Q&A: A Session With Dr. Steven G. Feifer

PAR staff recently sat down with Steven G. Feifer, DEd, author of the Feifer Assessment of Reading (FAR), the Feifer Assessment of Mathematics (FAM), the Feifer Assessment of Writing (FAW), and the Feifer Assessment of Childhood Trauma (FACT), to have an in-depth discussion about the importance of diagnostic achievement testing, how these instruments help create targeted interventions, why it is important to focus on more than just dyslexia, and how the Feifer products can help struggling students to succeed.

What is the difference between a traditional achievement test and a diagnostic achievement test?

Most traditional achievement tests are designed to measure how a student is functioning on a particular academic skill such as reading, writing, or math. This is often valuable when clinicians use a discrepancy model to determine a specific learning disability, and a heavy emphasis is placed on comparing composite achievement scores with intelligence test scores. Conversely, diagnostic achievement tests such as the FAR, FAM, and FAW are designed to measure why a student is functioning at a particular level in order to know what to do about it. The FAR, FAM, and FAW are based on a neuropsychological model of brain functioning designed to determine specific subtypes of learning disorders. Diagnostic achievement tests build psychological processing directly into the measurement of the academic skill to better determine the underlying causes of learning pitfalls.

How can I use your assessment tools to determine if there’s a learning disability or if issues are simply due to gaps in instruction?

The importance of using diagnostic achievement tests is especially relevant in the aftermath of a worldwide pandemic that significantly disrupted learning for as many as 60 million students in the U.S. For instance, suppose a student received a reading score of 80, which is at the 9th percentile, on a traditional achievement test. It is very difficult to determine if this lower reading score is due to a possible learning disability or if the student may simply be a “COVID casualty” and somewhat rusty in their skills due to disruptions in learning. If the student was also administered a diagnostic achievement test and scored an 80 with numerous processing deficits noted, then weaknesses with reading most likely are due to a learning disability. On the other hand, if the student scored an  80 on a traditional reading test and 100 on a  follow-up diagnostic achievement test of reading, then most likely their lower reading score on the traditional reading test was due to pandemic-related disruptions in learning as few processing deficits were observed.

I’m not a psychologist; I’m a teacher. Am I able to give the FAR, FAM, and FAW?

The FAR, FAM, and FAW are Qualification B instruments, which means that most educators and diagnosticians are eligible to administer these tests.

How is it beneficial for people in careers other than psychology to give this test?

There are two primary advantages for educators to use these measures. First, each test has a screening component that takes approximately 15 minutes to administer. It can determine at-risk students in need of an immediate intervention. Second, each measure can be used to monitor educational progress using a metric called the reliable change index (RCI). For instance, suppose a student’s phonological awareness score on the FAR was 75, which is in the 5th percentile compared to peers. A reading teacher may decide to use a phonics-based intervention. At some point, the teacher needs data to confirm the effectiveness of the intervention. After waiting a minimum of 30 days, the student can be reassessed using the same phonological awareness measure on the FAR. The student now scores an 85, which is in the 16th percentile. By using the RCI, educators can determine if the change in scores was statistically meaningful, therefore validating the effectiveness of the intervention, or if it was simply a statistical artifact from using repeated measures over time.

I’m a parent and my child was just diagnosed with dyslexia, dysgraphia, or dyscalculia. What do I do with these results? What does this mean for my child?

The FAR, FAM, and FAW are directly linked to interventions, which are included in the interpretive reports your clinician can access when using the PARiConnect platform. The score report yields evidence-based interventions, websites, apps, and general recommendations for struggling learners.

Dyslexia and dysgraphia are often linked. How can I use the FAW and the FAR together to get the most comprehensive results?

Both the FAR and the FAW are diagnostic achievement tests designed to determine various subtypes of learning disorders in children. These instruments are based on a neuropsychological model of learning that assumes that similar pathophysiological pathways in the brain underscore different components of the learning process. For instance, students with dyslexia often have difficulty sequencing and blending sounds when decoding words. In addition, these students also tend to have difficulty sequencing and blending sounds when attempting to encode or spell words. Therefore, the FAW is designed to measure dyslexic dysgraphia, which is the extent that dyslexia hinders a student’s ability to spell during the writing process. Since dyslexia and dysgraphia are often linked, both the FAR and FAW are often needed to complete a full assessment battery.

Why is it important to look at a wide range of processes that underlie proficient reading skills instead of simply looking to diagnose dyslexia?

The reason that multiple psychological processes are measured when assessing reading skills is twofold: First, there are different kinds or subtypes of dyslexia that require examiners to measure different types of psychological processes. Second, specificity of assessment always leads to specificity of intervention for students and provides educators with the best opportunity to put the “I” back in an IEP.

What would surprise people about your tests?

Not necessarily a surprise, but my hope is these tests help educators and clinicians appreciate how accessible neuropsychology can be when attempting to diagnose and remediate learning disorders in children.