In this post, I will outline other tests performed at my child’s Vision Therapy evaluations and their suggested plan.
The Gardner Test of Visual Perceptual Skills (TVPS) were administered. There were memory and non-motor subtests – seven in all. On average, my child scored just above average (60%), but had two scores that stood out. “Visual Form Constancy” measures the child’s ability to turn a shape mentally and identify a figure that represents the rotate shape. On this test, my child scored at the lowest end of “normal.” (Would this tie into the left/right tests results when she was unable to mentally project left/right onto another or mentally “turn” ideas of left/right as instructed?)
In contrast, she scored at the top end of the chart (99%) on “Visual Spatial Relationships.” This is an important skill for an engineer and if you are good at jigsaw puzzles, you may test well on this subtest. With two engineers for parents and knowing we do a LOT of jigsaw puzzles at our house, this was not surprising.
What was surprising was that the VT people focused in on the one high score in this battery of TVPS. They surmised that because of that one off-the-chart skill, my child’s potential is likely not being realized “in the other areas.” Does that make sense to anyone else? It wasn’t like two or three of the scores were high. Only one of the several was outside the “normal” range, yet they indicated that they thought she could be brought up to that extremely high level in the other areas. It seemed a bit of a leap. Besides, we aren’t looking for a “superstar” (word they used!), we just wanted to see if we could smooth out the bumps in the road, if there were any.
A Phonological Awareness Skills Program (PASP) test was administered and it showed her “test age equivalent” of 1-4 years high than her age.
The Birch-Belont Auditory-Visual Integration test was administered which probes the child’s ability to match what she hears with what she sees. This was pointed out to be an important skill for phonics and music reading. I do not know how to interpret the raw results, but their write-up says my child performed at an “age-expected level.”
Wold Sentence Copy– In terms of raw results, this test showed 12 letters per minute and 1 letter per glance. She was marked “inadequate” for letter formation, word spacing, pencil grip, inconsistent working distance (6-16″) and variable paper support. They noted that she sub-vocalizes as she writes (whispering or lips moving) and that her “visual-motor performance is demanding and inefficient” and that she performance at a “level that is significantly below age appropriate norms for speed of letter writing.”
They prescribed a plan to “develop the necessary visual abilities of academic achievement” that emphasize:
– monocular activities designed to equalized the focusing, tracking, and pointing of each eye
– Visual-spacial tasks to develop integrated sequential and directional concepts
– visualization program that improves the speed and span of visual recognition as they pertain to short & long-term visual memory
– Visuo-motor tasks to improve body awareness and control, and visually directed fine motor skills.
They believe it will take 6-12 months of in-office optometric visual therapy to rehabilitate her vision, based on an assumption of five days per week home practice and regular attendance at weekly in-office therapy. The six months is the minimum commitment – lump sum paid in advance.