PASS Theory of Intelligence and Its Measurement Using the Cognitive Assessment System, 2nd Edition

The goal of this paper was to describe the context within which the PASS theory of intelligence was conceived and the reasons why this theory was used to guide the construction of the Cognitive Assessment System and the several versions of the Cognitive Assessment System, 2nd Edition. We also discuss validity issues such as equitable assessment of intelligence, using PASS scores to examine a pattern of strengths and weaknesses related to academic variability and diagnosis, and the utility of PASS scores for intervention. We provide summaries of the research that informs our suggestions that intelligence testing should be theory-based, not constrained by the seminal work of test developers in the early 1900s, and neurocognitive processes should be measured based on brain function.

Applying the Discrepancy Consistency Method on CAS-2: Brief Data in a Sample of Greek-Speaking Children

This study aimed to examine whether we could use the discrepancy consistency method on CAS-2: Brief data collected in Cyprus. A total of 438 Grade 6 children (201 boys, 237 girls, Mage = 135.75 months, SD = 4.05 months) from Cyprus were assessed on the Cognitive Assessment System-2: Brief that is used to operationalize four neurocognitive processes, namely Planning, Attention, Simultaneous, and Successive (PASS) processing. They were also assessed on two measures of reading (Wordchains and CBM-Maze) and mathematics (Mathematics Achievement Test and Mathematics Reasoning Test). The results showed that 31.5% of our sample had a PASS disorder, and 8% to 10% of our sample had both a PASS disorder and an academic disorder. These numbers are similar to those reported in previous studies that used DCM in North America and suggest that the method can be used to inform instruction, particularly in places where no screening for learning disabilities is available.

The effect of measurement error on the positive predictive value of PSW methods for SLD identification: How buffer zones dispel the illusion of inaccuracy

Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW) methods are widely used for identifying specific learning disabilities (SLDs). Several researchers, however, have reported that the diagnostic accuracy of PSW methods is unacceptably low when strict thresholds were used to identify students with SLDs. We believe these findings give a misleading impression of the magnitude of the diagnostic errors that are likely to arise in PSW assessments. In a simulation study of 10 million cases using a simplified PSW method for demonstration, most of what have been called diagnostic errors were cases in which observed scores and true scores fell on opposite sides of a strict threshold but were still within a buffer zone the size of a typical measurement error. Because small score differences do not result in meaningfully different case conceptualizations, the use of buffer zones reveals that previous estimates of the diagnostic accuracy of PSW methods are misleadingly low. We also demonstrate that diagnostic decisions become increasingly reliable when observed scores are comfortably distant from diagnostic thresholds. For practitioners, we present a flowchart and practical guidelines to improve the accuracy and stability of SLD identification decisions.

Comparison of the Cognitive Processing Structures of Students Diagnosed With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, and Specific Learning Disorder According to Cognitive Assessment System Scores

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare the cognitive processing structures of students diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and specific learning disorder (SLD). AD and HD in this study are grouped separately. There are no students diagnosed as having two subgroups together.

METHODS

A total of 105 students, 35 AD, 35 SLD, and 35 HD, who were applied to the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS) and diagnosed by an expert, were selected as the sample. The students were evaluated according to their CAS full scale scores and the results of planning, attention, and simultaneous and successive cognitive processing areas.

RESULTS

It was examined whether the cognitive processing areas of the students differed among the diagnosis groups by one-way analysis of variance. Although no significant difference was found in the cognitive processing full scale score among the diagnosis groups, significant differences were found between the cognitive processing areas among the diagnosis groups. The planning scale scores of the students in the HD diagnosis group were lower than the other groups, the attention scale scores of the students in the AD diagnosis group were lower than the HD and SLD diagnostic groups, and simultaneous and successive cognitive processing scores of the students in the SLD diagnosis group were lower than the scores of the students in the HD and AD diagnosis groups. In our study, it was determined that students in different diagnosis groups have different cognitive structures. For this reason, it is necessary to prepare and apply different cognitive intervention programs suitable for each diagnostic group.

CONCLUSION

Determining the cognitive processing areas of students in different diagnosis groups will guide the creation of the content of cognitive intervention programs.

Cognitive processing skills and developmental dyslexia in Chinese

The purpose of the present study was twofold: (a) to examine the extent to which Chinese dyslexic children experience deficits in phonological and orthographic processing skills and (b) to examine if Chinese dyslexia is associated with deficits in Planning, Attention, Simultaneous, and Successive (PASS) processing. A total of 27 Grade 4 children with dyslexia (DYS), 27 Grade 4 chronological age (CA) controls, and 27 Grade 2 reading age (RA) controls were tested on measures of phonological awareness, rapid naming, phonological memory, PASS, reading accuracy, and reading fluency. The results indicated that the DYS group performed significantly poorer than the CA and RA groups on both measures of phonological awareness and on a measure of orthographic processing but comparably to the RA group on a measure of rapid naming and both measures of phonological memory. In regard to the PASS processing skills, the DYS group performed worse than the CA controls on Successive and Simultaneous processing but comparably to the RA group on all PASS processing skills. Implications of these findings for early identification and intervention of reading difficulties are discussed.