McCloskey - Advanced Interpretation of The WISC-V and Executive Functions

Advanced Interpretation of the
WISC-V and Executive Functions
George McCloskey, Ph.D.

Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine
[email protected]
[email protected]
1
Questions about Intelligence
 What is Intelligence?
 Why do you assess intelligence?
 What theoretical model guides your
interpretation of intelligence test
results?
 What type of mindset do you apply
to intelligence testing?
2
Contemporary
Intellectual
Assessment
Edited by
Dawn P.
Flanagan
And
Patti L.
Harrison
3
 Do you believe it is possible to

raise a child’s FSIQ from 70 to
100 through intervention?
 Can it be done in 6 months? A
year? Two years?
4
5
Ability Deficits
• The conventional wisdom regarding
ability deficits represents a fixed
mindset.
• What is needed is a new perspective
that embraces a growth mindset.
• A growth mindset suggests that
abilities are not innate; they can be
changed.
6
From Ability to Skill
The most critical shifts in

educational thinking involve:
1) engendering a strong
belief in the growth
mindset that asserts that
ability IS malleable.
7
2) implementing and
refining the techniques
needed to change
abilities into skills so that
they are taught instead of
merely measured.
8
Marzano, Pickering & Pollock
provided a blueprint for turning
abilities into skills in their book
“Classroom Instruction That
Works: Research-based
Strategies for Increasing Student
Achievement.” (2001)
9
Marzano, Pickering
& Pollock (2001)
10
2nd Edition
Dean, Hubbell,
Pitler, & Stone
(2012)
11
Strategies discussed include:

– Teaching Similarities
and Differences
– Teaching Hypothesis
Testing
– Teaching Vocabulary 12
If these research-based
strategies have been shown to
work, why would it not be
commonplace to expect to be
able to increase “verbal
ability” with good teaching
practices?
Martin’s WISC Score Changes
11/2010 4/2013 9/2015
FSIQ 70 99 103
GAI 83 105 108
VCI 73 95 106
PRI/FRI 94 117 112
VSI -- -- 111
WMI/AWMI 62 97 94
PSI 68 85 98
Martin’s Achievement Score Changes
11/2010 4/2013 9/2015

Wd Reading 71 94 98
Wd Decoding 81 97 98
Rdg Fluency 66 95 100
Rdg Comp -- 87 82
Rdg Vocab -- 93 112

WISC-V: 4 Levels of Interpretation
 FULL SCALE
 PRIMARY INDEX SCALES
 ANCILLARY INDEX SCALES
 COMPLIMENTARY INDEX SCALES

WISC-V 4 Levels of Interpretation
• It is important to note that the 4

level interpretation model is not a
theoretically-based model and
does not necessarily reflect a
specific meaningful hierarchy for
guiding interpretation.
17
WISC-V
What is General
Ability and why do
we assess it ?
18
WISC-V
What’s so “Full”
about the FSIQ?
19
FSIQ Interpretation
• The FSIQ is not really a score
based on the Full Scale (all 21
subtests).
• The FSIQ is based on a sampling of
behavior from each of five sub-
domains: verbal comprehension
(2), fluid reasoning (2),
visualpatial (1), working memory
(1) and processing speed (1).
20
FSIQ Interpretation
• The FSIQ is intended to be a measure of
general intelligence.
• In many instances, general intelligence is
considered to be synonymous with the
construct of “g”
• Controversy can occur regarding what type
of tasks should be included in a g
measure: a full range of sampling of
possible intellectual domains or a
concentrated sampling of high g loaded
domains.
21
WISC-V
What is g?
22
g and Psychometrics
• Spearman identified g based on his work
with the correlation of results of different
tests of mental abilities.
• In all analyses, a single factor emerged
that reflected the positive relationship
among all tests of mental abilities.
• While the existence of g is not
controversial, there is no consensus on
what causes the pattern of test
correlations that produces g.
23
Jensen on “g” and Intelligence
• “…task complexity and the amount of

conscious mental manipulation required
seem to be the most basic determinants
of the g loading of a task. If we distill
this summary generalization still further,
the amount of conscious mental
manipulation set off by the input would
seem to be the crucial element.”
• A.R. Jensen. (1998). The g Factor, p.
232.
24
What do Intelligence Tests Measure?
• It is important to note that neither

of the concepts of general
intelligence nor “g” were intended
to be used to guide clinical practice.
In fact, early intelligence
researchers eschewed the idea of
general intelligence tests.
25
Spearman on general intelligence
“As for the prevalent procedure of throwing a

miscellaneous collection of tests indiscriminately
into a single pool this-whether or not justifiable by
the theory which gave birth to it-certainly cannot
be justified simply by claiming that the results give
a “general level,” and “average,” or even a
“sample.” No genuine averaging, or sampling, of
anybody’s abilities is made, can be made, or even
has really been attempted. When Binet borrowed
the idea of such promiscuous pooling, he carried it
into execution with a brilliancy that perhaps no
other living man could have matched. But on the
theoretical side, he tried to get away too cheaply.
And this is the main cause of all the present
trouble.” (1927, p.70-71)
26
Spearman on Global IQ
“… let us compare a person’s mental measurement (his intelligence quotient”

or “IQ”) as based on averaging or sampling with his record in any other
sphere of activity, say that of sports. Suppose some lad to be the champion of
his school in the 100 yards race, the ¼ mile, the ½ mile, and also in the high
and broad jumps. Could all this be taken as a representative sample of his
sporting ability in general? So far as here indicated, he might perform very
badly indeed in countless other branches of sport, such as cricket, lawn
tennis, shooting, baseball, rowing, putting the weight, riding, mountaineering
or flying. And even if he were to be measured in every one of these also, how
could the result be pooled into any sort of average? Shall all sports mainly
dependent on the “eye” as cricket, tennis, billiards, etc. be reckoned as one
ability? Or as a myriad?... In a rough way, no doubt, a person can be said to
have had much success at such sports as he has attempted. But there appears
no serious prospect of calculating his “S.Q.” to several places of decimals,
and then piling upon this result a mass of higher mathematics.” (1927, p. 69).
27
Wechsler on Intelligence and FSIQ
“If the different tests were taken to represent generically
different entities, one could no more add the values assigned
to them in order to obtain an [IQ] than one could add 2 dogs,
3 cats and 4 elephants, and expect the unqualified answer of
9. That, of course, does not mean that their addition is
impossible. If instead of being concerned with the
characteristics of the dog, the cat and the elephant, which
differentiate them from one another, we restrict our interest
to those which they all have in common, we can say that 2
dogs, 3 cats and 4 elephants make 9 animals. The reason we
can get an answer of 9 here is because dogs, cats and
elephants are in fact all animals. The addition would no
longer be possible if for cats we were to substitute turnips.”
Wechsler, D. (1958). The Measurement and Appraisal of Adult
Intelligence, p. 7
Interpretive Level 1:
Full Scale
Similarities
Vocabulary Naming Speed
Information Literacy
Comprehension Naming Speed
Matrix Reasoning Quantity
Full Figure Weights
Picture Concepts Immediate
Scale Symbol Translation
Arithmetic
IQ Delayed
Block Design
Symbol Translation
Visual Puzzles Recognition
Digit Span Symbol Translation
Picture Span
Letter-Number Sequences
Coding
Symbol Search
Cancellation
WISC-V FSIQ vs WJ-IV GIA
WISC-V FSIQ WJ-IV GIA

Similarities Oral Vocabulary
Vocabulary Number Series
Matrix Reasoning Verbal Attention
Figure Weights Letter-Pattern Matching
Block Design Phonological Processing
Digit Span Story Recall
Coding Visualization
30
Jensen on Intelligence
My study of these two symposia and of many other equally
serious attempts to define “intelligence” in purely verbal terms
has convinced me that psychologists are incapable of reaching
a consensus on its definition. It has proved to be a hopeless
quest. Therefore, the term “intelligence” should be discarded
altogether in scientific psychology, just as it discarded “animal
magnetism” and as the science of chemistry discarded
“phlogiston.” “Intelligence” will continue, of course, in
popular parlance and in literary usage, where it may serve a
purpose only because it can mean anything the user intends,
and where a precise and operational definition is not
important.
Largely because of its popular and literary usage, the word
“intelligence” has come to mean too many different things to
many people (including psychologists). It has also become so
fraught with value judgments, emotions, and prejudices as to
render it useless in scientific discussion.”
A.R. Jensen. (1998). The g Factor, p. 48. 31
FSIQ and Clinical Practice
• For clinician’s, the primary question is not
whether general intelligence is a valid
construct.
• The primary question is whether general
intelligence has clinical utility.
• The clinical utility of general intelligence
and “g” is thought to be its predictive
power.
• The greater the complexity of the task,
the greater the predictive power.
32
What Do Intelligence Tests Measure?
The publishers of the WISC-V

emphasize in the Technical and
Interpretation Manual the use of
intelligence test scores to predict
achievement. Other purposes are
mentioned only briefly.
= EF?
34
Executive Functions and Intelligence
Research suggests that measures

of self-control in preschool are
better predictors of later school
achievement than Full Scale IQ
scores.
= EF?
If measures of self-control in
preschool are better predictors of
later school achievement than
Full Scale IQ scores, then why are
we still endorsing the use of
intelligence tests if their primary
purpose is to predict
achievement? = EF?
g and Brain Function
• Spearman: g is equivalent to mental
energy.
• Jensen: g represents individual
differences in the speed and/or
efficiency of the neural processes
associated with mental abilities.
• Wechsler: g is a general property of
overall brain function.
37
What do Intelligence Tests Measure?
“Intelligence tests measure more than mere learning ability

or reasoning ability or even general intellectual ability; in
addition, they inevitably measure a number of other
capacities which cannot be defined as either purely cognitive
or intellective,— abilities heavily loaded with factors like " X "
and "Z" mentioned above. Hitherto, authors of intelligence
scales when recognizing this situation, looked upon these
factors as disturbing elements and tried as far as possible to
eliminate them. Unfortunately, experience has shown that the
more successful one is in excluding these factors, the less
effective are the resulting tests as measures of general
intelligence.” Wechsler, D. (1958). The Measurement and
Appraisal of Adult Intelligence, p. 11
“Wechsler believed that performance on measures of
cognitive ability reflected only a portion of what
intelligence comprises. He defined intelligence as the
“capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think
rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment
(1944, p.3). Wechsler was keenly aware that the results
of factor-analytic studies accounted for only a portion of
intelligence, and he believed that another group of
attributes contributed to intelligent behavior. These
attributes included planning and goal awareness,
enthusiasm, field dependence and independence,
impulsiveness, anxiety, and persistence.”
WISC-V T&I Manual, page 3. = EF?
Spearman (1927) offered this observation about factors
that emerged in his studies of mental abilities:
• “Still another great functional unity has revealed its
existence; this, although not in itself of cognitive
nature, yet has a dominating influence upon all
exercise or even estimation of cognitive ability. On
trying to express it by any current name, perhaps the
least unsatisfactory – though still seriously misleading
– would be “self-control.” It has shown itself to be
chiefly responsible for the fact of one person’s ability
seeming to be more “profound” or more inclined to
“common sense” than that of persons otherwise
equally capable.” P. 413.
= EF?
 The concept of executive

functions is not synonymous
with the traditional concepts of
intelligence or “IQ”
 Executive functions are not
directly assessed with standard
intelligence tests
= EF?
Measuring Executive Functions
with a Reasoning Task
Directions for the Wisconsin

Card Sorting Test (WCST):
I can’t tell you much about
how to do this task. Which of
these do you think this one
goes with? I’ll tell you if your
answer is right or wrong.
= EF?
Neuropsychological Process Approach
to Cognitive Assessment
The ultimate purpose of

psychoeducational assessment is to
enable a clinician to characterize
an individual’s cognitive and
adaptive capacities and academic
skill proficiencies in the most
accurate and effective manner
possible.
43
Transitioning from Intelligence
Testing to Cognitive Assessment
• Replacing the concept of Intelligence with

Cognition
• Recognizing that Cognition is an amalgam of
multiple mental constructs including:
– Attention, Initial Registration/Encoding, Working
Memory
– Long-Term Storage and Retrieval, Executive Functions,
– Language, Visuospatial, Reasoning, Motor Production
• Understanding the role of cognition in
social/emotional functioning and academic skill
development
44
The CHC Model of Intelligence is based on a Narrow
Definition of Intelligence; Intelligence is represented by
the scores from multiple broad ability factors.
Comprehension/
Knowledge
Phonemic Fluid
Processing Reasoning
Processing CHC Visual/

Speed MODEL Spatial
Long Term Short Term

Retrieval Memory
Working
Memory
46
Primary Indexes
Verbal Similarities
Vocabulary
Index Literacy
Information
Naming Speed
Comprehension Quantity
Fluid Reasoning Matrix Reasoning
Index Figure Weights Immediate
Picture Concepts Symbol Translation
Visual Spatial Block Design Delayed
Index Visual Puzzles Symbol Translation
Arithmetic Recognition
Working Memory Digit Span Symbol Translation
Index Picture Span
Processing Coding
Speed
Symbol Search
Index
Cancellation
Ancillary Indexes
Similarities
Figure Weights Quantitative
Picture Concepts Reasoning
Arithmetic Index
Block Design
Immediate
Visual Puzzles
Symbol Translation
Digit Span
Delayed
Picture Span Symbol Translation
Letter-Number Sequences Recognition
Coding Symbol Translation
Symbol Search
Cancellation
Ancillary Indexes
Similarities
Figure Weights
Picture Concepts
Arithmetic Immediate
Block Design Symbol Translation
Visual Puzzles Delayed
Auditory Symbol Translation
Digit Span
Working Recognition
Picture Span Symbol Translation
Memory Letter-Number Sequences
Index Coding
Symbol Search
Cancellation
Complimentary Indexes
Similarities
Naming Speed
Vocabulary
Literacy
Information Naming Speed
Comprehension Index
Naming Speed
Figure Weights
Picture Concepts Storage and Retrieval Index
Arithmetic
Block Design Immediate
Visual Puzzles Symbol Translation Symbol Translation
Digit Span Index
Picture Span Delayed
Symbol Translation
Coding
Recognition
Symbol Search Symbol Translation
Cancellation
Neuropsychological Models Emphasize Multiple
Cognitive Components within Broad Functional
Categories of Cognition
Reasoning
(V, NV, Q)
Language Visual
(R, E, F, S, PA) (Ortho, NV)
Memory NEURO Visual/

(I, WM, LTR) MODEL Spatial
Processing Motor
Speed Functioning
Executive
Functions
WHY NOT? INDEXES
Naming Speed
Similarities Literacy
WHY NOT a Information Quantity
Reasoning Comprehension
Matrix Reasoning
With Verbal Immediate
Figure Weights
Content Picture Concepts Symbol Translation
Index Arithmetic Delayed
(RVI)? Block Design Symbol Translation
Recognition
Visual Puzzles
Symbol Translation
Digit Span
Picture Span
Coding
Symbol Search
Cancellation
WHY NOT? INDEXES
Naming Speed
Similarities Literacy
Information Quantity
Comprehension
Matrix Reasoning
WHY NOT a Figure Weights Immediate
Retrieval from Picture Concepts Symbol Translation
Long-Term Arithmetic Delayed
Storage Block Design Symbol Translation
Recognition
Index Visual Puzzles
Symbol Translation
(RLTI)? Digit Span
Picture Span
Coding
Symbol Search
Cancellation
WISC-V
5 Complementary Subtests
WHY???
Naming Speed Literacy
Naming Speed Quantity
Immediate Symbol Translation

Delayed Symbol Translation
Recognition Symbol Translation
WISC-V
5 Complementary Subtests
WHY???
The following statement(s) appear in the
description of each Complementary subtest:
This subtest was not designed as a measure of
intelligence but as a measure of cognitive
processes…
…associated with academic learning
…related to learning difficulties
…that may be interfering with academic learning
…related to learning
The addition of the 5 complementary
subtests raises important questions
about constructs associated with
thinking:
 What’s the difference between an
ability, a process, and a skill?
 Does intelligence testing involve
assessing abilities, processes or
skills? 56
Interpretive Levels Framework
Global Composite
(Full Scale IQ/GAI Level)
Specific Composite Indexes /

Clinical Clusters Level
Subtest Level
Item Level
Cognitive
Constructs
Level
General Ability Global Composite Level

Model Full Scale IQ/GAI
Specific Composite
Indexes Level
Clinical Clusters Level
Subtest Level
Item Level
Task Specific
Cognitive Capacities Cognitive
Level Neuropsychological
Model
Subtest Level
Item Level
Cognitive
Capacities
Level
Interpretive Levels
The Process Approach requires a

clear understanding of what a task
measures so that performance can
be effectively task analyzed to
characterize a person’s cognitive
capacities as accurately as
possible.
60
Stanislas Dehaene
61
Michael Posner
62
– Naïve: First exposure to the task;
responses required immediately.
– Practiced: Time given to rehearse
responses to the task; responses
delivered after rehearsal period.
64
System 1 – Fast, effortless,
automatic
System 2 – Slow, effortful,

non-automatic
Things that are Taught to Automaticity
in Early Elementary School
 Basic math facts and

multiplication tables
Things that are Taught to Automaticity
in Early Elementary School
 Basic math facts and

multiplication tables
 The alphabet and sight word
recognition
 Graphomotor functioning for quick
handwriting of letters and words
– Novel: Second exposure to the
task, but responses required
immediately to a set of all new items.
– Naïve: First exposure to the task; responses
required immediately; high demand for executive
functions (EFs)
– Practiced: Time given to rehearse responses to
the task; minimal demand for EFs
– Novel: Second exposure to the task, but
responses required immediately to a set of all
new items; moderate demand for Efs
– Source:
Posner, M.I. & Raichle, M.E. (1994). Images of
Mind.
70
Kaplan, E. (1988). A
process approach to
neuropsychological
assessment. In T. Boll &
B.K. Bryant (Eds.)
Clinical neuropsychology
and brain functions:
Research, measurement,
and practice (pp. 125-167).
American Psychological
Association.
71
Subtest/Item Level
Process Approach Example
What’s the difference

between a WISC-IV
Similarities Scaled
Score of 12 and a
WISC-IV Similarities
Scaled Score of 12?
72
Subtest/Item Level
Retrieval of verbal
information from long-term
storage
vs
Reasoning with verbal
information
73
Subtest/Item Level Process Approach
Specific Behavior Observation

Examples will be provided in the
Neuropsychological Approach to
WISC-V Interpretation Chapter
(McCloskey, et. al.) in Essentials
of WISC-V Assessment (spring
2016).
74
Subtest/Item Level
What Does Block Design

Measure?
Consider the following quote from
John Carroll (Human Cognitive
Abilities, 1993, page 309) :
75
76
Subtest/Item Level
What Does WISC/WAIS Block Design Measure?

“…difficulty in factorial classification arises
from the fact that most spatial test tasks,
even the “simplest,” are actually quite
complex, requiring apprehension and
encoding of spatial forms, consideration and
possibly mental manipulations of these
forms, decisions about comparisons of other
aspects of the stimuli, and making a
response – often under the pressure of being
required to respond quickly.” 77
What Does Block Design Measure?
From Carroll’s description, Block

Design can be measuring at least 5
distinct cognitive processes:
 Visual perception and discrimination
 Reasoning with visual stimuli
 Visualization (optional)
 Motor dexterity
 Speed of motor response
78
Measuring Problem-Solving or Executive
Functions with a Block Design Task
Who will have the best Block Design score?
16 20 22 79
What Does Block Design
Measure?
Raw Score 56 56 43
80
Scaled Score
14 14 10
From Carroll’s description of Block
Design, which of the 5 distinct
cognitive processes do you think
Subject 3 lacked?
• Visual perception and discrimination
• Reasoning with visual stimuli
• Visualization (optional)
• Motor dexterity
• Speed of motor response
81
The Process Approach to Analysis of Block Design
Consider the following quote from Carroll (1993, p. 309):
…considerable confusion exists about the identification of factors
in the domain of visual perception… Some sources of confusion
are very real, and difficult to deal with. This is particularly true of
confusion arising from the fact that test takers apparently can
arrive at answers and solutions – either correct or incorrect
ones – by a variety of different strategies. French (1965)
demonstrated that different “cognitive styles” can cause wide
variation in factor loadings; some of his most dramatic cases had
to do with spatial tests, as where a sample of subjects who
reported “systematizing” their approach to the Cubes test yielded
a large decrease of the loading of this test on a Visualization factor
(that is, decreased correlations of Cubes with other spatial tests),
as compared to a sample where subjects did not report
systematizing. It has been shown (Kyllonen, Lohman, & Woltz,
1984), that subjects can employ different strategies even for
different items within the same test. Lohman et al. (1987) have
discussed this problem of solution strategies, even rendering the
judgment that factor-analytic methodology is hardly up to the task
of dealing with it because a basic assumption of factor analysis is
82
that factorial equations are consistent over subjects.
Carroll’s description leaves out a

critical 6th cognitive process, or
group of processes, essential for
effective performance of Block
Design – the ability to initiate,
focus, sustain, coordinate/balance,
and monitor the use of the other
cognitive processes – i.e., Executive
Function processes.
83
An appropriate statement regarding the

performance of the third subject would
be:
“John’s superior capacity for problem-
solving with nonverbal visual material
was applied inconsistently resulting in
a Block Design Subtest Score in the
average range.”
84
Identifying Task Component Constructs
 An Information Processing Model

provides a theoretical framework for
understanding cognition and its role in
learning.
 An information processing model
represents a dynamic model of
cognition rather than a taxonomy of
cognitive abilities.
85
Motor Output
indicate
Executive
Functions
at work
Long-Term
Memory Lexicons
Mental
Representations
Active
Working
Memory Processing
pattern detail
Attention
Initial
Registration kinesthetic
Sensory
Memory
Sensory Input 86
Motor Output
indicate
Executive
Functions
at work
Long-Term
Memory Lexicons
Mental
Representation
Active
Working
Memory Processing
pattern detail
Attention
Initial
Registration kinesthetic
Sensory
Memory
Sensory Input 87
Process Approach Summary
• Subtests/tasks involve more than one Cognitive
Process.
• The format of the task can greatly affect
performance levels.
• Processing preferences and strategy selection can
greatly affect performance levels.
• The cognitive processes involved in performing a
task often vary based on the age, cognitive capacity,
and strategy selection of the examinee.
• To truly understand a person’s performance, you
must know not just the score obtained, but how the
person performed the task to obtain the score. 88
WISC-V VCI
VCI Subtests:
Similarities (SI)
Vocabulary (VC)
Information (IN)
Comprehension (CO)
89
What do VCI Subtests assess?
Assess multiple component processes:

– Auditory Discrimination (ALL)
– Language Comprehension (ALL)
– Reasoning (most likely to be assessed only by S, C)
– Verbal Knowledge Store (V, I, S*)
– Free Recall Retrieval from Long-Term (Recent or
Remote) Storage (V, I)
– “On Demand” Retrieval Efficiency (Word-Finding
Ability) (I, V)
– Expressive Language Ability (V, S, C, I*)
90
VCI and Academic and Job Performance
 V, I, and S all reflect verbal abilities that act as

constraints on understanding and depth of
processing of information in the classroom;
participation in discussions and written expression
production all can suffer when these are weak.
 Performance with math can be constrained by lack
of verbal abilities when instructional approaches
emphasize verbal presentation and discussion of
quantitative concepts.
 S and C often reflect reasoning with verbal
information capacities that act as constraints on
verbal comprehension when listening or when
reading.
91
What Does Similarities Measure?
 Similarities can be an effective measure of
reasoning with verbal concepts provided
the person:
 has not already learned and stored the
conceptual relationships, making them
available for retrieval from long-term storage
 perceives the task to be a measure of
reasoning and engages reasoning processes
when responding
 The speed and content of response can be
important indicators of whether or not
reasoning ability is being used to respond.
92
What Does Vocabulary Measure?
 Vocabulary is primarily a measure of

retrieval of verbal information from
lexicons (long-term knowledge stores), not
a measure of reasoning ability.
 The critical question that must be asked
when assessing vocabulary knowledge: Is
the ability to explain the meaning of
words equivalent to the abilities of
comprehending or using those same words
in natural contexts? In other words, does
format matter when assessing verbal
abilities such as vocabulary knowledge? 93
Does Format Matter in Assessment?
The task input format, the internal

processing demands (primarily
represented by different long-term
storage retrieval demands) and the
output format all impact on
performance and can produce highly
variable results for any given person,
even those from the “general”
population.
94
What Does Information Measure?
 Earliest items emphasize common knowledge

easily learned outside of formal educational
sources.
 Most items emphasize knowledge related to
specific topics typically addressed in school (or
in televised educational programs on networks
like TLC, Discovery, History Channel, Science
Channel, PBS, CNN, etc)
 Items can be categorized by content areas (e.g.,
History, biology, literature, geography).
95
Process-Oriented Analysis of
Verbal Responses
 Observe speed of lexical access as reflected in
speed of responses
 Observe organization of verbal storage as
reflected in type of response (direct, specific vs
nonspecific, rambling, etc.)
 Observe quality of verbal expression
(grammar/syntax of responses, vocabulary use,
prosody, quality of ideas, organization of
thought
 Observe effects of executive function demands
 Observe concrete vs abstract language use
 Process test the effects of shaping and/or
cueing on responses
96
WISC-V FRI
FRI Subtests:
– Matrix Reasoning (MR)
– Figure Weights (FW)
– Picture Concepts (PCn)
– Arithmetic (AR)
97
Fluid Reasoning Index (FRI)
It is clinically important to make the

distinction between nonverbal
reasoning and reasoning with
nonverbal visual material. Nonverbal
reasoning implies that language is not
being used to perform a task. Use of
visual stimuli as input for a task
provides no guarantee that the person
will process the task without the use
of language abilities.
98
FRI & Academic Performance
Although some research has

identified a correlation between
Fluid Reasoning scores and Reading
Comprehension. It is important to
note that the abilities most likely to
be assessed by the FRI tasks, are not
effective measures of the cognitive
processes that most constrain the
development and/or use of reading
and writing skills in the classroom.
99
Fluid Reasoning and Processing Speed
 Speed of information processing is a

major factor in Figure Weights.
 Item level performance on MR, FW and
PCn can be timed to help understand a
person’s cognitive processing approach to
these tasks.
100
Role of Executive Functions
• MR, PCn and FW all require

direction of attention to detail
and inhibition of impulsive
responding as well as monitoring
and checking responses and
efficient management of time.
101
What Does Matrix Reasoning Measure?
 Visual Perception and Discrimination

 Visual Analysis and Organization
 Attention to Visual Details
 Nonverbal AND/OR Verbal Abstract
Reasoning Abilities and Concept Formation
 Working Memory also likely to be involved
 Speed of visual processing can be observed
by process-oriented assessment technique
(time performance on each item)
102
What Does Figure Weights Measure?

 Quantitative and/or Nonverbal
and/or Verbal Analogical Reasoning
Abilities and Concept Formation
103
What Does Figure Weights Measure?
 Working Memory is highly likely to be

involved for more difficult items
 Speed of visual processing may play a
significant role (30 second time limit per
item)
 Speed of visual processing can be
observed by process-oriented assessment
technique (time performance on each
item)
104
What Does Picture Concepts Measure?
• Visual Analog to Similarities

• Reasoning either nonverbally or verbally,
without demand for verbal explanation of
response.
• Increased frequency of use of verbal mediation
with increased age is highly likely.
• Consider age and reasoning processes applied by
child when interpreting performance.
• Fluid reasoning measure that correlates well
with MR.
• Creative responses scored as incorrect a
possible but not very probable event.
105
What Does Arithmetic Measure?
 Arithmetic is a complex task requiring

multitasking of several mental capacities
including:
 Initial registration of auditorily presented stimuli
 Attention to details
 Quantitative Problem-solving ability
 Retrieval of math knowledge from long term
storage (facts and/or procedures)
 Use of working memory resources to set-up
problems and complete calculations in mind
 Executive Function coordination of multitasking
106
FRI: Academic Performance
 MR and FW most closely reflect application of reasoning

abilities that act as constraints on understanding and
depth of processing of information in classrooms when
nonverbal visual conceptualization and/or nonverbal
quantification is emphasized. This is most likely to occur
in courses involving math, science, engineering,
architecture and visual design.
 Performance in math can be constrained by lack of
nonverbal reasoning abilities when teaching approaches
emphasize nonverbal presentation and assessment of
quantitative concepts.
 MR, FW and PCn may be assessing complex visual
processing abilities that can act as constraints on learning
when visual materials are used in instruction.
107
WISC-V VSI
VSI Subtests:
– Block Design (BD)
– Visual Puzzles (VP)
108
Visual Spatial Index (VSI)
The VSI reduces the demand for

reasoning with visual information and
increases the demand for effective
visual perception and discrimination
capacities applied with speed.
Because they do not use orthographic
images (letters or numbers), they do
not directly relate to basic reading
and writing skills and often do not
play a role in early rote math
learning.
109
VSI & Academic Performance
It is important to note that the

abilities most likely to be assessed
by the VSI tasks are not effective
measures of the cognitive processes
that most constrain the development
and/or use of reading and writing
skills in the classroom and may not
necessarily constrain performance
with math.
110
Visual Tasks and Processing Speed
 Speed of information processing is a

major factor in performance only for VP
at all ages.
 Speed can be a factor in performance of
BD for older children.
 Item level performance on VP can be
timed to help understand a person’s
cognitive processing approach to this
task.
111
 Visual perception and discrimination

 Reasoning with visual stimuli
 Visualization (optional)
 Motor dexterity
 Speed of motor response
 Executive functions involved in
strategy generation, balancing
pattern and detail, monitoring
performance and correcting errors 112
Block Design Process Scores
 BDn (no time bonus),

 BDp (correct blocks placed),
 BDde (occurrence of broken
configuration),
 Bdre (occurrence of reversals)
113
What Does Visual Puzzles Measure?

 Spatial Visualization and Organization
 Nonverbal and/or Verbal Abstract Reasoning
Abilities may be applied but not required
 Working Memory also may be involved
 Speed of visual processing plays a significant
role (30 second time limit per item)
114
Role of Executive Functions
• BD requires complex EF direction

of performance.
• BD, MR, VP, PCn and FW all
require direction of attention to
detail and inhibition of impulsive
responding as well as monitoring
and checking responses and
efficient management of time.
115
WISC-V WMI /AWMI
WMI Subtests:
– Digit Span (DS)
– Picture Span (PS)
– Letter-Number Sequences
(LNS)
116
Working Memory Index (WMI)
The WMI combines an immediate

visual memory task with an
immediate/working memory
auditory memory task.
The different formats of the two
working memory subtests
necessitates interpretation at the
subtest level.
117
WISC-V Changes: Digit Span
Subtest Level Changes:

•Digit Span Subtest item
content revised:
A third item type has
been added- Digit
Sequencing
118
What Does Digit Span Measure?
 Digit Span is an aggregate measure;

 DS Forward assesses initial registration and
repetition of stimuli (immediate memory)
 DS Backward assesses working memory
applied to initially registered information.
 DS Sequencing assesses working memory
applied to initially registered information
along with sequencing capacity
 Separate Scaled Scores are provided for
all three DS tasks
119
What Does Picture Span Measure?
 Picture Span assesses the ability to

initially register and hold for
approximately 6-10 seconds visually
presented images of common objects
 Picture span can be processed as a visual
memory task or verbally mediated and
processed through, and rehearsed in, the
articulatory loop, thereby transforming
it into an immediate verbal memory
task.
120
What Does Picture Span Measure?
 Picture Span does not use orthographic

stimuli (letters and/or numbers) thereby
reducing or negating its connection with
cognitive processes that most constrain
the development and/or use of reading
and writing skills in the classroom.
 Picture Span may provide useful
information related to academic tasks
that require the initial registration and
holding of nonverbal visual information.
121
What Does Letter-Number Sequencing Measure?
 Letter-Number Sequencing
 Assesses initially registering, holding and
manipulating in working memory auditorily
presented verbal information
 Directions provide the child with a strategy
for making the random series more
contextually meaningful; for some children,
this results in improvements over Digit Span
performance
 Revised scoring prevents a child who only
repeats the series verbatim to earn a scaled
score of 10 (now earns only a 5)
122
AWMI and Academic Performance
Working Memory abilities applied

to verbal information act as
constraints on many classroom
learning activities including
listening, written expression,
note-taking, test-taking, math
problem-solving, and reading
comprehension.
123
Accounting for Variability in Working Memory
Subtest Performance: DSB > DSF
Although neuropsychologically speaking

it is impossible to actually be more
capable with DSB than with DSF, many
referred children do in fact correctly
repeat more digits backwards than
forwards.
The clinical question to be posed is
why the child did not perform up to
their capacity on DSF.
124
Subtest Performance: DSB > DSF
Reasonable hypotheses for

DSB >DSF performance involve
limitations of executive
function processes, in particular
difficulties with initiation and
modulation of effort.
125
Subtest Performance: Subtest Profiles
Although memory process tasks can be

ordered from least complex to most
complex, it is not true that this
ordering reflects a hierarchy of
constraints on task performance.
Many children show varied performance
profiles that do not conform to the
task complexity hierarchy.
126
DSF, DSB, DSS and LNS are more

likely to be problematic than AR
for a child with sequencing
problems. In these cases, material
might all be encoded and
manipulated intact, but the final
sequence of the response is not
accurate.
127
Example:
It is just as likely to find:
AR > LNS > DS
As it is to find:
DS > LNS > AR
128
In the case of
AR > LNS > DS
and
DS > LNS > AR
Tasks are ordered in terms of the
amount of context provided for the
performance of the memory task.
129
DSF DSB and DS Sequencing can be

more difficult than LNS for persons with
sequencing problems because there is
no contextual basis for the ordering of
the numbers.
LNS offers two modestly contextual
bases to guide performance; the order
of the alphabet and the order of
numbers.
130
 The more instruction requires literal, rote

skill for registering information exactly as
presented– like digit span – the more a
person with the AR > LNS >DS profile is
likely to struggle.
 The more instruction incorporates
meaningful context for cueing and guiding
manipulation of information in working
memory, the better a person with the
 AR > LNS >DS profile is likely to perform.
131
Person’s exhibiting a pronounced

AR > LNS > DS pattern are more
likely to be strong with classroom and
workplace memory tasks when a
strong context is provided for the
processing of the task.
132
Person’s exhibiting a pronounced

DS > LNS > AR pattern are more likely
to be strong with classroom and work
place memory tasks that are short, rote
and list-like in nature.
133
It is likely that children exhibiting a

pronounced DS > LNS > AR
pattern are at greater risk of
struggling with meaningful
classroom learning than are children
who demonstrate a pronounced
AR > LNS > DS pattern.
134
WISC-V PSI
PSI Subtests:
– Coding (CD)
– Symbol Search (SS)
– Cancellation (CA)
135
Processing Speed Index (PSI)
 Assesses multiple component processes:
 Processing Speed and Processing Accuracy
 Graphomotor Skill (Cd)
 Executive direction of focusing and sustaining
attention and effort and monitoring
performance
 Executive Coordination of Visual Skills, Motor
Skills, Speed, and Accuracy (Cd)
136
137
138
139
140
What Does Cancellation Measure?

 Processing Speed
 Processing Accuracy
 Inhibition of impulsive responding
 Executive Coordination of Visual Skills, Speed,
Inhibition and Accuracy
 Performance likely to be enhanced by the use
of working memory
 Visual Search Efficiency can be assessed with
process-oriented technique (number of
seconds required per line of symbols; number
and type of errors)
141
PSI and Academic Performance
 Processing Speed abilities applied to

nonverbal visual information might act as
constraints on some classroom learning
activities such as note-taking, test-taking,
math problem-solving, and written
expression.
 Processing speed tasks are most effective
as measures of capacity for sustained
attention and effort.
142
A relatively low score on the

Coding Subtest frequently co-
occurs with low scores on
written expression assessments
and poor production on written
expression classroom and
homework assignments.
143
It is important to note that visual

processing speed with nonverbal visual
material is not necessarily reflective of
visual processing speed with orthographic
codes (letters, words, numbers). Tasks
specific to reading, such as Rapid
Automatic Naming and paragraph reading
speed need to be used to assess visual
processing speed in reading and alphabet
writing and sentence copying tasks are
better indicators of grapho-motor
functioning.
144
What Does the PSI Measure?
• Coding and Symbol Search measure
distinctly different task component
processes in addition to a common core of
processing speed with visual nonverbal
material.
• Performance on Coding and Symbol Search
frequently vary by more than 3 scaled score
points (Cd > SS 15%; SS > Cd 15%) and should
be interpreted separately in these
instances.
145
Accounting for Variability in PSI
Subtest Performance
• Coding requires multitasking requiring
continuous motor production while
processing associations from a code key.
• This multi-tasking effort must be
coordinated by executive functions
involving focusing and sustaining
attention and effort, pacing and
balancing work effort (speed vs accuracy)
and monitoring for accuracy.
• Coding has predictable elements that can
help to improve performance.
146
Accounting for Variability in PSI
Subtest Performance
 Symbol Search assesses processing speed
applied to a series of unique visual
discrimination tasks with only a minor motor
response component.
 Every symbol search item is a unique task
requiring attention to new visual details.
 Executive functions are required to direct
focusing and sustaining attention and effort,
pacing and balancing work effort (speed vs
accuracy) and monitoring for accuracy.
147
Process Interpretation of PSI Tasks
The most effective way to

assess the use of executive
functions in directing the
focusing and sustaining of
attention and effort is through
the use of 15 or 30 second
interval task performance
recording.
148
Interval Recording:
0 – 30 31 – 60 61 – 90 91 – 120
0-15 16-30 31-45 46-60 61-75 76-90 91-105 106-120
Typical performance on both Coding and

Symbol Search reflects steady, consistent
attention and effort, with only slight
improements or declines in the final 30
seconds. 149
Interval Recording:
Patterns that deviate substantially
are often indicative of difficulties
with executive direction of
attention and effort, regardless of
level of scaled score performance.
150
Interval Recording:
Examples of clinically relevant patterns of
performance:
0 – 30 31 – 60 61 – 90 91 – 120
151
Memory processes are not

required to perform either
Coding or Symbol Search, but
memory processes can be
recruited for the performance of
both of these tasks if the persons
chooses to engage them.
152
Memory processes can be used to learn the

code associations in Coding and to hold
visual images during comparisons on
Symbol Search. Choosing to use memory
processes to help perform these tasks
reflects the use of executive functions to
alter test taking strategy.
Use of memory processes for these tasks
does not, however, guarantee
improvement in performance.
153
WISC-V
Complementary Subtests:
– Naming Speed Literacy
(NSL))
– Naming Speed Quantity
(NSQ)
154
WISC-V
Complementary Subtests:
– Naming Speed Literacy
(NSL))
– Naming Speed Quantity
(NSQ)
155
Thoughts
EFs Perceptions
Emotions Actions
Key Concept
Executive Functions:
 Directive capacities of the mind
 Multiple in nature, not a single
capacity
 Part of neural circuits that are
routed through the frontal lobes
 Cue the use of other mental
capacities
 Direct and control perceptions,
thoughts, actions, and to some
degree emotions
EF as the Conductor of the Brain’s
Orchestra (i.e., EF as “g”)
EF
Executive Functions Are Not a Unitary Trait
Appropriate Metaphors for Executive

Functions:
 The conductor and section
leaders of the mind’s Orchestra
 The management structure of a
multinational mind corporation
 The coaching staff of team mind
Key Concept
Executive
Functions cue
and direct in
different ways at
different levels.
160
Co-Conductors in a Holarchical Model of EF
EF
Trans-Self Integration
EF Self-Generation
Self-Realization ef ef Self-Determination
ef ef ef ef ef ef ef ef
ef ef
ef ef ef ef ef ef ef ef ef
ef
Self-Regulation
Self-Activation Activation
EF
Trans-Self Integration
EF Self-Generation
Self-Realization ef ef Self-Determination
ef ef
ef
Self-Regulation
Self-Activation Activation
Domains of Functioning Directed by Executive Functions
Action
Executive control of modes of output
Action including behavior in the external
E world and storage and retrieval of
internal representations
m
Cognition
o Executive control of thoughts
and thought processing
t Cognition
i Perception
o Executive control of modes of
perceptual input including external
n Perception sensory stimuli (visual, auditory,
kinesthetic) and internal
(representational) stimuli
Emotion
Executive control of moods, feelings,
and the processing of emotions
Holarchy vs Hierarchy
Hierarchy
Holarchy
EF Tiers within the Holarchical Model of Executive
Functions EF Trans-Self Integration
Self-Generation
EF
Self-Realization Self-Determination
Self-Awareness Goal setting
ef ef Other-Awareness Long-range Planning &
Self-Analysis Foresight
Self-Regulation
ef ef ef ef ef ef ef
ef
ef ef Perceive Monitor Plan
Focus Correct Evaluate/Compare
ef ef ef ef ef ef ef ef Sustain Balance Decide
ef
Energize Gauge Sense Time
ef ef
Initiate Anticipate Pace
ef ef ef ef ef ef ef
ef Inhibit Estimate Time Sequence
Stop Analyze Execute
Interrupt Generate Hold
Flexible Associate Manipulate
Shift Organize Store
Modulate Prioritize Retrieve
Self-Activation
Self-Activation
33 Self-Regulation EFs
 Perceive  Balance  Prioritize
 Focus  Monitor  Compare/Eval
 Sustain  Correct  Decide
 Energize  Gauge  Sense Time
 Initiate  Anticipate  Pace
 Inhibit  Est Time  Sequence
 Stop  Analyze  Execute
 Interrupt  Generate  Hold
 Flexible  Associate  Manipulate
 Shift  Plan  Store
 Modulate  Organize  Retrieve
Key Concept
It is important to
distinguish between
Executive
Functions
and
Executive
Skills. 167
Self Regulation Executive Functions
Executive Functions involve the part of

the executive network that that is used
to become aware of the need for the
use of executive skills and other mental
capacities and used to cue and direct
the use of the needed
executive skills.
168
Self Regulation Executive Skills
Executive Skills are responsible for

cueing the specific areas of the
brain needed to perform specific
tasks (e.g., attending, inhibiting,
modulating, planning,
organizing,
associating).
169
EF
Executive
Capacities
EF
ef ef
ef ef
Executive ef ef ef ef ef ef ef ef ef
Functions ef ef ef ef ef ef ef ef ef
ef
Executive ef ef
Skills ef ef
Key Concept
Self-regulation
Executive Functions
can be organized
into 7 basic clusters.
171
Self Regulation Executive Function “Clusters”
ENGAGEMENT
Energize
Initiate OPTIMIZATION EFFICIENCY
ATTENTION Inhibit
Monitor Sense Time
Perceive Stop Pace
Modulate
Focus Pause Sequence
Balance
Sustain Flexible Execute
Correct
Shift
SOLUTION
INQUIRY Generate
MEMORY
Anticipate Associate
Hold Gauge
Manipulate Prioritize
Analyze Plan
Store Estimate Time
Retrieve Organize
Compare Decide 172
The Multidimensional Nature of
EF Assessment
 The Multidimensional Nature of the use
of Executive Functions necessitates a
Multidimensional approach to their
assessment.
 Assessment of Executive Functions
needs to address the use of Efs within
all four domains of functioning and
across all four arenas of
involvement
Key Concept
Effective EF assessment
is multidimensional in
nature and addresses the
use of Efs within all four
domains of functioning
and across all four
arenas of involvement.
174
EF Assessment Perspective x Method
Assessment Method
Assessment Formal Methods – Informal Methods –
Using interviews, records reviews, and Using interviews, records reviews,
Perspective observation and interpretation methods and observation and interpretation
that make use of standards established methods that do not make use of
through normative comparisons standards established through
normative comparisons
Indirect Perspective – Behavior Rating Scales Interviews of Parents, Teachers

Collecting information in Parent & Teacher Behavior (e.g., use of the EFSO)
a manner that does not Rating Scales Review of School Records
Self-Report Rating Scales Process-oriented Interpretation
require direct contact
(e.g., BRIEF or MEFS Parent, of Parent and Teacher Ratings
with, or observation of,
Teacher and Self Rating forms) and Self Reports
the client
Direct Perspective – Individually-Administered Child Interview

Systematic and Nonsystematic
Collecting information Standardized Tests
Behavioral Observations (e.g., use
through direct (e.g., D-KEFS, of the EFSO and EFCO)
interactions with, or NEPSY-II, WCST, Process-oriented Interpretation of
through direct BADS, BADS-C) Standardized Test Performance
and Classroom Work Samples
observations of, the client
Key Concept
The most effective
approach to EF
assessment involves
1) Clinical interview(s)
2) Use of additional data
collection methods to
test hypotheses
generated from the
interview(s) 176
Assessment of Executive Functions
Norm-referenced assessments of
executive functions are currently
available, including:
 Individually-administered
tests
 Behavior rating scales
Assessment of Executive Functions
The limitations of the

current methods available
need to be understood and
taken into account when
conducting an assessment.
Key Concept
Standardized,
individually-administered
measures of executive
functions only assess
the use of executive
functions within the
Symbol System Arena.
179
EF Assessment Using Individually
Administered Tests
Perception Emotion Cognition Action
Self
Others
Environ-
ment
Symbol
Systems X X X
Key Concept
Although limited in scope,
individually-administered
assessment of executive
functions can provide
valuable information about
the clients capacities to self-
regulate perception,
cognition and action within
the Symbol System arena,
especially in school. 181
The Multidimensional Nature of EF Assessment
The most effective approach to EF assessment

involves:
• Conducting a thorough clinical
interview(s)
• Using additional data collection
methods to test hypotheses
generated from the interview(s)
Conducting a thorough clinical interview:

 Identify arenas of involvement that are
of concern, within the arenas of concern:
 Identify domains of functioning that are
of concern
 Identify the specific executive function
levels that are of concern
 Identify the specific executive functions
that are of concern within the level
Use additional data collection methods to test

hypotheses generated from the clinical interview:
 Parent, Teacher, Self Report and
Adult Inventories
 Background information/Records
review
 Individually-administered
standardized testing (for Symbol
System arena concerns)
Parent, Teacher, Child & Adult Inventories
BRIEF (Behavior Rating Inventory of

Executive Functions; 1996)
D-REFS (Delis Rating of Executive
Function; 2012)
BDEFS-CA (Barkley Deficits in Executive
Functioning Scale; 2012)
CEFI (Comprehensive Executive Functions
Inventory; 2013)
Executive Functions
BRIEF INHIBIT SCALE Likely to be Associated with Behaviors
Item Description P T PRIMARY EF SECONDARY Efs
WILDER than others x MODULATE MONITOR

INTERRUPTS others x x INHIBIT MONITOR
OUT OF SEAT x x INHIBIT MONITOR
OUT OF CONTROL x x MODULATE MONITOR
BLURTS OUT x INHIBIT MONITOR
TOO WILD x x MODULATE MONITOR
Trouble STOPPING x x STOP MODULATE MONITOR
TROUBLE when NOT
SUPERV x x INHIBIT MODULATE MONITOR
TOO SILLY x MODULATE MONITOR
Talks at WRONG TIME x INHIBIT MONITOR
NO THOUGHT BEFORE ACT x ANTICIPATE
IMPULSIVE x INHIBIT MONITOR
TOLD to STOP x STOP MONITOR
NO THOUGHT BEFORE ACT x ANTICIPATE 186
Parent, Teacher, Child & Adult Inventories
Ideally, behavior rating

inventories would offer coverage
of a broad array of executive
functions across all 4 domains
within all 4 arenas of
involvement.
EF Rating Inventories
The McCloskey Executive Function

Scales (MEFS) assess 33 self-
regulation executive functions
across multiple domains of function
within multiple arenas of
involvement.
Self Regulation Executive Function “Clusters”
ENGAGEMENT
Energize
Initiate OPTIMIZATION EFFICIENCY
ATTENTION Inhibit
Monitor Sense Time
Perceive Stop Pace
Modulate
Focus Pause Sequence
Balance
Sustain Flexible Execute
Correct
Shift
SOLUTION
INQUIRY Generate
MEMORY
Anticipate Associate
Hold Gauge
Manipulate Prioritize
Analyze Plan
Store Estimate Time
Retrieve Organize
Compare Decide 189
MEFS Rating Options
Always or almost always does this on his or her
5 AA own. Does not need to be prompted or
reminded (cued) to do it.
4 F Frequently does this on own without prompting
3 S Seldom does this on own without being

prompted, reminded, or cued to do so.
2 AP Does this only after being prompted, reminded,
or cued to do it.
Only does it with direct assistance. Requires
1 DA much more than a simple prompt or cue to be
able to get it done in situations that require it.
0 UA Unable to do this, even when direct assistance is
provided.
Key Concept
EFs in the Symbol
System arena are best
assessed by using
methods that can reveal
Cascading Production
Decrements or
Cascading Production
Increments
191
Cascading
Production
Construct Decrement
Start here
Construct + EF
Construct + + EF
Progressive deterioration Construct+ + + EF

of performance is observed
as executive function
demands (+ EF) become
greater.
Individually-administered
Assessments of EF
 Identify a specific cognitive construct

baseline using a measure that
minimizes EF involvement.
 Select and use a measure that adds
executive function demands to the
baseline construct and observe the
results.
 Continue to add additional EF demands
and observe results.
Cascading
Reasoning Ability:
Production
Matrix Reasoning Decrement
Start here
Reasoning
Ability
+ + + EF:
Progressive deterioration WCST
greater.
Cascading
Production
Visuo-motorAbility: Decrement
Design Copying
Start here Ability + EF:
BVMGT
Ability + + EF
Ability + + + EF:
Progressive deterioration
RCFT
greater.
Assessing Retrieval Fluency
Examples:
 Naming animals in 60 seconds
 Naming foods in 60 seconds
 Naming words that begin with
the letter “s” in 60 seconds
 Naming words that begin with
the letter “f” in 60 seconds
196
Examples of response patterns:

 Semantic “Flooding” – Retrieval
with minimal executive
direction; uncontrolled flow of
words
 Controlled Access – Executive
Functions used to organize
retrieval of words by semantic
197

 Semantic “Flooding” results
in uneven performance
across a 60 second interval
with decreased production in
each successive 15 second
interval.
198
1” – 15” Largest number of responses 15 responses
16” – 30” Reduced number of responses 4 responses
31” – 45” Reduced number of responses 1 response
46” – 60” Few, if any, responses 0 responses
199
 Controlled Access typically results in a
more even distribution of responses
across a 60 second interval.
Responses are often reflect organized,
sequential access of various
subcategories (e.g., water animals;
flying animals; farm animals; forest
animals; jungle animals;
200
1” – 15” 6 responses
Similar
16” – 30”
numbers 6 responses
of
responses
31” – 45” for 5 responses
each
interval
46” – 60” 5 responses
201
Cascading
Production
Decrement
Start here Retrieval Ability:
Semantic Fluency
Retrieval
Ability + EF:
Initial Letter Fluency
Progressive deterioration
greater.
Key Concept
Executive functions
are used to cue,
direct, coordinate and
integrate all the
processes, skills,
abilities, and
knowledge bases
used when reading
writing or doing math.
203
An Integrative Model Specifying Processes, Abilities, Knowledge Bases,
Skills, Memory and Achievement in Reading
General & Specific Semantic Lexicon

indicate
Knowledge Lexicons Word & Phrase Knowledge
Executive
Function
processing Language Reasoning Visuospatial
at work
Retrieval Comprehending Words and Text Speed

from Long
Term Storage
Decoding + Prosody =
Reading Reading Rate
Unfamiliar
Familiar aka
Working and/or
(Sight) “Fluency”
Memory Nonsense
Words
Words
Initial
Registration
(Immediate Phonological Processing Oral Motor Functioning
Memory)
Orthographic Processing
204
Copyright
Assessing Executive Functions
Related to Reading
Example of D-KEFS Color-Word

Interference Word Reading task:
“Look at this page…read
these words as quickly as you
can without making any
mistakes.”
205
Related to Reading
Example of D-KEFS Color-Word

Interference Inhibition task:
“Look at this page…the color
names are printed in a different
colored ink. You are to name
the color of the ink that the
letters are printed in not read
the word.”
206
Related to Reading
Example of D-KEFS Color-Word Interference

Inhibition-Switching task:
“This time, for many of the words
you are to name the color of the
ink and not read the words. But if
a word is inside a little box, you
should read the word and not name
the ink color.”
207
Cascading
Process: Production
D-KEFS
Color & Decrement
Word Naming
Process + EF:
D-KEFS CWI
Progressive
Inhibition
deterioration
of performance is
observed
as executive function Process + + EF:
demands (+ EF) become D-KEFS Inhibition/
greater. Switching
EF Involvement in Reading
Essentials of Executive Functions

Assessment Rapid Reference 6.2:
 Description of EF involvement in the
act of reading
 Lists the EFs most likely to be
involved in various facets of reading
 Describes task behavior likely to be
indicating a lack of effective EF
use
Interventions for Executive Functions
Difficulties Related to Reading
Many executive functions difficulties

related to reading are the result of
a lack of adequate maturation of
the neural networks involved in the
use of these executive functions for
reading.
210
Interventions for Executive Functions
Difficulties Related to Reading
The most effective form of intervention

for maturational difficulties with
executive functions cues is increased
practice of the complete act of reading,
i.e., applying the integration of all
processes, skills, abilities and lexicons
while reading connected text while
receiving feedback from an external
source.
211
Source Acknowledgements
212
An Integrative Model Specifying Processes, Abilities, Knowledge
Bases, Skills, Memory and Achievement in Writing
General & Specific Semantic Lexicon
indicate Knowledge Lexicons Word & Phrase Knowledge
Executive
Function
processing Language Idea Generation Reasoning Visuospatial
at work
Initial Text Editing & Revising

Registration
(Immediate Text
Memory) Production
Text Automaticity
Text Transcription
Working Generation &
Memory
Spelling
Retrieval
from Long
Visuospatial Processing GraphoMotor Processing
Term
Storage
Orthographic Processing Phonological Processing
213
Copyrig
Writing as a Holarchically Organized Process
PLAN ORGANIZE
Reviewing/Revising
Text Generation
PLAN
Text Transcription
Language Representation
Idea Generation 214

Text Transcription Difficulties
Academic Skills:
• Alphabet Writing
215
Text Transcription Improvement
Academic Skills:
• Alphabet Writing
216
Text Transcription Difficulties
Academic Skills:
• WJ-III Writing Fluency Nov 2010
217
Text Transcription Improvements
Academic Skills:
• WJ-III Writing Fluency August 2012
218
Academic Skills:
219
Academic Skills:
220
Text Generation Difficulties
• What Evan wrote for me:

My favorite game is … “mabul
roling it is
fun. I like making
the box to role in
to. Iam prety gode as
well. It is rell inters
ing. It is so fun
Adequate Language Representation
• What Evan told me:

“My favorite game is rolling marbles. I
think it is fun. I just learned it yesterday.
It can be pretty hard at times. It can be
fun and it’s interesting if you make it
challenging. I like making the boxes to
roll the marbles into. You probably need
to be pretty skilled with eye hand
coordination to do it. To get up the ramp
you need to roll it really fast.”
Language Representation to Text
Generation Difficulties
• What Evan told me:  What Evan wrote:
“My favorite game is rolling
marbles. I think it is fun. I My favorite game
just learned it yesterday. It is…“mabul
can be pretty hard at times. roling it is
It can be fun and it’s fun. I like making
interesting if you make it
the box to role in
challenging. I like making
the boxes to roll the marbles to. Iam prety gode as
into. You probably need to well. It is rell inters
be pretty skilled with eye ing. It is so fun
hand coordination to do it.
To get up the ramp you need
to roll it really fast.”
Cascading
Production
PAL-II Alphabet
Writing & PAL-II
Decrement
Copying A & B
WIAT-III Sentence
Progressive Composition and/or
deterioration PAL-II Sentence Writing
of performance is
observed WIAT-III
as executive function Essay
demands (+ EF) become Composition
greater.
EF Involvement in Writing

• Description of EF involvement in
stages of writing
• Lists the EFs most likely to be
involved in that stage
• Describes task behavior likely to be
indicating a lack of EF use
Executive Functions
and
Mathematics
226
226
Math EF Difficulties: Case Example
 Low scores on both WIAT-III

Numerical Operations and Math
Problem-Solving, failing Algebra II,
but…
 Grades on tests inconsistent, some
A’s, some F’s, homework not
completed resulting in failing grade;
grade of B in Algebra I, grade of B in
Geometry. History and present
behavior assessment indicating ADHD.
 Standard Score of 120 on Math Problem-
Solving, but Standard Score of 80 on
Numerical Operations.
 Process-oriented examination of student
response booklet reveals several very easy
calculation items incorrect due to
misreading the operation sign and/or
errors in basic addition or subtraction
when borrowing and carrying. Numerical
Operations items reflecting math skills
being taught this school year performed
much more effectively than items
assessing skills taught in previous
years.
• Standard Score of 70 on Numerical
Operations during first assessment session
but Standard Score of 92 during second
assessment session three days later.
• Process-oriented examination of student
response booklet reveals easy calculation
items incorrect due to operation sign errors
and/or errors in basic addition or
subtraction. Numerical Operations items
reflecting math skills currently being taught
performed much more effectively than
items assessing skills taught in previous
years.
Math EF Difficulties
Most common features of poor math production
likely to be indicating EF difficulties:
 Easy calculation items incorrect, more
difficult calculation items correct.
 “Careless” errors, misreading operation
signs, basic addition and subtraction
errors, despite capable performance with
most item types.
 Inconsistent grades on classroom tests.
 Math problem-solving skills much
better than math calculation skills.
EF Involvement in Math
• Description of EF involvement in
mathematical thinking
• Lists the EFs most likely to be
involved in specific tasks
• Describes task behavior likely to
be indicating a lack of EF use
Functional Behavior Assessment
The focus of a traditional FBA:

“Behavior support plans are designed to
alter patterns of problem behavior. The
process by which this is done, however,
involves change in the behavior of family,
teachers, staff, or managers in various
settings. Plans of behavior support define
what we will do differently. It is the
change in our behavior that will result in
improved behavior of the focus person.”
(O’Neill, Horner, Albin, Sprague, Storey, &
Newon, 1997, p. 65).
Functional Behavior Assessment
A B C
In traditional functional behavior
assessments antecedents are said to
TRIGGER the behavior that results in the
consequences, but the reasons WHY the
antecedents trigger the behavior is not really
addressed.
FBA: Is A-B-C Enough?
 Since the antecedent does not trigger the
same undesirable behaviors in ALL students
in the same situation, there must be
something about the students that differs in
an important way.
 Functional behavior assessment ignores
internal considerations (i.e., perceptions,
emotions, thought) and focuses on applying
external control to effect change in
behavior.
The EF Driven FBA
Informed by knowledge of executive functions, the
functional behavior assessment model can be revised
as follows:
A B C
EF
Behavior
Antecedents Consequences
Response
Perception Emotion Cognition Action

A Key Concept
An EF-Driven FBA
enables problems to
be clearly stated in
terms of perceptions,
B emotions, thoughts or
actions that can be
C changed through
intervention. 236
EF- Driven FBA
The goals of an EF-driven FBA are:

1) to help the child, the parents,
and professionals to understand
the nature of the deficit and
2) through proper intervention, to
assist the child or adolescent in
changing the behavior from a
negative to positive.
Progress Monitoring
Progress monitoring
techniques for interventions
targeting the improvement of
the use of executive functions.
238
DAILY PROGRESS BY CLASS
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4
ENGAGEMENT 4-Feb 5-Feb 6-Feb 7-Feb 8-Feb 11-Feb 12-Feb 13-Feb 14-Feb 15-Feb 19-Feb 20-Feb 21-Feb 22-Feb 23-Feb 25-Feb 26-Feb 27-Feb 28-Feb 1-Mar
Math 3 3 3 3 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 3 0 3 2 2 3
Science 3 3 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 2 0 2
Social Studies 3 3 3 3 2 0 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 1
English 3 2 3 3 0 3 3 0 3 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3
Reading 3 3 3 3 0 0 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Math Facts 0 3 3 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 3 0 3 3 3
WEEK 5 WEEK 6 WEEEK 7 WEEK 8

ENGAGEMENT 4-Mar 5-Mar 6-Mar 7-Mar 8-Mar 11-Mar 12-Mar 13-Mar 14-Mar 15-Mar 18-Mar 19-Mar 20-Mar 21-Mar 22-Mar 25-Mar 26-Mar 27-Mar 28-Mar 29-M
Math 3 3 3 1 3 3 2 1 0 0 1 0 3 1 0
Science 0 2 1 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 3
Social Studies 3 3 2 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
English 2 2 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 3
Reading 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Math Facts 0 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 3

ENGAGEMENT 1-Apr 2-Apr 3-Apr 4-Apr 5-Apr 15-Apr 16-Apr 17-Apr 18-Apr 19-Apr 22-Apr 23-Apr 24-Apr 25-Apr 26-Apr 29-Apr 30-Apr 1-May 2-May 3-May
Math 2 2 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 3
Science 3 3 3 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 2 2
Social Studies 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 2 0
English 3 3 2 0 1 3 3 0 3 3 0 3 3
Reading 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3
Math Facts 3 3 0 3 3 3 1 3 2 3 3
WEEK 13 WEEK 14
ENGAGEMENT 6-May 7-May 8-May 9-May 10-May 13-May 14-May 15-May 16-May 17-May
Math 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 1
Science 2 3 2 3 2 2 1 1 0
Social Studies 3 3 3 0 0 0 0
English 3 3 3 3 0 3 2 0
Reading 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3239
Math Facts 3 3 3
ATTENTION 4-Feb 5-Feb 6-Feb 7-Feb 8-Feb 11-Feb 12-Feb 13-Feb 14-Feb 15-Feb 19-Feb 20-Feb 21-Feb 22-Feb 23-Feb 25-Feb 26-Feb 27-Feb 28-Feb 1-Mar
Math 2 2 3 3 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 2 2 3
Science 3 3 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 2 0 2
Social Studies 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1
English 3 3 2 2 0 3 3 0 3 0 0 0 3 2 3 3 3
Reading 3 3 3 1 0 0 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Math Facts 0 3 3 3 0 3 0 3 0 2 2 0 3 3 2

ATTENTION 4-Mar 5-Mar 6-Mar 7-Mar 8-Mar 11-Mar 12-Mar 13-Mar 14-Mar 15-Mar 18-Mar 19-Mar 20-Mar 21-Mar 22-Mar 25-Mar 26-Mar 27-Mar 28-M
Math 3 2 2 1 3 3 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Science 0 3 1 3 3 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 3
Social Studies 3 2 2 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3
English 3 2 2 1 3 3 2 1 3 1 2 2 2 3
Reading 2 3 1 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 1 0 2 3
Math Facts 0 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 3

ATTENTION 1-Apr 2-Apr 3-Apr 4-Apr 5-Apr 15-Apr 16-Apr 17-Apr 18-Apr 19-Apr 22-Apr 23-Apr 24-Apr 25-Apr 26-Apr 29-Apr 30-Apr 1-May 2-May 3-Ma
Math 2 2 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3
Science 3 2 3 0 0 1 3 3 3 2 2 0
Social Studies 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 0
English 2 3 2 0 2 3 3 1 3 2 3 3 1
Reading 2 3 2 1 2 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 2
Math Facts 3 3 0 1 3 3 1 2 2 3 3
WEEK 13 WEEK 14
ATTENTION 6-May 7-May 8-May 9-May 10-May 13-May 14-May 15-May 16-May 17-May
Math 0 1 1 1 2 0 1 1
Science 2 3 2 3 1 2 1 1 0
English 3 0 1 2 0 2 2 1
Reading 1 3 3 3 1 3 2 3
Math Facts 3 3 3
240
WORK CONPLETION4-Feb 5-Feb 6-Feb 7-Feb 8-Feb 11-Feb 12-Feb 13-Feb 14-Feb 15-Feb 19-Feb 20-Feb 21-Feb 22-Feb 23-Feb 25-Feb 26-Feb 27-Feb 28-Feb 1-Mar
Math 3 3 3 3 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 2 0 3
Science 3 3 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 1
Social Studies 3 3 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 0 2 0 0 1 1
English 3 3 0 3 0 3 3 0 3 0 0 0 3 2 3 3 3
Reading 3 3 3 3 0 0 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Math Facts 0 3 3 3 0 3 0 3 0 2 3 0 3 3 3

WORK COMPLETION4-Mar 5-Mar 6-Mar 7-Mar 8-Mar 11-Mar 12-Mar 13-Mar 14-Mar 15-Mar 18-Mar 19-Mar 20-Mar 21-Mar 22-Mar 25-Mar 26-Mar 27-Mar 28-M
Math 3 1 2 1 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Science 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3
Social Studies 2 1 0 0 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 1 3
English 3 2 2 1 3 3 2 1 3 0 2 1 2 3
Reading 2 3 1 3 3 1 2 3 1 2 1 0 2 3
Math Facts 0 3 0 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 3

WORK COMPLETION1-Apr 2-Apr 3-Apr 4-Apr 5-Apr 15-Apr 16-Apr 17-Apr 18-Apr 19-Apr 22-Apr 23-Apr 24-Apr 25-Apr 26-Apr 29-Apr 30-Apr 1-May 2-May 3-May
Math 2 1 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3
Science 3 2 3 0 0 1 3 3 3 2 2 0
Social Studies 2 2 0 3 2 1 3 2 2 2 1 0
English 2 3 1 0 2 3 3 0 3 2 3 3 1
Reading 3 3 2 1 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3
Math Facts 3 2 0 0 3 3 3 2 2 3 3
Zach T. WEEK 13 WEEK 14

WORK COMPLETION 6-May 7-May 8-May 9-May 10-May 13-May 14-May 15-May 16-May 17-May
Math 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Science 1 2 2 3 1 0 1 1 0
English 3 0 0 2 0 2 3 1
Reading 2 3 3 3 1 3 2 3
Math Facts 3 3 3
241
END OF YEAR SUMMARY ALL CLASSES
ENGAGEMENT %
Rated 3, 2, or 1 78%
Rated 0 22%
ATTENTION %
Rated 3, 2, or 1 78%
Rated 0 22%
WORK
COMPLETION %
Rated 3, 2, or 1 70%
Rated 0 30% 242

McCloskey - Advanced Interpretation of The WISC-V and Executive Functions

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

McCloskey - Advanced Interpretation of The WISC-V and Executive Functions

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

McCloskey - Advanced Interpretation of The WISC-V and Executive Functions

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advanced Interpretation of the

WISC-V and Executive Functions

George McCloskey, Ph.D.

 Do you believe it is possible to

The most critical shifts in

Strategies discussed include:

11/2010 4/2013 9/2015

Rdg Fluency 66 95 100

Rdg Vocab -- 93 112

 PRIMARY INDEX SCALES

 ANCILLARY INDEX SCALES

 COMPLIMENTARY INDEX SCALES

• It is important to note that the 4

• “…task complexity and the amount of

• It is important to note that neither

“As for the prevalent procedure of throwing a

“… let us compare a person’s mental measurement (his intelligence quotient”

WISC-V FSIQ WJ-IV GIA

The publishers of the WISC-V

Research suggests that measures

“Intelligence tests measure more than mere learning ability

 The concept of executive

Directions for the Wisconsin

The ultimate purpose of

• Replacing the concept of Intelligence with

Processing CHC Visual/

Long Term Short Term

Memory NEURO Visual/

Immediate Symbol Translation

Specific Composite Indexes /

General Ability Global Composite Level

The Process Approach requires a

System 2 – Slow, effortful,

 Basic math facts and

 Basic math facts and

What’s the difference

Specific Behavior Observation

What Does Block Design

What Does WISC/WAIS Block Design Measure?

From Carroll’s description, Block

Who will have the best Block Design score?

Carroll’s description leaves out a

An appropriate statement regarding the

 An Information Processing Model

Assess multiple component processes:

 V, I, and S all reflect verbal abilities that act as

 Vocabulary is primarily a measure of

The task input format, the internal

 Earliest items emphasize common knowledge

It is clinically important to make the

Although some research has

 Speed of information processing is a

• MR, PCn and FW all require

 Visual Perception and Discrimination

 Visual Perception and Discrimination

 Working Memory is highly likely to be

• Visual Analog to Similarities

 Arithmetic is a complex task requiring

 MR and FW most closely reflect application of reasoning