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
