Policy Implications of Psychological Assessment of Minority Children

  • Cheryl A. Utley
  • H. Carl Haywood
  • John C. Masters
Part of the Disorders of Human Learning, Behavior, and Communication book series (HUMAN LEARNING)

Abstract

The insistent demand for “nondiscriminatory” testing procedures in psychoeducational assessment, especially of children from minority groups, has had a substantial base in case law (e.g., Larry P. v. Wilson Riles, 1979; Mattie T. et al., v. Charles E. Holladay et al., 1979; see also Elliott, Chapter 20 in this volume) as well as federal legislation (e.g., Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973; Education of All Handicapped Children Act of 1975). Professional organizations, such as the American Psychological Association, the American Educational Research Association, and the National Council on Measurement in Education, have adopted policy statements addressed to the possibility of bias in mental tests. Innovative assessment practices with minority children have been developed in efforts to minimize the discrepancy in intelligence test scores between minority and majority children and to prevent inappropriate or disproportionate assignment of minority children, relative to majority children, to special education classes (Jones, 1976, 1988; Sewell, 1987). These concerns constitute issues in psychometrics and educational practice, but they also constitute public policy issues.

Keywords

Psychological Assessment Intelligence Test Minority Child Dynamic Assessment Test Bias 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, B. (1982). Test use today in elementary and secondary schools. In A. K. Wigdor & W. R. Garner (Eds.), Ability testing: Uses, consequences, and controversies (Part 2). Report of the Committee on Ability Testing, National Research Council (pp. 232–285). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  2. Arbitman-Smith, R., Haywood, H. C., & Bransford, J. D. (1984). Assessing cognitive change. In P. H. Brooks, R. D. Sperber, & C. McCauley (Eds.), Learning and cognition in the mentally retarded (pp. 433–471). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  3. Avery, G. (1985). Effects of social, cultural, and economic factors on brain development. In J. M. Freeman (Ed.), Prenatal and perinatal factors associated with brain disorders (pp. 163–176). Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
  4. Bickel, W. E. (1982). Classifying mentally retarded students: A review of placement practices in special education. In K. A. Heller, W. H. Holtzman, & S. Messick (Eds.), Placing children in special education: A strategy for equity (pp. 182–229). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bond, L. (1982). The IQ controversy and academic performance. In S. Turner (Ed.), Behavior modification in black populations: Psycho-social issues and empirical findings (pp. 95–120). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brookover, W. B., & Lezotte, L. W. (1979). Changes in school characteristics coincident with changes in student achievement. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, College of Urban Development (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 182 465).Google Scholar
  7. Brown, A. L., & Ferrara, R. A. (1985). Diagnosing zones of proximal development. In J. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 273–305). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Budoff, M. (1975). Learning potential among educable retarded pupils. Technical report, grant No. RO1 MH 18553–03. Washington, DC: National Institute of Mental Health.Google Scholar
  9. Budoff, M., & Corman, L. (1973). The effectiveness of a group training procedure on the Raven learning potential measure with children of diverse racial and socioeconomic backgrounds. RIEP Print #58. Cambridge, MA: Research Institute for Educational Problems.Google Scholar
  10. Budoff, M., & Hamilton, J. (1976). Optimizing test performance of the moderately and severely mentally retarded. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 81, 49–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. California State Department of Education (1970). Placement of underachieving minority group children in special education classess for the educable mentally retarded. Sacramento: California State Department of Education.Google Scholar
  12. Campione, J. C., Brown, A. L., & Bryant, N. R. (1985). Individual differences in learning and memory. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Human abilities: An information processing approach (pp. 103–126). New York: Freeman Press.Google Scholar
  13. Children’s Defense Fund (1985). An analysis of the President’s FY 1986 budget and children. Washington, DC: Children’s Defense Fund.Google Scholar
  14. Childs, R. E. (1982). A study of the adaptive behavior of retarded children and the resultant effects of this use in the diagnosis of mental retardation. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 17, 109–113.Google Scholar
  15. Chinn, P. C., & Hughes, S. (1987). Representation of minority students in special education classes. Remedial and Special Education, 8(4), 41–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cleary, T. A., Humphreys, L. G., Kendrick, S. A., & Wesman, A. (1975). Educational uses of tests with disadvantaged students. American Psychologist, 30, 15–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cohen, R. A. (1969). Conceptual styles, culture conflict, and nonverbal tests of intelligence. American Anthropologist, 71, 828–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPortland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  19. Consortium for Longitudinal Studies. (1983). As the twig is bent…lasting effects of preschool programs. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Corman, L., & Gottlieb, J. (1978). Mainstreaming mentally retarded children: A review of research. In N. R. Ellis (Ed.), International review of research in mental retardation (Vol. 9, pp. 251–275). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  21. Darlington, R. B. (1986). Long-term effects of preschool programs. In U. Neisser (Ed.), The school achievement of minority children: New perspectives (pp. 159–189). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  22. Dunn, L. M. (1968). Special education for the mildly retarded—is much of it justifiable? Exceptional Children, 35(1), 5–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Education of All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, Sec. 121 a. 5, 20 U.S.C. Sec. 1401 (1977).Google Scholar
  24. Feuerstein, R., Haywood, H. C., Rand, Y., Hoffman, M. B., & Jensen, M. (1986). Examiner manual for the Learning Potential Assessment Device. Jerusalem: Hadassah-WIZO-Canada Research Institute.Google Scholar
  25. Feuerstein, R., & Rand, Y. (1974). Mediated learning experiences: An outline of proximal etiology for differential development of cognitive functions. International Understanding, 9–10, 7–37.Google Scholar
  26. Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., & Hoffman, M. B. (1979). The dynamic assessment of retarded performers: The Learning Potential Assessment Device, theory, instruments, and techniques. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
  27. Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., Hoffman, M. B., & Miller, R. (1980). Instrumental Enrichment. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
  28. Finn, J. D. (1982). Patterns in special education placement as revealed by the OCR surveys. In K. A. Heller, W. H. Holtzman, & S. Messick (Eds.), Placing children in special education: A strategy for equity (pp. 322–381). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  29. Goldman, R. D., & Hartig, L. K. (1976). The WISC-R may not be a valid predictor of school performance for primary-grade minority children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 80(6), 583–587.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Grossman, H. J. (Ed.) (1977). Manual on terminology and classification in mental retardation. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Deficiency.Google Scholar
  31. Grossman, H. J. (Ed.) (1983). Classification in mental retardation. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.Google Scholar
  32. Gutkin, T. B., & Reynolds, C. R. (1980). Factorial similarity of the WISC-R for Anglos and Chicanos referred for psychological services. Journal of School Psychology, 18(1), 34–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Haywood, H. C. (1974). Distribution of intelligence. Encyclopedia Britannica (15th Ed.), 672–677.Google Scholar
  34. Haywood, H. C. (1982). Compensatory education. Peabody Journal of Education, 59, 272–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Haywood, H. C. (1984, October). Alternative approaches to psychoeducational assessment of minority children. Paper presented at the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management Research Conference, New Orleans.Google Scholar
  36. Haywood, H. C. (1988). Dynamic assessment: The Learning Potential Assessment Device. In R. Jones (Ed.), Pschoeducational assessment of minority group children: A casebook (pp. 39–63). Berkeley, CA: Cobb & Henry.Google Scholar
  37. Haywood, H. C., & Bransford, J. D. (1984, March). Dynamic assessment: Issues, research, and applications. Introductory paper for a symposium on Dynamic Assessment given at the XVII Gatlinburg Conference on Research in Mental Retardation, Gatlinburg, TN.Google Scholar
  38. Haywood, H. C., & Switzky, H. N. (1986a). The malleability of intelligence: Cognitive processes as a function of polygenic-experiential interaction. School Psychology Review, 15, 245–255.Google Scholar
  39. Haywood, H. C., & Switzky, H. N. (1986b). Transactionalism and cognitive processes: Reply to Reynolds and Gresham. School Psychology Review, 15, 264–267.Google Scholar
  40. Haywood, H. G., & Wachs, T. D. (1981). Intelligence, cognition, and individual differences. In M. J. Begab, H. C. Haywood, & H. L. Garber (Eds.), Psychosocial influences in retarded performance. Vol. 1. Issues and theories in development (pp. 95–126). Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
  41. Heflinger, C. A., Cook, V., & Thackrey, M. (1987). Identification of mental retardation by the System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment: Nondiscriminatory or nonexistent? Journal of School Psychology, 25, 121–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Heller, K. A., Holtzman, W. H., & Messick, S. (1982). Placing children in special education: A strategy for equity. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  43. Ironson, G. H., & Sebkovial, N. J. (1979). A comparison of several methods for assessing item bias. Journal of Educational Measurement, 16, 209–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Jenkins, R. H., & Mayhall, W. F. (1976). Development and evaluation of a resource teacher program. Exceptional Children, 43, 21–29.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Jensen, A. R. (1980). Bias in mental testing. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  46. Jensen, A. R. (1985). The nature of black-white differences on various psychometric tests. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8(1), 359–368.Google Scholar
  47. Jensen, M. R., & Feuerstein, R. (1987). The Learning Potential Assessment Device: From philosophy of practice. In C. S. Lidz (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 379–402). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  48. Johnson, S. T. (1980). Major issues in measurement today: Their implications for black Americans. Journal of Negro Education, 49(3), 253–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Jones, R. L. (1976). Mainstreaming and the minority child. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.Google Scholar
  50. Jones, R. L. (1988). Psychoeducational assessment of minority group children: A casebook. Berkelely, CA: Cobb & Henry.Google Scholar
  51. Kazimour, K. K., & Reschly, D. J. (1981). Investigation of the norms and concurrent validity for Adaptive Behavior Inventory for Children (ABIC). American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 85(5), 512–520.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Kirk, S. A., & Gallagher, J. J. (1989). Educating exceptional children. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  53. Laosa, L. M. (1977). Nonbiased assessment of children’s abilities: Historical antecedents and current issues. In T. Oakland (Ed.), Psychological and educational assessment of minority children (pp. 1–20). New York: Brunner/Mazel.Google Scholar
  54. Larry P. v. Wilson Riles (1979). 495 F. Supp. 926 (N. D. Cal. 1979) No. 80.4027. (9th Cir., Jan, 1980).Google Scholar
  55. Linn, R. (1982). Ability testing: Individual differences, prediction, and differential prediction. In A. K. Wigdor & W. R. Garner (Eds.), Ability testing: Uses, consequences, and controversies (Part 2). Report to the Committee on Ability Testing, National Research Council (pp. 335–388). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  56. Manni, J. L., Winikur, D. W., Keller, M. R. (1984). Intelligence, mental retardation, and the culturally different child. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.Google Scholar
  57. Mascari, B. G., & Forgnone, C. (1982). A follow-up study of EMR students four years after dismissal from the program. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 17, 288–292.Google Scholar
  58. Mattie, T., et al. v. Holladay, et al. (1979). DC-75-31-S (N.D. Miss. 1979).Google Scholar
  59. Matuszek, P., & Oakland, T. (1979). Factors influencing teacher’s and psychologists’ recommendations regarding special class placement. Journal of School Psychology, 17, 116–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. McShane, D., & Cook, V. (1985). Transcultural intellectual assessment. In B. B. Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence: Theories, measurement, and applications (pp. 737–785). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  61. Mercer, J. R. (1973). Labeling the mentally retarded: Clinical and social system perspectives on mental retardation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  62. Mercer, J. R. (1979a). System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment Technical Manual. New York: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  63. Mercer, J. R. (1979b). In defense of racially and culturally nondiscriminatory assessment. School Psychology Digest, 8, 89–115.Google Scholar
  64. Messé, L. A., Crano, W. D., Messé, S. R., & Rice, W. (1979). Evaluation of the predictive validity of tests of mental ability for classroom performance in elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 233–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Minick, N. (1987). Implications of Vygotsky’s theories for dynamic assessment. In C. S. Lidz (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 116–140). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  66. Oakland, T., & Parmelee, R. (1985). Mental measurement of minority-group children. In B. B. Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence: Theories, measurement, and applications (pp. 699–736). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  67. Office of Civil Rights (1978). Elementary and secondary civil rights survey. Sample selection. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education, & Welfare.Google Scholar
  68. Ogbu, J. U. (1978). Minority education and caste: The American system in cross-cultural perspective. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  69. Poland, S., Ysseldyke, J., Thurlow, M., & Mirkin, P. (1979). Current assessment and decision making in school settings as reported by Directors of Special Education (Research Report No. 14). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.Google Scholar
  70. Prasse, D. P., & Reschly, D. J. (1986). Larry P.: A case of segregation, testing or program efficacy. Exceptional Children, 52(4), 333–346.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Reschly, D. J. (1978). WISC-R factor structure among Anglos, blacks, Chicanos, and Native American Papagos. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 417–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Reschly, D. J. (1980). Nonbiased assessment. Unpublished manuscript. Iowa State University, Department of Psychology, Ames, Iowa.Google Scholar
  73. Reschly, D. J., & Sabers, D. L. (1979). Analyses of test bias in four groups with regression definition. Journal of Educational Measurement, 16(1), 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Resnick, L. B. (1979). The future of IO testing in education. Intelligence, 3, 241–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Reynolds, C. R. (1982). The problem of bias in psychological assessment. In C. R. Reynolds & T. B. Gutkin (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  76. Reynolds, C. R., & Brown, R. T. (1984). Perspectives on bias in mental testing. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Reynolds, C. R., & Gutkin, T. B. (1980). A regression analysis of test bias on the WISC-R for Anglos and Chicanos referred for psychological services. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 8(1), 237–243.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Rosenshine, B. V., & Berliner, D. C. (1978). Academic engaged time. British Journal of Teacher Education, 4, 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sandoval, J. (1982). The WISC-R factoral validity for minority groups and Spearman’s hypothesis. Journal of School Psychology, 20(3), 198–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Sattler, J. M. (1974). Assessment of children’s intelligence. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.Google Scholar
  81. Sattler, J. M. (1988). Assessment of children. San Diego, CA: Jerome M. Sattler.Google Scholar
  82. Section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. §794. Regulations at 45 C.F.R. §84 (1977).Google Scholar
  83. Sewell, T. (1987). Dynamic assessment as a nondiscriminatory procedure. In C. S. Lidz (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 426–443). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  84. Slavin, R. E. (1987). Ability grouping and student achievement in elementary schools. A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 57(3), 293–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Strickland, B. B., & Turnbull, A. P. (1990). Developing and implementing individualized education programs, Columbus, OH: Merrill.Google Scholar
  86. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964m 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000d. Regulations at 45 C.F.R. Sec. 121 (1977).Google Scholar
  87. Travers, J. R. (1982). Testing in educational placement: Issues and evidence. In K. A. Heller, W. H. Holtzman, & S. Messick, (Eds.), Placing children in special education: A strategy for equity (pp. 230–261). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  88. Tucker, J. A. (1980). Ethnic proportions in classes for the learning disabled: Issues in nonbiased assessment. Journal of Special Education, 14(1), 93–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  90. Wechsler, D. (1974). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Revised. Cleveland, OH: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  91. Wigdor, A. K., & Garner, W. R. (1982). Ability testing: Uses, consequences, and controversies (Parts 1 and 2). Report of the Committee on Ability Testing, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  92. Wright, B. J., & Isenstein, V. R. (1977). Psychological tests and minorities. Rockville, MD: NIMH, DHEW Publication No. (ADM) 78–482.Google Scholar
  93. Wyne, M. D., & O’Connor, P. D. (1979). Exceptional children: A developmental view. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.Google Scholar
  94. Ysseldyke, J., Algozzine, R., Regan, R., & McGue, M. (1979). The influence of test scores and naturally occurring pupil characteristics on psychoeducational decision making with children (Research Report No. 14). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cheryl A. Utley
  • H. Carl Haywood
  • John C. Masters

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations