Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Twice Exceptional Reevaluation Question

Need some insight, thoughts and advice! My son is up for reevaluation next year. He is gifted identified and he has an identification as specific learning disability in written expression as well as dyspraxia/DCD. He may have ADHd - not sure on that. But he has attention issues, whether from ADD or dyspraxia.

Anyway, got an email form his special-ed coordinator that said in preparation for his re-evaluation, which will be due by May 23, 2020, the district procedure is for the support teacher to complete the KTEA-3 Brief during the year prior to the re-evaluation to gain updated information in regards to reading, math, and writing skills. Because this is the year prior to the re-evaluation, he would need to complete this testing in the upcoming days. My DS is accelerated math, generally gets all As, is in honors science and is in ATP program. So, I guess I am not sure why his re-evaluation would include a KTEA-3 Brief when such a test is not really relevant to identifying his disabilities of dysgraphia, dyspraxia and low processing speed? In his previous evaluation and re-evaluation, he was specifically tested for dysgraphia/disorder of written expression. The testing at both previous evaluations identified him as has a specific learning disorder of written expression (dysgraphia). I would think a reevaluation should seek to again evaluate the continuing presence of this disorder and accompanying issues. It does not seem to me that the KTEA-3 Brief would help or shed any information in that regard? Can anyone tell me if there is any good reason to have him do it? I mean he took the SCAT for CTY so I know here he "falls," to a certain extent, because of that testing. The spec-ed teacher/coordinator tells me it is up to me - he doesn't have to do it if I don't want him to do so. I just think it would be a waste of time - and may even be detrimental since he will probably score quite high and I worry they will want to take away his iep based on that? Not sure if that is a valid concern or not.

I would think he just needs to be reevaluated in the same manner was he was during his reevaluation that occurred when he moved from elementary to middle school and when he was originally evaluated for dysgraphia/disorder of written expression (without the WISC and IQ testing). These are the tests that were used in his past evaluation and which need to be used again in this reevaluation:
Measure of Visual-Motor Integration - Bender
The Process Assessment of the Learner - Second Edition
Maybe we should add the ADHD/ADD questionnaires this time as well? I would like to see the same subtests from the Process Assessment of the Learner that were used in his previous evaluation used again in this reevaluation. These include the handwriting fluency subtests, paragraph copying subtests as well as Alphabet Automatic Legible Letter Writing, Alphabet Legible Letter Writing, Alphabet Writing Total Time, Sentence Copying Automatic Legible, Sentence Copying Legible, Letter Writing, and Sentence Copying.

So, thoughts? Should I have him do this KTEA Brief or no? Thanks!

The KTEA-3 Brief is probably being recommended as part of a standard battery for reevals. On the one hand, reevals only have to be in the suspected areas of disability, and he's been identified as having SLD-written expression, so the non-writing parts of the KTEA wouldn't necessarily be relevant. And his effective progress in mathematics is clearly high. On the other hand, I have seen more students than I would like have their IEPs terminated in middle school because their identified area of disability was grossly remediated, but other areas of deficit were not identified, due to evaluation in only the previously identified areas of disability. So from a just-making-sure perspective, I don't disagree with a brief achievement measure, screening each of the major academic skill areas. It does seem unlikely that his math or reading skills are going to emerge suddenly as weaknesses, but I suppose stranger things have happened.

I'm not as concerned that it will result in the removal of his IEP, because it doesn't address the areas related to DCD/dyspraxia, which is also part of his disability. The complication with the measures you are looking for is that many of them cease having reliable norms by the end of middle school. E.g., PAL-II only has norms through sixth grade. The Bender/VMI has norms through adulthood, but isn't timed, which won't get you fluency measures. The KTEA-3 full battery does include an optional Writing Fluency subtest, so maybe ask to add that on? OTOH, at some point he should just be using AT for writing. From the SLD-written expression angle, I'd prefer some slightly more advanced measures of written expression, too, such as the TOWL-4. (The KTEA-3 Written Expression subtest has some of the same elements, but doesn't break out the different aspects of written language as well as the TOWL-4 does.) Or you could see if they have the OWLS-II, which would allow you to document possible discrepancies between oral expressive language and written expressive language, which is another way to identify SLD-written expression.

FWIW.

Thank you so much, aeh! I was hoping you would weigh in. So, perhaps I will have him do the KTEA-3 brief and ask that they include the writing fluency subtest. Is the KTEA-3 writing fluency test a measure of actual physical handwriting, literally (like the PAL-II)? His problem is he can simply not hand-write. He is apparently quite a good writer in terms of expression, i.e., he has won several awards in writing - mostly creative but also narrative and essay. As long as he is writing with AT, i.e., typing, iPad, etc., he is a strong writer. But physically writing letters and numbers with his hands is a problem. He still even writes some letters and numbers backwards and he is 13. His other problem is low processing speed - he needs extra time, he just processes things like directions slowly, he has weak executive functioning so he is slow with hat sort of stuff. He is also slow on assessments and usually requires extra time on assessments. And I used to think that was more due to dyspraxia and dysgraphia but now we wounder if it's ADD.

Are there any other measures, you think would be a good idea for me to request he tak in the re-eval given this info? I would rather him not lose his IEP but he is actually doing very well as long as he has extra time, reduced problems/work sometimes in some classes, and AT for writing. And while he also has always had very strong reading skills, he much prefers and does even better when he listens to books. So, I still wonder about stealth dyslexia. Anyway, thanks so much again.

The KTEA-3 writing fluency subtest is handwritten, and literally is a measure of how many words of meaningful language the student can generate by hand in a given time. If he is doing well with the provided accommodations, especially the kind you've listed, that is good documentation that he requires specialized accommodations to access his education, which meets criteria (with his diagnosed disabilities) for a 504 accommodation plan. If he doesn't need skills remediation (specialized instruction), then he doesn't need an IEP. In younger students, OT interventions make more sense, as there is still some possibility that they will gain functionality. By the time you hit middle school and beyond, it should have shifted over to primarily instruction in using relevant assistive technology. Once he's fluent with his AT, he may very well reach the point where accommodations are sufficient.

If you have lingering concerns about stealth dyslexia, the appropriate measures would be of reading fluency and of nonword decoding skills. The KTEA-3 has additional measures of silent and oral reading fluency, of word-level reading of real and nonsense words, and of reading fluency with both real and nonsense words. The more important question is what useful action would result from a diagnosis of stealth dyslexia. It appears he already has access to audiobooks (and practically speaking, almost every suburban secondary student in North America has access to audiotexts--Pearson publishes every etext with standard audio), and doesn't need read-aloud when it's a shorter reading selection. Remediation would force him to re-learn more efficient decoding strategies, which would probably be met with conscious or subconscious resistance, since his possibly-less-efficient methods do work.

You could throw in some rating scales for ADHD. Those are quick, and give a bit more data across settings. The slow cognitive tempo facet isn't too unusual in ADHD.

Thank you, aeh. This is very helpful!