Figure 3.1:A hypothetical 20-item subtest with a basal of two consecutive passes and a discontinue rule of three consecutive errors.
Figure 3.2:Ten broad abilities in CHC theory as updated by Schneider and McGrew (Schneider & McGrew, 2018), with the corresponding indexes of the fifth edition of the Wechsler scale for children (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, WISC-V).
Figure 3.3:The three domains of adaptive behavior, with examples of the skills in each.
Figure 3.4:T-score interpretation ranges on the BASC-3 scales.
Figure 3.5:Mean correlations between different informants' ratings of a child's behavioral and emotional problems, from Achenbach and colleagues (Achenbach et al., 1987).
Figure 3.6:Student characteristics and assessment conditions that guide the choice of instrument type.
Figure 7.1:The three criteria for diagnosing intellectual disability.
Figure 7.2:The decision pathway for diagnosing intellectual disability.
Figure 7.3:A hypothetical adaptive behavior profile for Nawaf on the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System, as rated by his mother, with the confidence interval around each score.
Figure 9.2:Early red flags that call for evaluation without delay, from Filipek et al. (1999); they remain in current guidelines (Hyman et al., 2020).
Figure 9.3:The decision pathway in diagnosing autism spectrum disorder.
Figure 9.4:Outcomes of evaluation for children who still screened positive on the M-CHAT-R/F after the Follow-Up interview: 47.5% were diagnosed with autism, and 94.6% overall had developmental delays or concerns warranting follow-up (Robins et al., 2014).
Figure 9.5:An original illustration of the checklist's page layout.
Figure 9.6:An original schematic for choosing the right booklet.
Figure 9.7:Total score ranges on the Standard Version for children under 13: below 30, minimal to no symptoms; 30 to 36.5, mild to moderate; 37 or above, severe.
Figure 9.8:An illustrative profile of a teacher rating, using hypothetical values.
Figure 9.9:An original schematic of the path from session to classification in the observation schedule.
Figure 9.10:A suggested layout of the session room, seen from above.
Figure 9.12:A hypothetical excerpt from a diagnostic report, worded by the author, with annotations showing what the teacher takes from each part.
Chapter 10: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and behavioral and emotional disorders
Figure 10.1:DSM-5-TR criteria for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, in abbreviated form.
Figure 10.2:The three presentations. The presentation is specified on the basis of the past six months.
Figure 10.3:Rate of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder diagnosis per 10,000 children by birth month, in states where September 1 is the school-entry cutoff date, from Layton and colleagues (Layton et al., 2018).
Figure 10.4:Externalizing and internalizing problems.
Figure 10.5:The decision pathway for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and behavioral and emotional disorders.
Figure 10.6:Illustrative drawing of the layout of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire form.
Figure 10.7:Illustrative drawing of the layout of the Vanderbilt teacher form.
Figure 10.8:Hypothetical summary of the mother’s and teacher’s Vanderbilt ratings.
Chapter 11: Sensory and multiple disabilities and communication disorders
Figure 11.2:An illustration of a visual acuity chart, with the categories of distance vision impairment in the International Classification of Diseases, Eleventh Revision (ICD-11) (World Health Organization, 2019).
Figure 11.3:One scene viewed with two visual fields.
Figure 11.4:A child’s pronunciation is judged by the standard of his dialect and community.
Figure 11.5:Decision pathway for hearing impairment.
Figure 11.6:Decision pathway for visual impairment.
Figure 11.7:Decision pathway for communication disorders.
Chapter 1: Concepts of diagnosis and identification
Table 1.1:Purposes of assessment, the question each purpose answers, and an example of a tool for it.
Table 1.2:The difference among testing, measurement, assessment and evaluation.
Table 1.3:Medical and educational classification systems and their purposes.
Table 1.4:The principal regulatory documents for diagnosis and identification in Saudi Arabia.
Table 1.5:The categories of US law (IDEA) and their counterparts in the Special Education Organizational Guide, with the main eligibility criteria.
Table 1.6:Principles of fair assessment, what they mean in practice, and their counterparts in Saudi regulations.
Table 1.7:The RIOT/ICEL matrix, with examples in each cell. A balanced assessment fills cells in every row and every column rather than confining itself to the testing cell in the learner row.
Table 1.8:Steps of the general pathway in the US system and their counterparts in Saudi regulations.
Table 1.9:Common errors in diagnosis, how they occur and how to avoid them.
Table 1.10:Sultan's file at the outset: what we have and what is missing.
Table 1.11:Alignment of chapter objectives with review questions and learning activities.
Table 2.2:Descriptive classifications of composite scores on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fifth Edition.
Table 2.3:Types of reliability and the question each one answers.
Table 2.4:The five sources of validity evidence in the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, with examples from adapting scales for Arabic-speaking settings.
Table 2.5:The same tool (sensitivity 85%, specificity 95%) in two groups with different prevalence. Hypothetical figures.
Table 2.6:Forms of measurement bias and how they are examined.
Table 2.7:Three levels in transferring an instrument from one culture to another (the author's simplification).
Table 2.8:Hypothetical scores for a ten-year-old student, modeled on the indexes of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fifth Edition.
Table 2.9:Who administers what in the Kingdom, according to the published documents we reviewed at the time of writing.
Chapter 3: Formal standardized methods
Table 3.1:Comprehensive individual intelligence tests and the state of their Arabic versions.
Table 3.2:Nonverbal ability tests and the state of their Arabic versions.
Table 3.3:Three group ability tests used in gifted screening.
Table 3.4:Academic areas and their component skills in individual achievement tests.
Table 3.5:Three comprehensive individual achievement tests and the state of their Arabic versions.
Table 3.6:A comparison of the Vineland scales and the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System.
Table 3.7:Common rating scales and the state of their Arabic versions.
Table 3.8:Accommodation versus modification during testing.
Table 3.9:When teleassessment is suitable and when in-person administration is preferable.
Chapter 4: Informal methods
Table 4.1:Formal standardized methods and informal methods.
Table 4.2:Observation recording methods and the behaviors each one suits.
Table 4.3:Distribution of the two observers' records across twenty intervals.
Table 5.1:Alternative methods and the question each one asks.
Table 5.2:The two formats of dynamic assessment and what each measures.
Table 5.3:Levels of evidence in functional behavioral assessment.
Table 5.4:Examples from Badr's antecedent-behavior-consequence record.
Table 5.5:Traditional testing and authentic assessment.
Table 5.6:Characteristics of assessment from birth to three and what they mean for the assessor.
Table 5.7:Sources of evidence when standardized instruments are not suitable.
Table 5.8:Summary of Hattan's antecedent-behavior-consequence record (eight incidents over eight days).
Table 5.9:Alignment of chapter objectives with questions and activities.
Chapter 6: Identification models
Table 6.1:Judgments for three hypothetical students using the simple difference (cutoff 22.5) and regression (cutoff 18 below expected, assuming a correlation of 0.60).
Table 6.2:Common nonresponse criteria, example thresholds and their limitations.
Table 6.3:Strengths and limitations of the response to intervention model.
Table 6.4:The three versions of the patterns of strengths and weaknesses model.
Table 6.5:Nayef’s curriculum-based measurement data across the three tiers (words correct per minute; hypothetical figures).
Table 6.6:Results of Nayef’s comprehensive evaluation (hypothetical standard scores with a mean of 100 and SD of 15; 95% confidence intervals).
Table 6.7:Nayef’s evidence against the criteria of the hybrid model, the DSM and the Saudi regulatory text.
Table 6.8:Applying the three combination rules to seven hypothetical students (cutoff 120).
Table 6.9:A comparison of identification models: the question each asks, its evidence, and what it may miss.
Table 6.10:Identification rules in published Saudi texts, read through the concepts of this chapter.
Table 6.11:Evidence available on Lujain at referral (hypothetical data).
Table 6.12:Alignment of chapter objectives with questions and activities.
Chapter 7: Intellectual disability
Table 7.1:Examples of adaptive behavior deficits in the three domains.
Table 7.2:Severity levels of intellectual disability by adaptive behavior domain (adapted from APA, 2022).
Table 12.1:Levels of giftedness in the Differentiated Model (Gagné, 2009) and their approximate equivalents on an intelligence scale with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.
Table 12.2:Four models of giftedness from the standpoint of identification.
Table 12.3:Principles of fair identification of gifted learners and what they mean in practice.
Table 12.4:Common nomination and observation tools in identifying gifted learners.
Table 12.5:Profile of the Cognitive Abilities Test.
Table 14.5:Alignment of chapter objectives with review questions and learning activities.
Chapter 15: From diagnosis to decision
Table 15.1:Statements from diagnostic reports in professional language, rephrased in language parents and teachers can understand.
Table 15.2:From general to specific recommendations, with the finding that supports each one.
Table 15.3:Report appendix: Mazen's scores with confidence intervals (90%). Descriptive labels vary across tests; those used here are the Wechsler labels.
Table 15.4:Components of the individualized education program in the Saudi Regulations and their counterparts in US law.
Table 15.5:What reevaluation may reveal, and the usual decision in each case.
Table 15.6:Types of decisions for gifted learners, the evidence each decision requires, and what to ask before making it.
Table 15.7:Principles of eligibility, planning, and family rights in the Saudi regulations, and their counterparts in US law. Sources: the Regulations (Ministry of Education [Al-Ma'arif], 1422 AH [Arabic]), the Organizational Guide (Ministry of Education, 1436 AH [Arabic]), the Law on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (1445 AH), and the Personal Data Protection Law (1443 AH); and 34 C.F.R. pt. 300.
Table 15.8:Stages of the decision for gifted students in the published Saudi documents.