholders
involved in this project. Any teacher who wishes
to be involved in the final phase of this project
can register their interest at -
pauline_mcogan_at_hotmail.com or at mobile number
[phone] or the sign-up sheet as your
expression of interest
46
References
Brooks, G. (2007). What works for pupils with
literacy difficulties? The effectiveness of
intervention schemes (3rd ed.) London Department
for Children, Schools and Families. See also
www.interventionsforliteracy.org.uk Carter L.F.
(1984). The Sustaining Effects Study of
Compensatory and Elementary Education.
Educational Researcher, 13(7), 4
13. Clerehugh, J., Hart, K., Pither, R., Rider,
K., Turner, K. (1991). Early Years Easy
Screener (EYES). Windsor, Berks
NFER-Nelson. Denton, C.A., Vaughn, S.
Fletcher, J.M. (2003). Bringing Research-Based
Practice in Reading Intervention to Scale.
Learning Disabilities Research Practice, 18(3),
pp.201 Department of Education and Science
(2000). Guidelines for Learning Support. Dublin
Government Publications. Department of Education
and Science (2001). Report of the Task Force on
Dyslexia. Government Publications Office,
Dublin Department of Education and Science
(2003) SpEd 24/03 Allocation of Resources for
Pupils with Special Needs in Primary
Schools Department of Education and Skills,
(2011). Literacy and numeracy for learning and
life The national strategy to improve literacy
and numeracy among children and young people
2011-2020. Dublin Government Publications. Educa
tion of Persons with Special Educational Needs
(EPSEN) Act (2004) Government Publications
Office, Dublin Educational Research Centre. 
(2010). Drumcondra Test of Early Literacy Scoring
Booklet.  Dublin Author. Educational Research
Centre.  (2010). Drumcondra Test of Early
Literacy Administration and Technical Manual. 
Dublin Author. Gough, P., and Juel, C. (1987).
The first stages of word recognition. Unpublished
manuscript. University of Texas at Austin.
47
Hannavy, S. (1993). The Middle Infant Screening
Test(MIST) and Forward Together Programme NFER
Nelson. Hatcher, Hulme, Miles, Carrol, Gibbs,
Smith, Bowyer-Crane Snowling (2006) MacLagan,
F. (2001). Theory and Intervention A Complete
Analysis for Children With Learning Difficulties.
University of Sheffield. Spelmanm B, and McHugh
B (1994) BIAP (Belfield Infant Assessment
Profile) Muter, V. (2003). Early Reading
Development and Dyslexia Whurr. National
Council for Curriculum and Assessment (2005)
Towards a Framework for Early Learning Final
Consultation Report. Available at
http//www.ncca.ie/en/Publications/Reports/Towards
_a_Framework_for_Early_Learning_Final_Consultation
_Report.pdf National Council for Special
Education. (2006). Implementation Report Plan
for the Phased Implementation of The EPSEN Act
2004.Assessment in Primary School 2005
Supporting Assessment in School Dublin
Stationery Office. Nicolson R. I., and Fawcett
A.J (1996). The Dyslexia Early Screening Test
(DEST2). The Psychological Corporation Nicolson
R. I., and Fawcett A.J (2004). The Dyslexia
Early Screening Test (DEST-2). The Psychological
Corporation Nicolson, R. I., Fawcett, A. J.,
Moss, H., Nicolson, M. K., Reason, R. (1999).
Early reading intervention can be effective and
cost-effective. British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 69(1), 47-62. Singleton, C., Horne,
J., Thomas, K., Leesdale, R. (2003). Lucid
Rapid Dyslexia Screening. Beverly, East
Yorkshire Lucid Research Limited. Strag, G.A.
(1972). Comparative behavioural ratings of
parents with severe mentally retarded, special
learning disability and normal children. Journal
of Learning Disabilities 5 52 - 56