Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test – 2 Bruce A. Bracken R. Steve McCallum.

Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test – 2 Bruce A. Bracken R. Steve McCallum

UNIT2 Authors Bruce A. Bracken, PhD Professor The College of William & Mary School of Education P.O. Box 8795 Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795 (757) 221-1712 babrac@wm.edu

UNIT2 Authors R. Steve McCallum, PhD Professor Educational Psychology University of Tennessee, Knoxville 434 Claxton Addition University of Tennessee Knoxville, TN 37996 (865) 974-5405 mccallum@utk.edu

What is nonverbal assessment and why it matters? For whom is nonverbal assessment appropriate? UNIT2 development goals UNIT2 subtests, scales, and theoretical underpinnings Administration Features UNIT2 standardization and technical properties (e.g., Reliability, Validity, and Special Psychometric Properties) Fair and equitable assessments Scoring and interpreting the UNIT2 What This Presentation Covers…

 Testing that requires no spoken language by the examiner or the examinee  Nonverbal refers to the method of administration and the nature of the response, not the abilities being assessed or the strategies used to arrive at solutions What is Nonverbal Assessment?

Race/Ethnicity Estimate Percent Total U.S. Population301,237,703 100% White (Not Hispanic/Latino)223,965,009 74% Black or African American37,131,771 12% American Indian and Alaska Native 2,419,895 < 1.0% Asian13,164,169 4% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 446,164 < 1.0% Two or more races:6,571,705 < 1.0% Total Hispanic/Latino Population 45,432,158 15% 21 st Century U.S. Population 1998 Estimate

Race/Ethnicity Estimate Percent Total U.S. Population318,857,056 100% White (not Hispanic or Latino)198,010,232 62.1% Black or African American42,089,131 13.2% American Indian and Alaska Native382,628.12% Asian17,218,281 5.4% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 63,771.02% Two or more races:7,971,426 2.5% Total Hispanic/Latino Population55,481,128 17.4% 21 st Century U.S. Population: 2014 Estimate

Where is the Population Growth Heading?  By the middle of the current century, the nation’s Hispanic population is expected to reach 96.5 million (24.5 % of the total population).  Through 2020, the Asian/Pacific Islander population is expected to grow faster than other racial groups or the Hispanic-origin population.

Number of Languages Spoken in the U.S. Public Schools Chicago, IL: 200 (Pasko, 1994) California: 140 (Unz, 1997) Palm Beach, FL: 80 (Fast Fact, 1996) Tempe, AZ: 67 (Ulik, 1997) Plano, TX: 60 (Power, 1996) Des Plaines, IL: 57 (Van Duch, 1997) Knoxville, TN: 60 (Forrester, 2000) Scottsdale, AZ: 50 (Steele, 1998) Prince William County, VA: 48 (O’Hanlon, 1997) Cobb County, GA: 45 (Stepp, 1997) Nashville, TN: 40 (Nashville Banner, 1997) Tukwila, WA: 30 (Searcey, 1998) Schenectady, NY: 22 (Lipman, 1997)

Others who Would Benefit from Nonverbal Assessment  Other individuals for whom verbal tests may under-estimate their true level of functioning Individuals with autism/Asperger’s Deaf/hard of hearing Selective/elective mutes Individuals with language-related learning disabilities Individuals with speech and language disorders Individuals with focal or diffuse cortical damage Individuals with social phobia

Students with Significant Hearing Loss?  48 million Americans (20 percent of US Population) have some degree of hearing loss  2 to 3 of every 1,000 children are hard of hearing or deaf  30 school children per 1,000 have a hearing loss Source: Johns Hopkins School of Medicine

 Any individual for whom a verbal test would produce “Construct Irrelevant Variance” and bias or unfairly assess the desired construct (i.e., Intelligence) For Whom is Nonverbal Assessment Appropriate?

 Benefits Assess children in their native languages  Detriments labor intensive, expensive, and time-consuming Required for every language in population Regional/dialectal nuances within same language Lack of skilled bilingual translators/examiners Insufficient validation of translated scales Bilingual children are often not proficient in either language Translated Tests Assessment Options

 Benefits Administered, normed, and validated nonverbally No examinee receptive or expressive language No second language skill of examiner Test is appropriate for most children  Detriments Assessment of a single construct (e.g., matrix reasoning) Historically poor predictor of academic achievement Verbal demands on many “nonverbal” tests Nonverbal Measures Assessment Options

 First Generation Nonverbal Intelligence Tests  Matrices-Based Nonverbal Cognitive Procedures  The Most Current Generation of Multidimensional Nonverbal Cognitive Procedures Nonverbal Intelligence Tests: Old and New

 Seguin Form Board (1907)  Healy Picture Completion Test (1914)  Portius Mazes (1915)  Knox Cubes (1915)  Army Beta (1917)  Draw A Person (Goodenough, 1926)  Raven’s Progressive Matrices (originally 1938)  Arthur Point Scale (1943)  Leiter International Performance Scale (originally 1948) First Generation Nonverbal Intelligence Tests

 Matrix Analogies Test  Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test  General Ability Measure for Adults  Comprehensive Test of Nonverbal Intelligence, 2 nd Ed.  Raven’s Progressive Matrices  Test of Nonverbal Intelligence–4th Ed. Matrices-Based Nonverbal Cognitive Procedures

 Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test2 (UNIT2) B. A. Bracken & R. S. McCallum (1998, 2016)  Leiter International Performance Scale–3 G. H. Roid, L. J. Miller, M. Pomplun, & C. Koch (2013)  Wechsler Nonverbal Scale of Ability D. Wechsler & J. Naglieri ( 2006) The New Generation of Multidimensional Nonverbal Intelligence Tests

A.Differential Ability Scale: Nonverbal Scale B.K-ABC Nonverbal Scale C.Leiter International - III D.Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test E.Raven’s Progressive Matrices F.Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales G.Stanford-Binet, V: Nonverbal Scale H.Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test I. Wechsler Nonverbal Scale of Ability J.All of the Above The first intelligence test to be standardized with NO verbal directions?

Ten Goals in original UNIT Development 10. Address the need for cross-cultural assessment instruments. 9. Create a multipurpose test for use whenever language is a concern. 8. Create a test that is entirely nonverbal, with no receptive or expressive language requirements. 7. Develop tasks that comprehensively measure general intelligence. 6. Develop tasks that measure important subdomains of intelligence. 5. Develop tasks that enhance the testing experience for examinees. 4. Encourage flexible and efficient assessment with three administration options. 3. Develop a test that builds on examiner knowledge and experience. 2. Develop a test that measures intelligence accurately and with precision. 1. Ensure the highest level of test fairness.

UNIT2 The basic elements of the original UNIT have been retained in its revision, including the following:  Clear, well-organized record forms, norms tables, and administration procedures  Easel administration format  Chapter in the Examiner’s Manual dedicated to fairness in testing  Focus on fair and equitable assessment of all children  UNIT’s 100% nonverbal administration format and use of the eight universal administration gestures  Administration at a Glance guide  Use of demonstration, sample, and checkpoint items  Four of the original UNIT six subtests

UNIT2 Improvements Based on feedback and current research, the following improvements to the test have been made:  All-new normative data collected from 2009 to 2013 conforming to the population reported by the U.S. Census Bureau  Upper age range was extended from 17-11 years to 21-11 years  All subtests were revised to ensure stronger floors  Mazes and Object Memory were replaced with two psychometrically robust, easily administered quantitative reasoning subtests

UNIT2 Improvements Based on feedback and current research, the following improvements to the UNIT were made:  The scope of cognitive skills and abilities was broadened to three facets of intelligence—Memory, Reasoning, and Quantitative.  Administration is easier because of the new “one-way” presentation of easel-based subtests.  The overall look has been updated and enhanced (e.g., items have been redrawn and colored to make them more appealing).  All-new evidence of reliability and validity for the UNIT2.  Standard Batteries with or without memory

UNIT2 Theoretical Model A hierarchical model of intelligence with general ability, or g, at the apex (e.g., Carroll, 1993; Gustafsson, 1984)  Three foundational cognitive factors: Memory Reasoning Quantitative  Two foundational processing demands: Symbolic Nonsymbolic

UNIT2 Primary Abilities

UNIT2 Theoretical Model

UNIT2 Materials Administration at a Glance. Administration at a Glance is a laminated card that presents abbreviated administration and scoring instructions for all eight subtests on one side and explanations of administration gestures on the other side. UNIT2 Stimulus Book 1. Stimulus Book 1 contains visual materials required for the administration of the Symbolic Memory and Nonsymbolic Quantity subtests. UNIT2 Stimulus Book 2. Stimulus Book 2 contains visual materials required for the administration of the Analogic Reasoning and Spatial Memory subtests. UNIT2 Stimulus Book 3. Stimulus Book 3 contains visual materials required for the administration of the Numerical Series and Cube Design subtests. UNIT2 Examiner Record Form. The Examiner Record Form provides keyed responses for UNIT2 items and spaces for recording responses for each subtest. Stopwatch (not provided). UNIT2 Symbolic Memory Response Cards. The 10 Symbolic Memory Response Cards depict universal symbols for baby, girl, boy, woman, and man. The examinee uses the cards to respond to the Symbolic Memory items. UNIT2 Cube D esign Cubes. The nine green-and- white cubes are used by the examinee to respond to the Cube Design items in the subtest. UNIT2 Cube Design Response Mat. The response mat contains a diagonal line that orients the examinee’s responses to the three-dimensional designs in the Cube Design subtest. UNIT2 Spatial Memory Response Chips. The examinee uses the eight green and eight black, circular chips to respond to the Spatial Memory items. UNIT2 Spatial Memory Response Grids. The response grids consist of two laminated cards. One card has a 1 x 2 grid on one side and a 2 x 2 grid on the other side. The other card has a 3 x 3 grid on one side and a 4 x 4 grid on the other side. The examinee uses the grids to duplicate patterns from the Spatial Memory subtest. Pencil. The Direction Detection and Symbolic Detection subtests require the use of a pencil (not provided).

UNIT2 Administration Options UNIT2 Extended Battery Six subtests Scales and Quotients: FSIQ, Memory, Reasoning, Quantitative Composites UNIT2 Traditional Standard Battery (with Memory) Four subtests from original UNIT2 (i.e., Analogic Reasoning, Cube Design, Symbolic Memory, Spatial Memory) Scales and Quotients: FSIQ, Memory and Reasoning Composites UNIT2 Standard Battery without memory Four subtests, including Analogic Reasoning, Cube Design, Number Series, and Nonsymbolic Quantity. Scales and Quotients: FSIQ, Quantitative and Reasoning Composites UNIT2 Abbreviated Battery Two subtests, including Analogic Reasoning and Nonsymbolic Quantity offers a FSIQ (From the two psychometrically strongest subtests)

Subtest Organization Description. This section briefly describes the task of the subtest and the information to be recorded on the Examiner Record Form. Materials. This section lists the materials needed for the subtest. General Direction. This section specifies the arrangement of the test materials on the table top and the suggested seating positions for examinee and examiner. Starting Points. This section specifies the starting rules for each age group. Stopping Points. This section specifies the stopping, or discontinuation, rules for the subtest. Demonstration Items. This section provides instructions for administering demonstration items. Demonstration items are used to teach the nature of the task and are not scored. Using a demonstration item, the examiner presents the item and models the appropriate response. Sample Items. This section provides the instructions for administering sample items. Sample items are used to determine whether the examinee understands the task. On sample items, the examiner presents the item and the examinee responds. The examiner then either affirms or corrects the examinee’s response. Scored Items. This section provides the instructions for administering scored items of the subtest. Checkpoint Items. This section contains the instructions for administering the checkpoint items of the subtest. Checkpoint items are scored items for which the examiner models the correct response if the examinee responds incorrectly. Instructions for Checkpoint items are identical to those for all other scored items, except that examiner feedback is allowed when the examinee responds incorrectly. Scoring Criteria. This section informs the examiner about the kinds of events to record (e.g., timing, item correctness) during administration of subtests. Special Considerations. This section provides additional administration guidelines that are unique to individual subtests.

Subtest Administration Commonalities UNIT2 subtests were designed to be administered consistently within and across domains. All subtests use the “Point-Wave-Shrug” administration format: 1) point to the stimulus materials 2) wave over the response materials or options 3) shrug to ask how the subtest should be completed. Memory subtests use a 5 second exposure The examiner’s seating and materials are arranged according to the student’s dominant hand All keyed responses and Start and Stop points are highlighted in the Record Form for easy administration and scoring All subtest stopping points require three consecutive failed items

100% Nonverbal Administration UNIT2 provides a multidimensional measure of intelligence, administered completely nonverbally But you always have the freedom to talk with a child to build and maintain rapport, so long as the discussion is not about the test!

UNIT2 administration directions and subtests descriptions:

Symbolic Memory Subtest Description Symbolic Memory depicts a sequence of universal symbols for baby, girl, boy, woman, and man. Easier items require the examinee to match response figures to stimulus figures. More difficult items require the examinee to recreate a sequence of the universal human symbols after seeing the sequence presented on a stimulus plate for 5 seconds. Examinees re-create the sequence using Response Cards, which depict the five universal symbols. SM includes 35 scored items, 3 demonstration items, and 3 sample items. Items 1, 2, 8, 10, and 11 are checkpoint items. The correct response for each item is replicated on the Examiner Record Form to facilitate scoring, and the examiner records the score by circling 1 or 0.

Symbolic Memory Materials Stimulus Book 1 10 Symbolic Memory Response Cards (5 green, 5 black) Stopwatch (for stimulus exposure only) Starting Points Ages 5 – 7 or suspected cognitive limitations begin with Demo #1 Ages 8 – 21 begin with Demo #8 Stopping Points Ages 5–7, discontinue testing after scores of 0 on Checkpoint Items 1 and 2, and on Item 3. Ages 8–21, return to Demo # 1 when scores of 0 are obtained on Checkpoint # 8, and on Items 9 and 10. Discontinue after 3 consecutive scores of 0

Symbolic Memory

What Did you See?

Symbolic Memory

Special Considerations The examiner should use the stopwatch (which can run throughout the test) to ensure that the stimulus page is exposed to the examinee for only the full 5-second exposure time. Except for demonstration items, sample items, and incorrectly completed checkpoint items, the stimulus page is not re-exposed to the examinee. The examiner provides feedback only for correct or incorrect responses on sample items and for incorrect responses on checkpoint items. All other items are administered without indication of correctness. The examiner should not permit the examinee to touch the response cards until after the stimulus page has been covered.

Reliability Split-Half.92 Test–Retest.77 Inter-scorer.99 g Loading Extended Battery.60 (Good) Error Variance 8% Most Related to Spatial Memory Least Related to Cube Design Primary Abilities Shared With Other Subtests Attention to Detail Concentration Perception of Meaningful Stimuli Reproduction of a Model Sequential Processing Symbolic Mediation Visual Short-Term Memory Secondary Abilities Covert Mediation Simultaneous Processing Concept Formation Perceptual Organization Visual–Motor Integration Symbolic Memory

Nonsymbolic Quantity Subtest Description Nonsymbolic Quantity presents an array of white and/or black domino-like objects of various numerical values that create a numerical sequence, equation, analogy, or mathematical problem. Among the domino-like objects is one object (or more) with a red question mark (i.e., ?). The examinee determines which one of the numerical value responses best fits the incomplete conceptual or numerical analogy, sequence, or problem. The examinee completes the item by pointing to one of the response options. NQ includes 3 demonstration items, 3 sample items, and 48 scored items, including 4 checkpoint items. Items 1, 2, 8, and 10 are checkpoint items. On the Examiner Record Form, the response options correspond to the letters a, b, c, and d. For scoring convenience, correct responses are indicated in the Examiner Record Form by boldfaced capital letters. The examiner circles the letter corresponding to the examinee’s response and circles a score of 1 or 0.

Nonsymbolic Quantity Materials Stimulus Book 1 Starting Points Ages 5 – 7 or suspected cognitive limitations begin with Demo #1 Ages 8 – 21 begin with Demo #8 Stopping Points Ages 5–7, discontinue testing after scores of 0 on Checkpoint Items 1 and 2, and on Item 3. Ages 8–21, return to Demo # 1 when scores of 0 are obtained on Checkpoint # 8, and on Items 9 and 10. Discontinue the subtest after 3 consecutive scores of 0

Nonsymbolic Quantity

Reliability Split-Half.96 Test–Retest.79 Inter-scorer.99 g Loading Extended Battery.71 (Good) Error Variance4% Most Related to Numerical Series Least Related to Spatial Memory Primary Abilities Shared With Other Subtests Abstract thinking Analysis Attention to Detail Concentration Nonsymbolic Mediation Nonverbal Reasoning Perception of Abstract Stimuli Perceptual Organization Secondary Abilities Shared With Other Subtests Concept Formation Reasoning Nonsymbolic Quantity

Special Considerations There is no time limit for exposing the stimulus plates; however, the examiner should use the rapid palm roll to encourage a hesitant examinee or one who has stopped responding. The examiner provides feedback for correct or incorrect responses only on sample items and for incorrect responses on checkpoint items. All other items are administered without indication of correctness. Once the examinee establishes a basal, the examiner does not re-administer subsequent demonstration and sample items, but does administer subsequent checkpoint Items. Nonsymbolic Quantity

Special Considerations Some Nonsymbolic Quantity items have more than one question mark embedded in the problem, but only one option solves the problem. If examinees points to more than one response for the multiple question marks, examiners should score only the first option the examinee points to. The examiner should then point to that option and nod to indicate yes and then to the second option the examinee pointed to and shake his or her head to indicate no. Nonsymbolic Quantity

Subtest Description Each Analogic Reasoning item is an incomplete conceptual or geometric analogy in matrix format. The examinee completes the analogy by pointing to one of four response options. Analogic Reasoning includes 56 scored items, 3 demonstration items, and 3 sample items. Items 1, 2, and 9 are checkpoint items. On the Examiner Record Form, the response options correspond to the letters a, b, c, and d. Correct responses are indicated by boldfaced capital letters. The examiner circles the letter corresponding to the examinee’s response and circles a score of 1 or 0. Analogic Reasoning

Materials Stimulus Book 2 Starting Points Ages 5 – 7 or suspected cognitive limitations begin with Demo #1 Ages 8 – 21 begin with Demo #9 Stopping Points Ages 4–7, discontinue testing after scores of 0 on Checkpoint Items 1 and 2, and on Item 3. Ages 8–21, return to Demo # 1 when scores of 0 are obtained on Checkpoint # 9, and on Items 10 and 11. Discontinue the subtest after 3 consecutive scores of 0 on the remaining items. Analogic Reasoning

Special Considerations Except for demonstration items, sample items, and incorrectly completed checkpoint items, the examiner does not point to the stimulus figures after the examinee has selected a response option. The examiner provides feedback for correct or incorrect responses only on sample items and for incorrect responses on checkpoint items. All other items are administered without indication of correctness. Analogic Reasoning

Reliability Split-Half.96 Test–Retest.76 Inter-scorer.99 g Loading Extended Battery.77 (Good) Error Variance4% Most Related to Numerical Series Least Related Symbolic Memory Analogic Reasoning Primary Abilities Shared With Other Subtests Analysis Reasoning Concept Formation Covert Mediation Evaluation Synthesis Nonverbal Reasoning Verbal Reasoning Judgment Secondary Abilities Shared With Other Subtests Abstract Thinking Attention to Detail Perception of Abstract Stimuli Perception of Meaning Stimuli Perceptual Organization Sequential Processing Simultaneous Processing Synthesis

Subtest Description Easier items require the examinee to select one of four options presented below a horizontal line that matches a stimulus figure presented above the line. More difficult items require the examinee to view a random pattern of green, black, or green-and-black dots presented on a 1 X 1, 2 X 1, 2 X 2, 3 X 3, or 4 X 4 grid for a period of 5 seconds. After the stimulus is removed, the examinee recreates the spatial pattern by placing green and black circular chips on the blank response grid. The Spatial Memory subtest includes 33 scored items, 2 demonstration items, and 2 sample items. Items 1, 2, 5, and 6 are checkpoint items. Spatial Memory

Materials Stimulus Book 2 16 Response Chips (8 green, 8 black) Response Grid 1 (1 X 2 on one side, 2 X 2 on one side) Response Grid 2 (3 X 3 on one side, 4 X 4 on one side) Stopwatch (for stimulus exposure only) Starting Points Examinees 5 through 7 years or those suspected of having cognitive limitations begin with Demonstration 1. Examinees 8 through 21 begin with Demonstration 5. Stopping Points Ages 5-7, discontinue after scores of 0 on Checkpoint Items 1 and 2 and on Item 3. Ages 8-21, return to Demonstration Item 1 when scores of 0 are obtained on Checkpoint Items 5 and 6, and on Item 7. Discontinue the subtest after three consecutive scores of 0 on the remaining items. Spatial Memory

What Did You See?

Spatial Memory

Special Considerations The examiner should use the stopwatch (which can run throughout the test) to ensure that the stimulus page is exposed only for the full 5-second exposure time. Except for demonstration items, sample items, and incorrectly completed checkpoint items, the stimulus page is not re- exposed to the examinee. The examiner provides feedback for correct or incorrect responses only on sample items and for incorrect responses on checkpoint items. All other items are administered without indication of correctness. The examiner should not permit the examinee to touch the response chips until after the stimulus page has been covered. Spatial Memory

Reliability Split-Half.89 Test–Retest.75 Inter-scorer.99 g Loading Extended Battery.74 (Good) Error Variance11% Most Related to Cube Design Least Related to Nonsymbolic Quantity Primary Abilities Shared With Other Subtests Attention to Detail Concentration Nonsymbolic Mediation Perception of Abstract Stimuli Perceptual Organization Simultaneous Processing Spatial Orientation Visual Short-Term Memory Secondary Abilities Shared With Other Subtests Visual–Motor Integration Spatial Memory

Subtest Description Numerical Series presents an array of numbers or mathematical symbols that create a perceptual match or an incomplete quantitative series. Among the numbers or symbols presented on the stimulus page is a red question mark (i.e., ?). The examinee determines which of the response options (i.e., numerical values or symbols) best completes the incomplete series. The examinee completes the item by pointing to one of the response options. The Numerical Series subtest includes 45 scored items, 2 demonstration items, and 2 sample items. Items 1 and 8 are checkpoint items. On the Examiner Record Form, the response options correspond to the letters a, b, c, and d. Correct responses are indicated on the Examiner Record Form by boldfaced capital letters. The examiner circles the letter that corresponds to the examinee’s response and circles a score of 1 or 0. Numerical Series

Materials Stimulus Book 3 Starting Points Ages 5 – 7 or suspected cognitive limitations begin with Demo #1 Ages 8 – 21 begin with Demo #8 Stopping Points Ages 5–7, discontinue testing after scores of 0 on Checkpoint Items 1 and 2, and on Item 3. Ages 8–21, return to Demo # 1 when scores of 0 are obtained on Checkpoint # 8, and on Items 9 and 10. Discontinue the subtest after 3 consecutive scores of 0 on the remaining items. Numerical Series

Special Considerations There is no time limit for exposing the stimulus plates; however, the examiner should use the rapid palm roll to encourage a hesitant examinee or one who has stopped responding. The examiner provides feedback for correct or incorrect responses only on sample items and for incorrect responses on checkpoint items. All other items are administered without indication of correctness. Numerical Series

Reliability Split-Half.96 Test–Retest.86 Inter-scorer.99 g Loading Extended Battery.80 (Good) Error Variance4% Most Related to Analogic Reasoning and Cube Design Least Related to Symbolic Memory Primary Abilities Shared With Other Subtests Analysis Attention to Detail Concentration Nonverbal Reasoning Perception of Meaningful Stimuli Symbolic Mediation Covert Mediation Secondary Abilities Shared With Other Subtests Attention to Detail Perceptual Organization Reasoning Sequential Processing Numerical Series

Subtest Description Cube Design requires the presentation and matching and/or direct reproduction of two-color, abstract, geometric designs. While viewing the stimulus design, the examinee either responds by pointing to one of four options or reconstructs the design directly on the stimulus book or response mat, using green-and- white one-inch cubes. Cube Design includes 26 scored items, 3 demonstration items, and 3 sample items. Items 1, 2, 7, 10, and 11 are checkpoint items. Cube Design

Materials Stimulus Book 3 Nine Green-and-White Cube Design Cubes Cube Design Response Mat Stopwatch Starting Points Ages 5 – 7 or suspected cognitive limitations begin with Demo #1 Ages 8 – 21 begin with Demo #7 Stopping Points Ages 5–7, discontinue testing after scores of 0 on Checkpoint Items 1 and 2, and on Item 3. Ages 8–21, return to Demo # 1 when scores of 0 are obtained on Checkpoint # 7, and on Items 8 and 9. Discontinue the subtest after 3 consecutive scores of 0 on the remaining items. Cube Design

Special Considerations The examiner should place the exact number of cubes needed to complete each item beside the stimulus book or response mat. This number is printed in parentheses on the Examiner Record Form. For Items 7 through 10, the response cubes are presented so that the correct face for completing the design is not up. For Items 3 through 6 and Items 11 and 12, one cube is presented with a solid face up and one with a two-color face up. For Items 13–26, the cubes are scrambled and presented so that at least one of each face (solid green, solid white, and two-color) is up. Cube Design

Special Considerations The examiner should present the Cube Design Response Mat immediately before Demonstration 10 is presented. This mat should be placed directly in front of the examinee, between the examinee and the stimulus book. When the examinee has finished constructing a response, the examiner should turn the response mat in order to see both the right and left sides of the design. The examiner should make the motions of starting and stopping the stopwatch very deliberate in order to make the examinee aware that his or her performance is being timed. Throughout administration of the subtest, the stopwatch remains in the examinee’s sight to reinforce the timed nature of the task. The examiner should stop the examinee from working when the time limit expires and score the examinee’s response design. Cube Design

Special Considerations The examiner provides feedback for correct or incorrect responses only on sample items and for incorrect responses on checkpoint items. All other items are administered without indication of correctness. Cube Design

Reliability Split-Half.91 Test–Retest.94 Inter-scorer.99 g Loading Extended Battery.75 (Good) Error Variance 9% Most Related to Numerical Series Least Related to Symbolic Memory Cube Design

Primary Abilities Shared With Other Subtests Abstract Thinking Analysis Attention to Detail Evaluation Holistic Processing Nonsymbolic Mediation Nonverbal Reasoning Perception of Abstract Stimuli Judgment Secondary Abilities Shared with Other Subjects Working Under Time Constraints Concentration Perceptual Organization Reasoning Reproduction of a Model Simultaneous Processing Spatial Orientation Synthesis Three-Dimensional Representation Visual-Motor Integration Cube Design

Scoring UNIT2 With the UNIT2 online scoring software or by hand calculations and notations, examiners may obtain… standard scores percentile ranks score confidence intervals descriptive classifications performance graphs subtest and scale score contrasts test session validity documentation behavioral observations

Let’s take a brief break!

1. Interpret FSIQ 2.Interpret Construct-Specific Scores a)Memory b)Reasoning c)Quantitative 3.Interpret Subtests a)Normatively b)Ipsatively c)Triangulating with other measures UNIT2 Interpretation

Demographic Information Subtest Information Composite Information UNIT2 Record Form

Record Form

Hypotheses to guide interpretation of UNIT2 composites and subtests comparisons

Memory > Reasoning Examinee's short-term memory skills are better developed than nonverbal reasoning. Examinee's ability to comprehend and reproduce visual stimuli is better developed than the ability to analyze, synthesize, or reorganize visual stimuli. Examinee's attention to relevant details is better developed than concentrated problem-solving abilities. Individuals with this pattern of scale scores may learn best through exposure to concrete, factual information, with memory aids, as opposed to discovery learning activities. For example, reading instruction might include considerable sight-word repetition, as opposed to a more whole-language approach; instruction in higher order knowledge (e.g., comprehension, synthesis, evaluation) should be based on well-learned rules, principles, and laws (e.g., science principles, grammar rules); learning may be aided through the use of mnemonics (e.g., “a pint's a pound the world round”); generalizations of previously learned material to new problems or contexts might be facilitated by reminding students of basic concepts that guide problem solving (e.g., the area of complex geometric designs can be computed by reducing the design to a combination of familiar shapes, such as squares, rectangles, and triangles). Interpretive Hypothesis to Guide Comparisons Between UNIT2 Scales

Reasoning > Memory Examinee's nonverbal reasoning is better developed than short-term memory. Examinee's ability to analyze, synthesize, or reorganize visual stimuli is better developed than the ability to comprehend and reproduce visual stimuli. Examinee's ability to concentrate during problem-solving activities is better than the ability to attend to relevant visual details. Individuals with this pattern of scale scores may be adept at solving unique problems that are not highly dependent on previously learned information. Knowledge to be learned might best be presented through the use of relationships, comparisons, underlying les, extrapolations, and discovery learning. Memory of information should be facilitated by combining new content into existing taxonomies, categories, and strategies, with an emphasis on understanding relationships. Interpretive Hypothesis to Guide Comparisons Between UNIT2 Scales

Quantitative> Memory Examinee’s quantitative reasoning is better developed than short-term and working memory. Examinee’s ability to understand numerical relationships is stronger than the ability to attend to and recall details Examinee’s ability to manipulate abstract quantitative facts is stronger than the ability to register concrete characteristics of objects for later recall. Individuals with this scale pattern may learn best through depictions of quantitative elements requiring numerical and categorical relationships rather than through concrete, rote recitation and recall (e.g., flash cards, worksheets). For example, quantitative instruction might include use of rules, theorems, natural sequences, rubrics, principles, matrices, and exposure to depictions of classifications and relationships, as opposed to the overuse of flash cards, repetitive practice, and rote memorization. Learning in mathematics might best be approached through exploring relationships and juxtapositions where basic principles and facts will be discovered along the way.

Symbolic Memory Correlates of Subtest Performance As a measure of short-term sequential and symbolic memory, an examinee’s performance on the Symbolic Memory subtest may predict such behaviors as the examinee’s ability to attend to and distinguish important from irrelevant information; organize, recall, and follow multistep directions; sequence verbal information meaningfully (e.g., story telling; reading decoding); understand and compute multistep mathematics story problems; ignore extraneous, competing information during problem solving; and, concentrate on the interrelationships between salient variables.

Cube Design Correlates of Subtest Performance Performance on the Cube Design subtest may predict the examinee’s mechanical or graphic (e.g., artistic, drafting, geometry) competence; ability to divide aspects of problems into discrete parts for examination and recombination to provide a viable solution; tenacity in complex future problem-solving situations; reaction to activities that have deadlines or specific time limits; flexibility in evaluating and modifying solution strategies; and ability to orient in and around his or her environment (e.g., reading maps, following spatial directions).

Numerical Series Correlates of Subtest Performance Performance on the Numerical Series subtest may predict the examinee’s number sense, ability to solve numerical problems, and ultimately math-related academic content; ability to appreciate quantity and to see relations among symbols, numbers; ability to divide aspects of problems into discrete parts for examination and then recombine elements to provide a viable solution; tenacity in handling complex symbolic problem-solving situations; flexibility/adaptability in evaluating and modifying solution strategies; and ability to hold information in memory and use that information to understand and solve symbolic problems.

Primary and Secondary Abilities

UNIT2 Online Scoring and Report Writing Software Online access Log on Enter basic demographic information and raw scores Receive completed Record Form and choice of a brief or detailed report Report is fully editable in MS Word and can be saved as either a Word or PDF document Multiple examiners can use and store cases on single license

UNIT2 Online Scoring and Report Writing Software

1. Normative Sample 2.Reliability and Related Item Integrity Indicators a)Internal Consistency b)Stability c)Inter-rater d) Floors/Ceilings/Item gradients 3.Validity a)Developmental growth curves b)Concurrent validation with intelligence tests c)Predictive validation with achievement tests d)Special population performance (e.g., gifted, LD, Autistic Spectrum) 4.Fairness a)Color blindness b)Special populations (e.g., deaf, ESL) c)Reliability and validation by subgroups (e.g., age, race/ethnicity, gender) UNIT2 Technical Adequacy

Age (5 years 0 months through 21years 11 months) Gender (Female, Male) Race (African American, Asian American, Native American, White, Other) Hispanic Origin (Hispanic, Non-Hispanic) Region (Midwest, Northeast, South, West) Household Income (Six Categories) Parental Educational Attainment (Less than High School degree; High School Graduate or Equivalency; Some College or Technical School; Bachelor’s Degree; Advanced Degree) Inclusion of Representative Exceptional Children and Adolescents UNIT2 Sampling Variables

Standardization Sample Match to U.S. Population

Floors: UNIT2 subtests have very good to excellent floors for low ability examinees across the entire age range, i.e., standard scores < 2 SDs below the mean. Ceilings: UNIT2 subtests have consistently excellent ceilings, even for the oldest and highest ability examinees, i.e., standard scores > 2 SDs above the mean. UNIT2 Difficulty Gradients: Average item gradients for UNIT2 subtests equal or exceed standards for every age level, indicating UNIT’s sensitivity to subtle differences in ability, i.e., 1 raw score increment moves standard score = to or <.33 SD. UNIT2 Floors and Ceilings

UNIT2 Normative Reliabilities: Summary

Evidence of Content Validity Structural and Predictive Evidence of Validity Developmental Growth Curves Subtest and Scale Intercorrelation Studies Comparison among the three UNIT2 Batteries Comparisons with other Cognitive/Achievement Batteries Confirmatory Factor Analytic Investigations Studies with clinical samples UNIT2 Validity

Correlational Studies Measures of Intelligence Measures of Academic Achievement Studies with Clinical and Exceptional Samples Speech and Language Impairment Learning Disabilities Intellectual Disability Intellectually Gifted Serious Emotional Disturbance UNIT2 External Validity Studies

Studies with Clinical and Exceptional Samples Speech and Language Impairment Learning Disabilities Intellectual Disability Intellectually Gifted Serious Emotional Disturbance Correlational Studies Measures of Intelligence Measures of Academic Achievement UNIT2 Validity Studies

UNIT2 Developmental Growth

UNIT2 Correlations with Major Intelligence Tests: Average Sample

UNIT2 Validity Studies: Achievement

 Individuals with the four common types of red-green color vision deficiencies were administered representative portions of UNIT2 subtests.  All participants were able to discriminate colors and perform the subtests without difficulty, even though not all could reliably name the colors. [Note: The UNIT2 is completely nonverbal and does not require any naming.]  Summary: The protanopes, deuteranopes, protanomals, and deuteranomals were all able to validly perform UNIT2 subtests. UNIT2 Fairness: Individuals with Color-Vision Deficiencies

Conditional Reliabilities Females and Males African Americans Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders Native Americans Hispanics Individuals in Bilingual and ESL Classrooms Individuals who are Deaf/Hearing-Impaired Other clinical samples UNIT2 Fairness: Special Population Performance

UNIT2 Conditional Reliabilities: Race/Ethnicity 6/11/2016 121 UNIT2 Composite Memory Reasoning Quant. ABIQ SBIQ-M SBIQ FSIQ African American.95.97.98.97.98 Hispanic.95.97.98.97.98 Asian/ Pacific Islander.94.97.99.98.97.98 White.95.97.98.97.98 Native American.96.98.99

UNIT2 Conditional Reliabilities: Exceptionalities 6/11/2016 122 UNIT2 Composite Memory Reasoning Quant. ABIQ SBIQ-M SBIQ FSIQ Learning Disabled.94.95.97.96.97.98 Intellect Disability.96.97.98 Deaf/Hard Hearing.95.97.98.99 Gifted.91.96.97.95.98.97 Autistic Spectrum.97.96.98.99

UNIT2 Conditional and Local Reliabilities: Gender, Language, Ability 6/11/2016 123 UNIT2 Composite Memory Reasoning Quant. ABIQ SBIQ-M SBIQ FSIQ Females.94.97.98.97.98 ESL.95.97.98.99 Males.95.97.98.99 FSIQ 70 +/-10.96.95.96.97.98 FSIQ 130 +/-10.92.95.98.97.95.97

UNIT2 Fairness: Mean Score Comparisons

UNIT2 Fairness: Mean Score Comparisons ADHDD/HH ESL LD M (SD)M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) (n = 64)(N = 32) (N = 24) (N = 93) UNIT2 Value ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Subtest Symbolic Memory9.08 (2.88)8.31 ((2.74) 9.46 (2.86) 8.78 (2.71) Nonsymbolic Mem 9.25 (3.20)8.84 (3.66) 9.79 (3.16) 8.37 (2.57) Analogic Reasoning9.45 (2.91)8.34 (3.35) 8.54 (2.67) 8.14 (2.63) Spatial Memory8.89 (3.02)8.69 (3.06) 8.63 (2.60) 8.17 (3.19) Numerical Series9.19 (3.05)8.81 (3.30) 8.75 (2.52) 7.67 (2.24) Cube Design9.44 (3.43)9.22 (3.09) 8.38 (3.36) 8.17 (2.43) _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Composite Memory93.86(14.38)91.00(15.62) 94.25(13.67) 90.89(14.28) Reasoning96.50(16.22)92.53(14.63) 90.67(14.24) 89.04(12.53) Quantitative95.42(15.53)93.25(18.70) 95.71(15.47) 88.48(12.09) Abbreviated Battery96.09(14.72)91.53(19.46) 95.00(16.21) 89.52(13.59) Standard /Memory94.56(14.86)90.75(16.58) 91.50(14.78) 88.52(13.59) Standard /WO Mem95.50(15.64)92.06(17.47) 92.50(15.57) 87.54(11.99) Full Scale94.47(14.97)90.97(17.85) 92.42(15.55) 87.52(12.83)

A test may not show evidence of psychometric bias, but still have significant cultural/linguistic loadings. UNIT2 is 100% nonverbal so the linguistic influence is minimal; in addition, the cultural loading is slight as well. When concrete items are shown in one subtest (e.g., Analogic Reasoning) the entities depicted typically are common in all or most cultures (e.g., animals, trees, plants). Although quantitative thinking is included in UNIT2, it is assessed by both abstract symbols (e.g., dominos) and numbers, which are ubiquitous in nearly all cultures. Examiners may create a Standard Battery without the quantitative component. The next slide depicts UNIT2 authors’ placement of the cultural/ linguistic loading of the six UNIT2 subtests into a Cultural-Linguistic Interpretation Matrix (C-LIM), as depicted in the UNIT2 Manual. Fairness: Test Bias vs. Cultural Loading

A test may not show evidence of psychometric bias, but still have significant cultural loading or influence How do we determine cultural loading for these tests? Cultural-Language Interpretation Matrix (C-LIM; see Flanagan, Ortiz, & Alfonso, 2007, 2013, Essentials of Cross- Battery Assessment) POINT?? Use of the C-LIM and info from the Essentials of Cross- Battery Assessment can help determine influence of cultural loading Fairness: Test Bias vs. Cultural Loading

Cultural-Language Interpretation Matrix (C-LIM; see Flanagan, Ortiz, & Alfonso, 2007, 2013, Essentials of Cross-Battery Assessment)

Slightly Different: Individuals with high levels of English proficiency, high acculturation. Moderately Different: Includes individuals with moderate English proficiency and moderate acculturation. Markedly Different: Includes individuals with low to very low levels of English proficiency and low or very low levels of acculturation. Degree of Linguistic Demand Degree of Cultural Loading LowModerateHigh Low Slightly Different: 3-5 Points Moderately Different: 5-7 points Markedly Different: 7-10 points Slightly Different: 5-7 Points Moderately Different: 7-10 points Markedly Different: 10-15 points Slightly Different: 7-10 Points Moderately Different: 10-15 points Markedly Different: 15-20 points Moderate Slightly Different: 5-7 Points Moderately Different: 7-10 points Markedly Different: 10-15 points Slightly Different: 7-10 Points Moderately Different: 10-15 points Markedly Different: 15-20 points Slightly Different: 7-10 Points Moderately Different: 10-15 points Markedly Different: 15-20 points High Slightly Different: 7-10 Points Moderately Different: 10-15 points Markedly Different: 15-20 points Slightly Different: 10-15 Points Moderately Different: 15-20 points Markedly Different: 20-25 points Slightly Different: 15-20 Points Moderately Different: 20-25 points Markedly Different: 25-35 points

UNIT2 Summary of Steps for Determining the Pattern of Scores Derived from the C-LIM Practitioners should look for a declining pattern of scores (Cell Averages) within the context of the individual’s unique cultural, linguistic, and educational history based on administered subtests (placed into the matrix): 1.Is the highest Cell Average in the uppermost left-hand corner? 2.Is the lowest Cell Average in the lowermost right-hand corner? 3.Do the remaining Cell Averages fall between the highest and lowest scores and follow a relative decline from upper-left cells to the lower-right cells? 4.If the answer to all questions is “yes,” then it is likely that the test results are invalid and reflect lack of acculturation and limited English proficiency more so than true ability.

Fairness: Test Bias vs. Cultural Loading

Note: UNIT2 may be used in conjunction with two other related instruments, both sensitive to those with nontraditional or limited English Language skills.

UNIT GAT is a group administered measure of general cognitive ability. UGAT can be used as a screener and features two scales: General Reasoning and Quantitative Thinking UGAT may be used to determine those who are: (a) gifted/cognitively advanced, or (b) students who are at risk UGAT is scheduled for publication in 2017. UNIT2 Related Instruments

UNIT Group Ability Test (UGAT; Bracken & McCallum, in progress) is a group administered measure of general cognitive ability. UGAT can be used as a screener for gifted identification or to identify students who are at risk. UGAT features two scales: General Reasoning Quantitative Reasoning UGAT is scheduled for publication in 2017. UNIT Group Ability Test

Universal Multidimensional Abilities Scales, or UMAS UMAS was published in 2012 and provides a teacher- based rating of performance in six domains: Cognition, Creativity, Leadership, Literacy, Math, Science. Raters are instructed to rate students on 15 items per domain based on their perspective of the examinee’s performance relative to same-age peers. In addition, raw scores can be transformed into standard scores based on a national standardization sample. UMAS can be used as a screener to identify those who may be gifted or at- risk in the areas of cognition, creativity, leadership, literacy, math, and science. UMAS takes advantage of the teacher’s knowledge of local standards/norms and does not penalize examinees for use of nonstandard or limited English. Provides another source of information about examinees! UNIT2 Related Instruments

UMAS (McCallum & Bracken, 2012) provides a teacher-based rating of students’ performance in six domains: Cognition Creativity Leadership Literacy Math Science Students are rated on 15 items per domain based on their performance relative to same-age peers. Raw scores are transformed into standard scores based on a national standardization sample. UMAS can be used as a screener for gifted identification or for students who are at-risk. UMAS takes advantage of the teacher’s knowledge of local standards/norms and does not penalize examinees for use of nonstandard or limited English. UMAS provides another source of information about Examinees level of functioning! Universal Multidimensional Abilities Scales

Thank you for Attending! Questions?

Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test – 2 Bruce A. Bracken R. Steve McCallum.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test – 2 Bruce A. Bracken R. Steve McCallum."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test – 2 Bruce A. Bracken R. Steve McCallum.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test – 2 Bruce A. Bracken R. Steve McCallum."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback