t-score range labels Re: FW: meeting follow-up
Ateac...@aol.com
Typical Range, Elevated Range, and Very Elevated Range.
www.ateachabout.com
623.521.3646
--Hi all,
Kailey did a nice job reviewing various publishers t-score range labels (see list below). Although nearly all instruments pair a t-score range (e.g., T-65—75) with an interpretation (usually a paragraph or more, similar to SPM and SPM-P), not every instrument adds a descriptive label to each range (e.g., “above average”). Of those that do label the ranges with descriptive words, some of them are more useful than others as models for SPM-2. This is because some measures (like SPM-2 and other pathology scales) care most about deviations above the mean, whereas other measures (like adaptive behavior scales) care most about deviations below the mean. Still others care as much about high scores as they do about low scores (for example IQ measures). So, not every example on Kailey’s list will map perfectly onto SPM-2, but it gives us a good sense of what the industry standard includes.
So here are my current thoughts about what to call the ranges:
· Although it would have been fine keeping them as they are (primarily because continuity is something that users value quite a lot), if you hate them then it’s OK to change them, as long as we explain somewhere why we did that, and what if any effect it should have on users’ interpretation of scores.
· I’m not sure Typical, Atypical, and Very Atypical is going to work so well, mainly because typical and atypical are most often used as binary categories, so it’s not clear what “very atypical” would mean and it could be confusing for users, as well as the end-receivers of the assessment results (parents, etc)
· An alternative based on Kailey’s research could be something as simple as Typical Range, Elevated Range, and Very Elevated Range.
· A third idea is to use terms that are already used as the primary descriptors inside the interpretive passage for the SPM-P ranges, such as Typical, Mild-to-Moderate Difficulties, and Significant Sensory Processing Problem.
Hopefully that gives you all some new ideas to think about.
J
John
From: Kailey Bax
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 3:01 PM
To: John Williams <jwil...@wpspublish.com>
Subject: RE: meeting follow-up
MHS assessments:
CBRS – low, low average, average, high average, elevated, very elevated
ASRS – average, slightly elevated, elevated, very elevated
CDI-2 – average or lower, high average, elevated, very elevated
Pearson:
MMPI-2 – below average, average, above average
SCL-90-R: below normative mean, average, above average
BASC-3: low extreme, sig. below average, average, sig. above average, upper extreme
WPS
PCRI – very low, low, average (anything above 40T is considered average)
CDRS-R – utilizes interpretive descriptions rather than score classifications such as “uncommon, possible engagement in denial” “possible depressive disorder, further evaluation may be needed.”
Other
STAXI – low moderate, low, moderate, high
ASEBA
ASEBA assessments only give the classifications of Borderline (67-70T) and Clinical (t>70), as anything below 67T is considered normal.
John C. Williams, PhD
Senior Project Director
Licensed Clinical Psychologist
t 800.648.8857 or 424.201.8800
625 Alaska Avenue, Torrance, CA 90503
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SPM-2 Project Workspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to spm-2-project-wor...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to spm-2-proje...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/spm-2-project-workspace.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Glennon, Tara J. Prof.
Tara
Tara J. Glennon, EdD, OTR/L, FAOTA
Professor of Occupational Therapy
Quinnipiac University
275 Mt. Carmel Ave | MNH-362L | Hamden, CT 06518
tara.g...@quinnipiac.edu | 203-582-8293
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message, including any attachments, is solely for use by the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential and privileged information or otherwise protected by law. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, distribution or forwarding of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender via reply email and destroy the original and all copies of this message and its attachments.
________________________________
From: Ateachabout via SPM-2 Project Workspace <spm-2-proje...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 2:09 PM
To: spm-2-proje...@googlegroups.com
Cc: kb...@wpspublish.com
Subject: t-score range labels Re: FW: meeting follow-up
Howdy everyone,
Re t-score range labels :
Yes, thank you for your work Kailey!
Of all the possibilities listed, if we are set on making a change, I think the following could work best:
Typical Range, Elevated Range, and Very Elevated Range.
I don't love Typical, Mild-to-Moderate Difficulties, and Significant Sensory Processing Problem.
as Mild-to-Moderate Difficulties could result in the same misunderstandings (parents not thinking this indicates issues to be concerned with) as Cheryl noted with our present "Some Problems" label.
What do the rest of the authors think?
Diana
Diana A Henry, MS, OTR/L, FAOTA
In a message dated 6/14/2017 5:05:56 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, jwil...@wpspublish.com writes:
Hi all,
Kailey did a nice job reviewing various publishers t-score range labels (see list below). Although nearly all instruments pair a t-score range (e.g., T-65—75) with an interpretation (usually a paragraph or more, similar to SPM and SPM-P), not every instrument adds a descriptive label to each range (e.g., “above average”). Of those that do label the ranges with descriptive words, some of them are more useful than others as models for SPM-2. This is because some measures (like SPM-2 and other pathology scales) care most about deviations above the mean, whereas other measures (like adaptive behavior scales) care most about deviations below the mean. Still others care as much about high scores as they do about low scores (for example IQ measures). So, not every example on Kailey’s list will map perfectly onto SPM-2, but it gives us a good sense of what the industry standard includes.
So here are my current thoughts about what to call the ranges:
· Although it would have been fine keeping them as they are (primarily because continuity is something that users value quite a lot), if you hate them then it’s OK to change them, as long as we explain somewhere why we did that, and what if any effect it should have on users’ interpretation of scores.
· I’m not sure Typical, Atypical, and Very Atypical is going to work so well, mainly because typical and atypical are most often used as binary categories, so it’s not clear what “very atypical” would mean and it could be confusing for users, as well as the end-receivers of the assessment results (parents, etc)
· An alternative based on Kailey’s research could be something as simple as Typical Range, Elevated Range, and Very Elevated Range.
· A third idea is to use terms that are already used as the primary descriptors inside the interpretive passage for the SPM-P ranges, such as Typical, Mild-to-Moderate Difficulties, and Significant Sensory Processing Problem.
Hopefully that gives you all some new ideas to think about.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SPM-2 Project Workspace" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to spm-2-project-wor...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to spm-2-proje...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/spm-2-project-workspace.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SPM-2 Project Workspace" group.
To post to this group, send email to spm-2-proje...@googlegroups.com<mailto:spm-2-proje...@googlegroups.com>.
Diane Parham
Here it is: Typical, Moderate Difficulties, and Significant Sensory Processing Problems.
I made "Problem" plural because to get a score that high, you'd almost always have more than one sensory system involved.
Comments?
Diane
L. Diane Parham, PhD, OTR/L, FAOTA
Professor
University of New Mexico
Occupational Therapy Graduate Program
MSC09 5240 - 1 University of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001
________________________________________
From: spm-2-proje...@googlegroups.com <spm-2-proje...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Glennon, Tara J. Prof. <Tara.G...@quinnipiac.edu>
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 12:49 PM
To: Ateachabout via SPM-2 Project Workspace
Cc: kb...@wpspublish.com
Subject: Re: t-score range labels Re: FW: meeting follow-up