1. Using the CPPS to Evaluate Children with Learning Problems
Dr. Milton J. Dehn
Schoolhouse Educational Services

2. Children’s Psychological Processes Scale (CPPS) Facts
Standardized teacher rating scale
Ages 5 – 12
121 items across 11 subscales
Entirely online, internet-web based
Online administration time of 15 minutes
Online scoring and report
Author: Milton Dehn; published by Schoolhouse Educational Services, 2012

3. Uses of the CPPS Screening LD Evaluations
Identifies need for intervention
Predicts academic skills development
Useful in planning comprehensive assessment
LD Evaluations
Identify psych processing deficits
Pattern of strengths and weaknesses
Measure progress during interventions
Through the use of change-sensitive W-scores

4. What is psychological processing?
Brain processes, operations, functions
Any time mental contents are operated on
When information is perceived, transformed, manipulated, stored, retrieved, expressed
Whenever we think, reason, problem-solve
Can’t learn and perform without processing
Learning depends on these processes
Doesn’t include knowledge or academic skills

5. MN Processing Criteria
“The child has a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes which includes an information processing condition that is manifested in a variety of settings by behaviors such as inadequate …. (next slide)

6. MN Processing Criteria
….acquisition of information; organization; planning and sequencing; working memory, including verbal, visual, or spatial; visual and auditory processing; speed of processing; verbal and nonverbal expression; transfer of information; and motor control for written tasks.”
(Can include other processes not listed.)

7. What is a Processing Disorder?
Disorder: A group of symptoms involving abnormal behaviors
A disorder involves deficits
Deficit: A lack or shortage of something
Weakness: Lacking normal ability
A processing disorder impairs academic learning
Not many official processing disorders
E.g. CAPD, aphasia, amnesia, dyspraxia

8. Evidence for a Processing Disorder and SLD Diagnosis
It’s not specific to one environment
A normative weakness (below average score)
Intra-individual: score is significantly weaker than predicted from discrepancy analysis
Best if it’s an intra-individual weakness and a normative weakness (this is a deficit; these are rare)
It’s impacting academic learning
The low psychological processes and low academics have research-based links
The linked process and academic skills both have low scores (consistency approach)

9. Processes and Academic Learning
Psychological processes are like “aptitudes”
Relations established through research
Flanagan et al.
McGrew’s review of research
The influence of processes varies by age
Look for academic area and related psychological processes to both be low
See Table

10. Psychological Processes Measured by the CPPS
Attention
Auditory Processing
Executive Functions
Fine Motor
Fluid Reasoning
Long-Term Recall
Oral Language
Phonological Processing
Processing Speed
Visual-Spatial Processing
Working Memory
General Processing Ability (Composite)

11. CPPS Processes Significantly Related With Types of Academic Learning

12. Characteristics of CPPS Processes
Brain-based
Interrelated
Necessary for academic learning
They underlie academic performance
They are broad processes
Observable in classroom

13. Attention In classroom: Necessary for learning
Attention deficits part of LD; not necessarily ADHD
Types: Selective, focused, divided, sustained
The problem is attentional control & lack of inhibition
On CPPS, links to Executive Functions and Working Memory
Lowest Item: “Is noisy and disruptive in class”
Highest Item: “Has difficulty dividing attention between two tasks”

14. Auditory Processing
Ability to perceive, analyze, synthesize, and discriminate auditory stimuli, mainly speech
In classroom: Perceiving and comprehending instruction; being able to understand words with background noise
Lowest item: “Has difficulty associating a voice with the correct person”
Highest item: “Has difficulty understanding instruction when there is background noise”

15. Executive Functions
Management of cognitive functions and psychological processes
Effectiveness depends on self-monitoring, self-regulation, and metacognition
Has a longer course of development
More to do with classroom performance than learning of academic skills
Lowest item “Has difficulty adapting to changes, such as a change in routine”
Highest item: “Does not notice errors in schoolwork”

16. Fine Motor Hits developmental plateau by age 7
On CPPS, has weaker relations with cognitive processes in general but has strong relations with academics
On CPPS, pairs up with visual-spatial process.
Lowest item: “Has difficulty picking up small objects with thumb and forefinger”
Highest item: “Has difficulty staying between the lines when printing or writing”

17. Fluid Reasoning
Deductive, inductive reasoning, especially with novel materials
Has a longer course of development
More important for applied academics
Lowest item: “When given clues, does poorly at guessing the answer”
Highest item: “Has difficulty solving unfamiliar problems”

18. Long-Term Recall
Close connection with other processes and with academic learning in general
Includes encoding, consolidation, storage, and retrieval
RAN is part of
Lowest item: “Has difficulty remembering nursery rhymes or stories”
Highest item: “Has difficulty recalling information during tests”

19. Oral Language
Not the content (vocabulary) or receptive language but the oral expression processes
Lowest item “Substitutes or omits vowel and consonant sounds when speaking”
Highest item: “Has difficulty paraphrasing when speaking”

20. Phonological Processing
Processing of phonemes, e.g. blending
Phonemic awareness is part of
Lowest item: “Has difficulty identifying the first sound in a word”
Highest item: “Has difficulty sounding out unknown words when reading”

21. Processing Speed
How quickly information flows through the processing system; a matter of efficiency
Too slow: info. lost, process not completed
Lowest item “Is slow to perform, relatively easy, well-learned tasks”
Highest item: “Takes a long time to complete a worksheet”

22. Visual-Spatial Processing
The ability to perceive, analyze, synthesize, manipulate and think with visual patterns
A strength in most LD cases
Weak relations with all academics; more of a “threshold” process
Lowest item: “Has difficulty matching things that look alike”
Highest item: “Becomes confused when figures are rotated or reversed”

23. Working Memory Processing while retaining information
On CPPS includes short-term memory
Both verbal and visual
Lowest item: “Loses place when counting”
Highest item: “Has difficulty organizing information when writing”

24. General Processing Ability (GPA)
Based on average of all process scores
Emerges from factor analysis; similar to concept of general intelligence
Processes function in an inter-related fashion
Most processes contribute to any given behavior, task
On CPPS defined as “the underlying efficiency of automaticity of processing”

25. CPPS Standardization 1,121 students rated by 278 teachers
128 communities in 30 states
Entirely online
Demographics match U.S. Census well
Scores were weighted
Included children with disabilities
Demographics details Link

26. Item Selection Two rounds of piloting
W-scores indicate wide ability range
Skewed distributions common
Rasch item analysis
Exploratory factor analysis to check subscale alignment

27. Reverse Scoring Relative to achievement & cognitive tests
High scores mean high difficulty and low ability
All items stated negatively
Inconsistent ratings when positively stated items were tried

28. Norms and Scores 4 age groups (5-6; 7-8; 9-10; 11-12)
Boys have more processing problems
No sign. sex differences in fluid reasoning, phonological, and visual-spatial
Norms not divided by sex Link
Combined sex norms better for identification
T-scores derived from linear transformation of actual standardization distribution

29. W-Scores
Used in item analysis, development of scoring system, and in reports
Mean of 500 at age 10; SD of roughly 20
Converts ordinal rankings into equal intervals
More precise measurement
Gradient with smaller steps
More sensitive to changes, progress
Use when re-evaluating student with CPPS

30. Reliability
Internal consistency subscale reliability ranges from .88 to Link
.99 on Total Score
Inter-rater reliability
Range of .21 to .90
Median coefficient of 76.5

31. Validity: Developmental Evidence
Skewed distributions because
Very few children have processing problems
Fewer processing problems in older children
Most processes fully develop early
Teachers rate relative to that grade level
Dev. changes observed in younger children
Changes observed in upper half of problem distribution Link See Range
W values used to arrange items in order

32. Correlations with Achievement
High correlations with WJ III Achievement Test scores Link
The broader the achievement score, the higher the correlations
Correlation of .66 between teacher’s overall ranking of academic skills and CPPS GPA
Parent education level and CPPS GPA is .33

33. Correlations with WJ III COG
Fewer correlations than achievement Link
All CPPS processes have sign. correlations with Cognitive Fluency (ability to quickly and fluently perform cog. tasks)
Most CPPS scales expected to link with WJ III COG tests do, except attention, processing speed, and working memory
Also, discriminant evidence

34. Correlations with BRIEF
CPPS Attention, Executive Functions, and Working Memory have the highest correlations with all BRIEF scales and a sign. correlation with every BRIEF score
CPPS Attention and EF mostly are >.70 indicating they measure same domains as BRIEF Link
Other CPPS scales correlate with BRIEF metacognitive scales but not behavioral

35. Factor and Cluster Analysis
A general factor; all subtests load on
General processing ability (GPA) may reflect processing efficiency or automaticity Link
Second factor is Attention, EF, sometimes WM: Self-Regulatory Processes
Third factor is Fine Motor and Visual-Spatial: Visual-Motor processes Link
Results fairly consistent across age groups

36. Diagnostic Utility for LD
37 LD subjects with broad demographics
Compared to matched controls, LD subjects had significantly higher means on all subscales Link
The CPPS has high classification accuracy in regards to LD
Using CPPS GPA cutoff of 60 has 92% classification accuracy across 74 subjects

37. CPPS Administration
Online rating scale minutes for teachers to complete
Can print free paper copy and enter later
Must answer all items
Responses: Never, Sometimes, Often, Almost Always
This file is stored until accessed for report
More than 1 teacher rater is recommended

38. CPPS Report Brief narrative A graph and a table of scores
Change-sensitive W-scores
T-scores; percentiles; confidence intervals
Intra-individual strengths and weakness discrepancy table
T-score to standard score converter
Example

39. Multiple Raters Expect differences Compare scores on the graphs
Is the profile similar but one teacher’s scores are consistently higher than others
Significantly different when confidence bands do not overlap
How are the teachers’ experiences with the student different?
If 3 raters, give most creditability to middle rater

40. Diagnosing LD with the CPPS
Use a T-score of 60 or above on the GPA
Use discrepancy table to determine pattern of strengths and weaknesses
Predicted score based on mean of other 10
Use +/ SD of discrepancy as criterion
Non LD also have a pattern Link
Weaknesses should link to evidence-based achievement relations Link

41. Case I Background 5th grade, 12 year old male
History of struggling with Math & Wr Lang
Received tutoring and extra help at school
Not placed for LD after eval. 2 years prior
Average IQ
Doesn’t meet ADHD diagnostic criteria
Seems immature

42. Case I CPPS Scores
Attention 70 Auditory Processing 51 Executive Functions 55 Fine Motor 63 Fluid Reasoning 64 Long-Term Recall 61 Oral Language 61 Phonological Processing 53 Processing Speed 58 Visual-Spatial Processing 48 Working Memory 63 General Processing Ability 60

43. Case I WJ Cog Scores
Comp-Knowledge 97 *a close match with CPPS LT Retrieval 86* Vis-Spatial 93* Auditory Proc 97* Fluid Reasoning 103 Process Speed 82 ST Memory 90 Phonemic Aware 103* Working Memory 87* Broad Attention 90 Cognitive Fluency 85

44. Case I WJ III ACH
Broad Reading 91* Broad Math 89** Broad Wr Lang 86** Math Calc Skills 90** Writ Exp 85** *Has strong CPPS related processes **Has weak CPPS related processes

45. Case I Conclusions From a processing perspective, could qualify for LD
Does not because IQ-Ach discrepancy not severe enough
Nevertheless, struggles because of processing problems

46. Case II Background 7 year old, first grade male
1st grade teacher reported many concerns: attention, math difficulties, losing things, slow to start, slow to complete work
Good at art, visual-spatial, behavior
Reported concerns to parent
History: needed oxygen at birth
No health or developmental problems

47. CPPS Case Study II
Attention 69 Auditory Processing 69 Executive Functions 65 Fine Motor 53 Fluid Reasoning 66 Long-Term Recall 73 Oral Language 64 Phonological Processing 65 Processing Speed 70 Visual-Spatial Processing 65 Working Memory 72 General Processing Ability 68

48. Case II WJ III COG Scores
Comp-Knowledge 84 LT Retrieval 101 Vis-Spatial 110 Auditory Proc 122 Fluid Reasoning 98 Process Speed 96 ST Memory 112 Phonemic Awareness 108 Working Memory 93 Broad Attention 99 Cognitive Fluency 83

49. Case II WJ III ACH
Brief Reading 85 Broad Math 69* Brief Writing 80 (-1.49) Math Calc Skills 67* *More than 2.00 SD’s of discrepancy below ability

50. Case II BRIEF Scores
Inhibit 49 Shift 50 Emot Control 43 BRI 47 Initiate 67 Working Memory 72 Plan/Organize 72 Org of Materials 57 Monitor 49 MI 64 GEC 58

51. Case II WRAML2 Scores
Verbal Memory 108 Visual Memory 85 Attention/Concentration 88 General Memory 91 Verbal Recognition 105 Visual Recognition 84 General Recognition 94 Delayed Recall Average 10 (mean for subs)

52. Case II Discussion Compare CPPS results with other test results
What are the consistencies
What are the inconsistencies
Does he have a learning disability?
Does he have ADHD?
(Disregard intervention requirement)

53. Selective, Cross-Battery Testing
Assess areas based on concerns, not on what a test has to offer
Mix tests/batteries to cover all the areas
Limit to 2 or 3 batteries
Should be normed about the same time
Avoid redundancies
Ideally, 2 subtests per process
Analyze results together by computing a cross-battery mean or using IQ

54. Dehn’s Approach to Cross Battery
Not limited to CHC factors in Flanagan and Ortiz method
Includes processing factors that are important for learning of academic skills
Analyze scores at the factor (two-subtest) level whenever possible
Use a hand computation analysis sheet

55. Selective Testing Not necessary to administer entire battery
Focus most on hypothesized deficits
Know the factors/subtests that measure processes
Apply a cross-battery approach
See selective testing table for cog. & ach. Link

56. Using CPPS Results to Guide Standardized Testing
The WJ III COG is a good match
Other broad scales, such as memory
Use selective testing table
Sample all processing areas but especially weak and borderline areas
CPPS processes with scores above 60 should be sampled with at least 2 subtests

57. Using the CPPS to Measure Progress
Use W-Scores
Have a mean of 500 at age 10
Standard deviations vary (about 20)
4-5 W-score points for every 1-2 T-score points
A change of 20 points can be considered statistically significant

58. Using the CPPS to Plan an Intervention
Select processes with scores above 60 (weaknesses)
Prioritize if too many
Look for strengths (scores below 40) to counterbalance weakness

59. References
Dehn, M. J. (2006). Essentials of Processing Assessment. Wiley Publishing.
(a revision of this book will be out spring 2013)
Dehn, M. J. (2012). Children’s Psychological Processes Scale, Professional Manual. Schoolhouse Educational Serivces

60. CPPS Purchasing Information
Found at