Comments on: Put Away the 1 inch Cubes!

By: Dana Childress, PhD

Dana Childress, PhD — Tue, 19 May 2020 17:04:34 +0000

Yes, exactly! I hope this post will be helpful to others on your team. Sometimes a reminder about those underlying skills really helps assessment team members shift their perspectives and hopefully reduce some of the stress. 🙂

By: Criss Hickey

Criss Hickey — Fri, 15 May 2020 14:08:43 +0000

We have dug this article out to share with evaluators as they move to doing tele-assessment. The blocks seems to be the task that they struggle with as how to administrate. From your information they are able to look at the skills need to perform the task. As evaluators we sometimes get stuck in the checking of a box if successful or not checking if not.
While it is true that blocks are on most evaluations, in our current reality it may not be possible to have a child demonstrate that. Having an understanding of all of the underlying skills that are displayed in that task, assists the evaluator to look to other means to see those skills.
Thank you!

By: Dana Childress, M.Ed.

Dana Childress, M.Ed. — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 13:31:35 +0000

In reply to Natali Von.

Great question, Natali. No, a child’s performance on a skill like this should not be scored as showing a delay if the only reason the child is unable to complete the activity is due to a visual impairment. What should happen is that the assessment team should use a test that is appropriate for a child with a visual impairment, so items like stacking blocks, that are highly visual, would not be part of the assessment. There are tools that we can use that are either intended for children with visual impairments or that have guidance about how to adapt items so that they are more meaningful. When a child has a visual impairment, the assessor should try to determine if the child’s impairment is hindering her ability to perform the task, or if the child has an underlying cognitive delay which affects her abilities. It really does take good clinical judgment to determine the difference. I hope this helps answer your question.

I’m glad you found our blog! Your insights are very welcome so thanks for posting. I hope your daughter is doing well!

By: Natali Von

Natali Von — Sun, 01 Mar 2015 18:29:19 +0000

I am the mother of a 27-year-old who has autism, cortical vision impairment, and development delays. As I was researching for a blog post I was writing, I came across this blog post about 1-inch cubes.

The content of your post is very meaningful. Long ago, I was one of those parents who misunderstood and thought the assessment was unfair because my daughter hadn’t had an opportunity to learn how to manipulate the blocks. I love the comparison that is made to teaching the test. One thing I struggled with then, and now to some degree, is the vision factor. Is the same assessment made regardless of vision impairment? Or, would it potentially be a developmental delay even if the only reason a skill couldn’t be performed was lack of exposure due to vision?

By: Wee Sing – Get used to it! | the transitional truth

Wee Sing – Get used to it! | the transitional truth — Sun, 01 Mar 2015 15:02:01 +0000

[…] do most, if any, of them. For example, one of the things they tried to have her do is manipulate 1 inch cubes. This is a common assessment tool. I could not understand why they were judging her based on […]

By: Dana Childress, M.Ed.

Dana Childress, M.Ed. — Mon, 16 Dec 2013 13:54:58 +0000

In reply to Sarah Kranz.

Yes, that’s a great example, Sarah! It’s a skill that has multiple purposes during assessment but is not a critical/functional skills that needs to be reflected in IFSP outcomes or specifically taught.

By: Sarah Kranz

Sarah Kranz — Mon, 16 Dec 2013 13:11:23 +0000

I second this regarding a child being able to pull a toy behind them while walking. Important to gauge balance and ability etc, but not important as a skill to teach.

By: Dana Childress, M.Ed.

Dana Childress, M.Ed. — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 19:06:57 +0000

In reply to amy cocorikis.

I love your training idea, Amy! You’re right, thinking about how the underlying skills are learned in everyday activities really does help link the assessment to real life. And whoa…stereognosis…what a whopper of a term! I love your explanation. Makes me wonder why anyone ever “invented” that big term in the first place when it can be explained so simply as you did! 🙂

By: amy cocorikis

amy cocorikis — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 16:10:09 +0000

Great article! In a training on meaningful assessment, I’ve had participants do an activity where they break down a test item into it’s underlying functional skills as you’ve done here – and then challenge them to think of when during the day would a child need to use those skills. Children who can put a ring on the ring stack might use those same skills to hang their bag up on a hook by their cubby at daycare. Sometimes it helps parents when we think of when we use some of those same skills with fancy sounding jargon – like using pronation and supination of the wrist while flipping pancakes or stereognosis is the silly sounding word for my ability to reach into my black hole of a purse without looking and find my car keys! Thinking about underlying skills and functional use during daily routines can help all of us focus much less on those one inch cubes!!

By: Dana Childress, M.Ed.

Dana Childress, M.Ed. — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:45:58 +0000

In reply to Cori Hill.

Yes, teaching to the test or “to the toy” is not really learning. I’ve seen this same thing happen with a pegboard, puzzles and even books, when the interventionist works in the same book week after week and the child can point to pics only in that one book. We know “real” learning is happening when skills transfer to other situations, people, places, etc!