Diagnostic Measures for Monitoring Progress
This week, you read about changes over time in the procedures for evaluating SLDs. Recently, most states changed their existing rules and regulations to include an RTI model, which identifies three levels of intervention or teaching to facilitate learning for all students. Subsequently, it became important to determine tests or assessments, which would provide monitoring or progress within each level of instructional intervention. However, this model for teaching has now been utilized as a method for identifying students as having a learning disability.
You were also introduced to a number of diagnostic measures for monitoring progress, which included nationally standardized tests alongside locally normed standardized measurement procedures called CBM. In addition, the authors of your Psychological Testing and Assessment text presented several questions and concerns regarding the use of diagnostic tests when working with individuals suspected of having learning disabilities.
Based on this week's readings, complete the following for this discussion:
Outline the concerns that may exist with using an RTI model when identifying students suspected as having a learning disability.
Identify some of the limitations or concerns that may result from using diagnostic tests (both nationally standardized and CBM) when working with all students, as well as students who may have a learning disability.
Identify some of the strengths in using these tests or measurements for progress monitoring.
Summarize this information and present a recommendation for the use of the RTI model, nationally standardized diagnostic tests, locally normed CBM, and intelligence and academic achievement tests, and their role in monitoring educational progress and identification of a learning disability.
*** you can Google the text I couldn’t find in library.
Diagnostic Measures for Monitoring Progress
Name
Institution
Course
Date
Diagnostic Measures for Monitoring Progress
The major concern with using an RTI model when identifying students suspected of having a learning disability is that it may lead to misdiagnosis. If the RTI model is not implemented properly, it can result in students struggling with learning being incorrectly identified as having a learning disability. In addition, the RTI model tends to focus on the deficits of a student, which can lead to labels that may need to be more accurate (Kovaleski & Scruggs, 2020). Also, there is a concern that the RTI model may delay identifying a learning disability. The RTI model requires multiple levels of intervention before a student can be identified as having a learning disability. This action can result in a delay in diagnosis and intervention, which can detrimentally affect student learning.
A major limitation of using nationally standardized and CBM diagnostic tests is that they may not accurately identify students with a learning disability. Diagnostic tests are typically designed to measure a student’s overall performance rather than their specific skills, which can lead to misdiagnosis (Larivieren& Dunn, 2020). Besides, diagnostic tests may not accurately identify the underlying causes of a student’s learning disability. Furthermore, there is a concern that the results of diagnostic tests may be biased due to the use of outdated or inappropriate assessment tools.
Another area for improvement is that many diagnostic tests rely heavily on the student's ability to recall information, which can be difficult for some students. Due to the time-consuming nature of most diagnostic tests, it is only sometimes feasible to administer them to large groups of students. Besides, students with learning disabilities may not be able to complete the tests properly, and even if they do, the results may not accurately reflect their true abilities (Kovaleski & Scrug...