CPPS - Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.

The Children’s Psychological
Processes Scale (CPPS)
Dr. Milton J. Dehn
Children’s Psychological Processes
Scale (CPPS) Brief Overview
Standardized teacher rating scale
Ages 5-0-0 to 12-11-30
121 items across 11 subscales
Entirely online, internet-web based
Online administration time of 15 minutes
Online scoring and report
Author: Milton Dehn; published by Schoolhouse
Educational Services, 2012
8. Measurement Consultant: Kevin McGrew
The Needs for the CPPS
1. IDEA definition of LD “disorder…..basic
psychological processes”
2. Several states mandate a processing
component for LD identification
3. Neuropsych interest
4. Even with RTI, some practitioners evaluate it
5. The previous processing rating scale (PPC)
has limitations
Uses of the CPPS
1. LD Evaluations (Primary Purpose)
1. Identify psych processing deficits
2. Pattern of strengths and weaknesses
3. Planning further assessment
2. Screening
1. Identifies need for intervention
2. Predicts academic skills development
3. Useful in planning comprehensive assessment
3. Measure progress during interventions
1. Through the use of change-sensitive W-scores
What is psychological processing?
1. Brain processes, operations, functions
2. Any time mental contents are operated on
3. When information is perceived, transformed,
manipulated, stored, retrieved, expressed
4. Whenever we think, reason, problem-solve
5. Basic and higher level processes
6. Can’t learn and perform without processing
7. Learning depends on these processes
8. Doesn’t include knowledge or academic skills
What is a Processing Disorder?
1. A group of symptoms involving abnormal
2. A within child, brain-based deficit
3. That impairs academic learning
4. Not many official processing disorders
1. E.g. CAPD, aphasia, amnesia, dyspraxia
Evidence for a Processing Disorder
and SLD Diagnosis
1. It’s not specific to one environment
2. A normative weakness (below average score)
3. Intra-individual: score is significantly weaker than
predicted from discrepancy analysis
4. Best if it’s an intra-individual weakness and a
normative weakness (this is a deficit; these are rare)
5. It’s impacting academic learning
6. The low psychological processes and low academics
have research-based links
7. The linked process and academic skills both have
low scores (consistency approach)
Processes and Academic Learning
1. Psychological processes are like “aptitudes”
2. Relations established through research
1. Flanagan et al., & McGrew’s review of research
2. Swanson, Geary, and others
3. The influence of processes varies by age
4. Look for academic area and related
psychological processes to both be low
Characteristics of CPPS Processes
Necessary for academic learning
They underlie academic performance
They are broad processes
Observable in classroom
Processes can be validly assessed through
ratings; similar to BRIEF
Psychological Processes
Measured by the CPPS
1. Attention
2. Auditory Processing
3. Executive Functions
4. Fine Motor
5. Fluid Reasoning
6. Long-Term Recall
7. Oral Language
8. Phonological Processing
9. Processing Speed
10. Visual-Spatial Processing
11. Working Memory
12. General Processing Ability (Composite)
In classroom: Necessary for learning
Attention deficits part of LD; not necessarily ADHD
Types: Selective, focused, divided, sustained
The problem is attentional control & lack of
5. On CPPS, links to Executive Functions and Working
Auditory Processing
1. Ability to perceive, analyze, synthesize, and
discriminate auditory stimuli, mainly speech
2. In classroom: Perceiving and comprehending
instruction; being able to understand words
with background noise
Executive Functions
1. Management of cognitive functions and
psychological processes
2. Effectiveness depends on self-monitoring, selfregulation, and metacognition
3. Has a longer course of development
4. More to do with classroom performance than
learning of academic skills
Fine Motor
1. Hits developmental plateau by age 7
2. On CPPS, has weaker relations with cognitive
processes in general but has strong relations
with academics
3. On CPPS, pairs up with visual-spatial process.
Fluid Reasoning
1. Deductive, inductive reasoning, especially
with novel materials
2. Has a longer course of development
3. More important for applied academics
Long-Term Recall
1. Close connection with other processes and
with academic learning in general
2. Includes encoding, consolidation, storage,
and retrieval
3. Rapid Automatic Naming (RAN) is part of
Oral Language
1. Not the content (vocabulary) or receptive
language but the oral expression processes
Phonological Processing
1. Processing of phonemes, e.g. blending
2. Phonemic awareness is part of
Processing Speed
1. How quickly information flows through the
processing system; a matter of efficiency
2. Too slow: info. lost, process not completed
Visual-Spatial Processing
1. The ability to perceive, analyze, synthesize,
manipulate and think with visual patterns
2. A strength in most LD cases
3. Weak relations with all academics; more of a
“threshold” process
Working Memory
1. Processing while retaining information
2. On CPPS includes short-term memory
3. Both verbal and visual
General Processing Ability (GPA)
1. GPA score is the average of all process scores
2. Emerges from factor analysis; similar to
concept of general intelligence
3. Processes function in an inter-related fashion
4. Most processes contribute to any given
behavior, task
5. On CPPS defined as “the underlying
efficiency of processing automaticity”
CPPS Items
• For report, grouped by subscale
• In developmental (ability) order from lowest
item to highest item
CPPS Development
1. Initial pilot study with 75 items and 10 scales
1. Result: More range needed
Item tryout with 147 items
11 scales in standardization version
Items reduced to 121
Rasch item analysis used throughout
W-scale used throughout
Exploratory factor analysis
CPPS Standardization
1,121 students rated by 278 teachers
128 communities in 30 states
All data collected online
Demographics match U.S. Census well
Scores were weighted
Included children with disabilities
Demographics details
Reverse Scoring
1. Relative to achievement & cognitive tests
2. High scores mean high difficulty and low
3. All items stated negatively
4. 0 = Never; 1 = Sometimes; 2 = Often; 3 =
Almost Always
5. Inconsistent ratings when positively stated
items were tried during item tryout
Norms and Scores
1. 4 age groups (5-6; 7-8; 9-10; 11-12)
2. T-scores derived from linear transformation
of actual standardization distribution
3. T-Scores, W-Scores, confidence intervals, and
conversion to standard scores
Sex Differences
1. Boys have more processing problems
2. No sign. Sex differences in fluid reasoning,
phonological, and visual-spatial
3. Norms not divided by sex
4. Combined sex norms better for identification
CPPS Administration
1. Online rating scale 12-15 minutes for
teachers to complete
1. Can print free paper copy and enter later
2. Must answer all items (but can save incomplete)
2. Responses: Never, Sometimes, Often, Almost
3. This file is stored, and then accessed for
CPPS Report
Brief narrative, graph, and a table of scores
Change-sensitive W-scores
T-scores; percentiles; confidence intervals
Intra-individual strengths and weakness
discrepancy table
5. T-score to standard score converter
6. Can be re-run with different options (without
a charge)
Item Printout
1. Teacher ratings can be viewed and printed,
even before report generated
2. Numerical values will be shown
3. Grouped by subscale
4. Arranged in developmental/difficulty
sequence from low to high
Discrepancy Analysis
1. Use discrepancy table to determine pattern
of strengths and weaknesses
Predicted score based on mean of other 10
Regression toward the mean included
+/- 1.00 to 2.00 SD of SEE discrepancy options
Strengths and Weakness labeling is opposite of
discrepancy, e.g. “-” value = a strength
5. Non LD also have a pattern
1. Internal consistency subscale reliability
ranges from .88 to .98 Link
2. .99 on Total Score
3. Inter-rater reliability
1. Range of .21 to .90
2. Median coefficient of 76.5
Validity Evidence
Content Validity
Developmental Evidence
WJ III Achievement
WJ III Cognitive
Diagnostic Accuracy
Validity: Developmental Evidence
1. Skewed distributions because
Very few children have processing problems
Fewer processing problems in older children
Most processes fully develop early
Teachers rate relative to that grade level
2. Dev. changes observed in younger children
3. Changes observed in upper half of problem
4. W values used to arrange items in order
Factor and Cluster Analysis
1. A general factor; all subtests load on
1. General processing ability (GPA) may reflect
processing efficiency or automaticity
2. More GPA presence with younger children
2. Second factor is Attention, EF, sometimes
WM: Self-Regulatory Processes
3. Third factor is Fine Motor and Visual-Spatial:
Visual-Motor processes
4. Results fairly consistent across age groups

similar documents