Testing Testing

As a classroom teacher for more than thirty years, one of the few aspects of my job I truly disliked was giving standardized tests to my students. In fact, retiring from teaching brought relief that I would no longer have to give these dreaded assessments. Knowing these evaluations were often worded in ways that were confusing to my students or bored them with long reading passages that failed to hold their interest, I questioned how accurately these tests could measure their abilities. As I watched some students who lacked motivation rush through the tests simply to get done and others struggle through every minute trying to finish in time, I knew their scores would not reflect what they really knew. Moreover, the general atmosphere of anxiety prevalent during testing among students and staff was upsetting and counterproductive.

My mistrust of standardized tests has only been heightened as the parent of a child with autism. Having been present for most of Alex’s evaluations, I know that they cannot measure accurately what he actually knows and can do. Consequently, on traditional intelligence tests, he scores quite poorly. Nonetheless, we place little value on the IQ values assigned to him, knowing that Alex is smart in ways that the tests fail to measure.

Recently, an enlightening article in The Atlantic addresses the shortcomings of using traditional cognitive testing with people who have autism and offers promising alternative methods. In “IQ Tests Are Biased Against People With Autism,” published December 31, 2018, author Nicholette Zeliadt notes, “…research has confirmed that some autistic people––especially those who speak few or no words––have abilities that standard tests of intelligence underestimate or overlook.” [To read this article, please click here.] In addition, the subtitle of this article states, “For those with poor verbal and motor control, traditional intelligence exams can be a faulty way to measure real cognitive ability.”

Recognizing problems of using traditional testing methods with people who have autism, scientists have recently considered new ways to test cognitive skills. Some have adapted existing tests, while others have developed new tests. In both cases, the goal has been making tests easier to complete for people with autism. Other researchers have employed technology that measures eye movement and brain activity to evaluate skills. While using technology may produce more accurate results, the expense and lack of portability make these methods less accessible.

Although experts cannot reach a consensus about which tests are most useful in evaluating people with autism, researchers note that none of the most commonly used assessments qualify as “a particularly good fit.” In addition, interpreting scores often proves problematic when assessing people who have autism. Many issues commonly associated with autism make testing difficult, such as anxiety, social-communication challenges, restricted interests, and lack of motivation to do boring tasks. Furthermore, poor fine motor control makes pointing, which is required in some tests, difficult, and tests lasting nearly an hour are too challenging for those with attention issues. As Beth Slomine, neuropsychologist at Kennedy Krieger Institute in Baltimore, Maryland, candidly explains, “…the tasks we have that measure cognitive ability are often boring, [and] the tasks don’t always measure what we think they’re measuring.”

At Boston University’s Center for Autism Research Excellence in Massachusetts, researchers have adapted testing for children with autism. To make the process less stressful, the child does not interact with the evaluator. Instead, two pictures are shown side by side on a screen as a recording instructs them to “Look!” Additionally, to keep them interested, pictures of beloved character Thomas the Tank Engine and videos of rockets launching are shown. According to the director of the Center, Helen Tager-Flusberg, “We did that to keep them engaged, to keep them looking––it doesn’t feel like a test.”

Using technology to observe eye tracking, researchers at Bar-Ilan University in Ramat-Gan, Israel, monitor involuntary eye movements as a method of testing people with autism. Under the direction of Yoram Bonneh, associate professor of vision science and optometry, the researchers study “tiny flicks of the eye as it jumps toward something of interest” in people with autism to assess word comprehension. After words are spoken or shown on a screen, two pictures are displayed side by side, with only one matching the given word. Eye movement toward the picture demonstrates word comprehension. This research indicates that adults with nonverbal autism perform as well in this testing activity as typical adults do.

In addition, these researchers show multiple choice questions and answers on a screen without reading them aloud. When the person’s eyes stop on a correct answer, the researchers use this behavior as a measure of cognitive ability. After testing a group of young men with autism who had minimal verbal skills and were thought to be illiterate, the researchers discovered through the testing that these men could actually read. Consequently, this testing method not only proved the young men had the ability to read and understand written text but also demonstrated that their skills had previously been underestimated.

At Rutgers University in Newark, New Jersey, scientists have been using EEGs to test minimally verbal children with autism. As the children watch images immediately followed by hearing a word that may or may not match the picture displayed, researchers use the EEG technology to look for brain activity to indicate the recognition of the image and word. Through this form of testing, the research suggests that the children don’t always connect the words and pictures. Another theory is that children with autism may use other parts of their brains to process what they have seen and heard than typical children do. Nonetheless, using brain wave technology allows scientists to glimpse how the minds work in children with autism.

Clearly, research shows the importance of creativity when assessing people who have autism, considering their special needs and the differences in the ways their brains process information. As Charles A. Nelson, professor of pediatrics at Harvard University and Boston Children’s Hospital notes, “These kids we think are very low functioning, very nonverbal, may have more going on upstairs then we’re giving them credit for.” Indeed, using traditional methods to question those with autism may produce questionable results. Instead, parents, educators, and professionals should seek better ways to assess the skills of people with autism, and more importantly, they must never underestimate the abilities of those whose brains work in mysterious––and perhaps even superior––ways.

“But there is a spirit within people, the breath of the Almighty within them, that makes them intelligent.” Job 32:8