"ARLY RECOGNITION OF MINIMAL BRAIN INJURY THROUGH

use OP THE METROPOLITAN READINESS TESTS

APPROVED:

1/ -

•iajor Frcfa3sor t "

Ilishor F

,7 v//

Chairman of the Psychology^epartment

DeantoT~Ths~^]?aduate School

V>\ V v" • \ \

Spur gin, Rayrr- on Da vi d , Ea r ly Re cor-r. i b Ion of i c ij&al

Brain Injur:/ through use of the Hebrr-politan Readiness Tesbs.

1-laster of Science (Clinical Psychology), December, 1971?

25 PP*> 6 tables, 5?- references*

This study explored the usefulness of the Metropolitan

Readiness Tests (RUT) as a screening device for minimal brain

injury. It was hypothesized that brain injured (BI) children

would score significantly lower on Test Six of the MRT than

non-brain injured (NBI) children. Test Six is a visual-motor

perceptual task.

Two groups, one BI and the other KBI, each with 2i| Ss

v.ere matched for age, sex, and IQ,. Six t tests were used to

determine if any significant differences existed between

the two groups on each of the six KRT, Pour of the tests

indicated that significant differences existed: Tests 1, 3,

5, and 6, Results of Tests One and Three provide important

evidence that the BI group has better verbal and reading

skills than the NBI group. Results of Tests Pive ana Six

provide evidence that the NBI group has better number skills

and motor skills than the BI group. Special class placement

for the minimal brain injured does not appear warranted,

considering evidence from the present study. Rather, special

attention to individual problems of each student, whether

BI or U3I, handled wibhin a regular class setting, is

suggested.

EARLY RECOGNITION 0? llllUKAL BRA IF INJURY THROUGH

USE OP THE KETRO P OLI TAN READINESS TESTS

THESIS

Presented to the Graduate Council of the

North Texas State University in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirenenbs

For the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

By.

Rayrion David Spur-gin, B. S,

Denton, Texas

December, 1971

LIST Or71 TABLES

Table Pa;;e

I. Means, Standard Deviations, and _t test on Test One, VJord Meaning 13

II. Means, Standard Deviations, and jb best on Test Two, Listening 1)4

III. Means, Standard Deviations, and t_ test on Test Three, Matching lij.

IV. Means, Standard Deviations, and _t test on Test Four, Alphabet . . . . . . 1 5

V. Means, Standard Deviations, and jb test on Tost I?ive, T'unbers 1$

VI. Means, Standard Deviations, and t test on Test Six, Copying 16

EARLY RECOGNITION OF MINIMAL BE A IK IliJURZ THRQUOE

USE 07 THE FETROPOLITAK flEADI'CESo ri'STS

The screening of' school beginners as a. way of

identifying children with potential learning Disabilities

before these difficulties produce their ce :,rir.enbal

effects on school performance can prove to be most beneficial

(Slingerlpnd, 1969). V'ith the early detection of learning

disabilities certain problems are avoided the child's

chances for school success are ratably orVuince'! (Beck, 1?61 j

Cruickshank, 196?; Hunt, 1969J Knights 2:. Hinton, 1969 i

Strauss ?c Lehtinen, 19ir7J Strauss & Irephar*t, 1955). Also,

every community can save a substantial percentage of present

economic and financial waste by a pianned•program for

detection and treatment of learning disorders (Hurst, 1968).

Recently, emphasis has been placed upon the

identification and remediabicn of learning disabilities

which are due to minimal brain dysfunction,, injury, or

damage (Shipe C: Miezitis, 1969). The tern "learning

disabilities" is the one preferred by educators in discussing,

and programming for children with what is medically known

as minimal brain dysfunction. Clements (1966) states that

the term minimal brain dysfunction refers to children of

near average, avei»age, or above average general intelligence

with certain learning arid/or behavioral disabilities,, ranging

fron wild to severe, which are associated with functional

deviations of the centra.! nervous system. These deviations

may a: an if est themselves by various combinations of

impairment in perception, conceptualization, language,

memory, and control of attention, impulse, or motor function.

These aberrations may arise from genetic variations,

biochemical irregularities, perinatal brain, insults, or other

illnesses or injuries sustained during the years which are

critical for the development and maturation of the central

nervous system, or from other unknown organic causes.

The evolving terminology in this field has often been

confusing, but this is not surprising in view of the complexity

of the involvements deriving from dysfunctions in the brain.

Many types of disturbances in learning and adjustment can

result. Thus, the terminology which properly and adequately

describes these disturbances is sometimes complicated.

Moreover, a number of disciplines share the obligation for

proper diagnosis and classification and each is concerned

that its contribution be revealed in the terminology.

Another important consideration is that initially the

manifestations most often are behavioral, not neurological;

the more observable symptoms are psychological in nature.

The central feature of the condition is the learning

disability. Therefore, it is logical ana -warranted that

this feature be specifically identified by the classification.

It is the learning disability that constitutes the basis of

• 3

the liOMOgeneity of this groap of handicapped children. The-

second nost salient requirement of the terminology is that

it specify that the condition is neurological in origin. A

learning disability, a3 noted previously, can result from

various conditions. Thus, the designation must indicate

the type of imposition that prevails, which in this case is.

a brain dysfunction (Johnson & Xyklebust, 1967).

Kyklebust (I960, 1967, 1963) states that the learning

disability group is homogeneous in that it consists of

children who are not primarily retarded, emotionally disturbed,

sonaorially impaired, culturally deprived, or grossly

cerebrally .palsied. Yet at the same time they are unable to

learn end profit frcm the norrr.al educational experience.

The group is heterogeneous in that the learning problems

vary in both type and degree.

Recognizing the complexity of the human brain aa well

as the various forms of verbal and nonverbal behavior that

a child is expected to learn, it is evident that many types

and combinations of problems can result from even a minor-

disturbance. Whereas some children have difficulty speaking,

others have problems in reading, writing, or arithmetic,

others have only nonverbal problems. Some have difficulty

with perceptual skills, others with memory.

Therefore, none of the typical diagnostic categories

such as aphasia, dyslexia, perceptual handicap, or hyper-

kinesis is sufficiently inclusive to denote the total group.

As a result we are compelled to use the broad term learning

h

disability but simultaneously to define the individual

problems (Johnson, 1968).

When minimal brain dysfunction is present, the normal

pattern, the manner in which learning occurs, is altered.

It is altered variously and selectively on the basis of the

specific brain dysfunction sustained, Kyklebust (1961}.)

points out that learning seems to be altered in four primary

ways. First, there may be perceptual disturbance or the

inability to identify, discriminate, and interpret sensation.

Such disturbance is often seen clinically as poor recognition

of everyday experience sensorially. Secondly, there may be

disturbance of imagery or the inability to call to mind

common experiences although they have been perceived. Such

disturbance is seen as deficiencies in auditorization and

visualization. Thirdly, there may be disorders of symbolic

processes or the inability to represent experience symbo3.ica.lly

Such disorders are seen as aphasia, dyslexia, dysgraphia,

dyscalculia, and as language disorders. And, finally, there

may be conceptualizing disturbances or the inability to

generalize and categorize experience. Such disturbances are

seen a3 a deficiency in grouping ideas that have a logical

relationship.

In terms of a complete diagnostic evaluation of learning

disabilities, the ascertaining of the individual problems

should be throughly investigated, preferably through a

multidisciplinary approach. This type of approach to the

problems of learning disabilities is becoming increasingly

' all facets of a child's-

learning problems (Gunderson, 1971). However, the purpose

of a screening device is ?inply bo discover the presence of

a general condition, not the detailed specification of the

nature and effects of a particular disorder'. The purpose

of this study is to investigate the possibility of a

screening device not a diagnostic instrument.

Koppitz (I96I4) states that the great majority of all

brain injured subjects reveal poor visual-motor perception,

Frostig (1963) reports that one of the major causes of

perceptual disabilities in children is undoubtedly brain

damage. In discussing the effect of brain lesions, Bender

(1938) points out that visual-motor perception is an

integrative function of the personalit.y-as-a-whole which is

controlled by the cerebral cortejc. Any disturbance in this

highest center of integration would modify the integrative

function of the individual tc a lower and more primitive

level. The effect of brain injury would depend on the

interaction of several factors: including, the locus and the

extent of the brain lesion, the maturation level of the

person prior to receiving the brain injury, and the emotional

and social adjustment of the individual. Therefore, it is

this primary area, visual-motor perception, wiuh which this

study is concerned.

The Metropolitan Readiness Tests (hereafter KRT) were

devised to measure the extent to which school beginners have

developed in the several skills and abilities that contribute

to readiness for first-grade instruction (Hildreth, C-riffii.h,

& McGauvran, 1969). Test Six, a copying task, is a ll|

item test which measures a combination of visual percept ion

and motor control. Since the great Lmajority of all brain-

injured subjects reveal poor visual-motor perception, Test

Six would appear to be an especially useful device for the

identifying of brain-injured children. The purpose of this

study is to investigate the usefulness of the MRT generally

and Test Six of the MRT specifically as a screening device

for the identification of brain™injured children. In many

school districts the MRT is administered to every child

entering the first grade. It might be, therefore, a most

economica1 screening device for minimal brain dysfunction,

since it is in widespread current use for other pur-poses,,

Specific studies utilizing the MRT and specifically Test Six

of the MRT as a screening device for brain-injured children

were not found in a survey of the literature. Many studies,

however, have indicated the usefulness of tests of visual-

motor -perception for the diagnosis of brain injuries.

The Bender Visual Motor Gestalt Test (BVKGT) is one

such device that is generally accepted as a valuable aid in

diagnosing neurological impairment (Bender, 1938, I9I4.6).

Investigators concur that the Bender protocols of groups of

brain injured individuals, regardless of age and intelligence,

differ significantly from those of non-brain injured

individuals who are not psychiatric patients (Barkley, 19l|9;

Baroff, 1957J Beck, 19>9j Bender, 195>24 195&J Eensberg,

7

1952; Claw3on, 1958, 1962; Feldman, 1953; Hanvick, 1953;

Koppit%J( 1958, I960, 1961, 1962, 196^, 1970; NcSuire, I960;

Niebuhr & Cohen, 1956; Shaw & Cruickshank, 1956; Wewetzer,

1959).

Koppita (1962) did a study exploring the usefulness of

the BVMGT in diagnosing brain injury in young children. The

Ss used were 3SI4. public school children, a:;c 5-10 years.

Of these 103 had been diagnosed as brain injured i-vhile the

rer.1aini.n3 28l Ss served as controls. All 3VMGT records were

scored according to the Bender Scoring System for Young

Children which has been developed by Kippjtz. The results

show that the total Bender scores as veil as individual

scoring iteras, can differentiate significantly between brain

injured and non-brain injured Ss, The diagnostic value for

each given deviation on the Bender varied according to the,

_Ss age. Most brain injured Ss did poorly on the 3VI4GT

regardless of their IQ,. Good 3VM3*f records were very rare

ssaong brain injured Ss and occured almost exclusively ax-iong

children with at least average intelligence.

Clawson (1/62) performed a pilot study to select frora

an extensive test battery those psychological .measures which

would differentiate between children of average intelligence

who are brain injured and those not brain injured. She found

that the Bender records of 5o?i of the brain injured Ss

contained four or more deviations of a specified nature.

None of the other Ss had as rrnny. In the study, a battery

o u

of 22 testa were administered individually to 10 brain

injured children., 10 clients of a rp^idance center, and 10

children chosen by their achecls as "normals." All

children were 'of average or above average Intelligence,

a;;es ranged fren 3-0 year3 to 13-0 year.?, end .groups were

matched for age and intelligence.

In a study U8iir~ rotations in the BVMGT ?s 'predictors

of EEG- abnormal!ties in children* Manvick (1953) found that

there undoubtedly is a hit:h correlation between rotation of

the figures of the 3'/XG-T and electr-cer.ceph&lographic

abnormalItie s . Rotation is a developmental p ho n oner on and

its persistence beyond the s.ftes of 7 cr 8 years way be

indicative of either r.er.tal deficiency or o.rcyanic brain

injury where it is a regressive feature (Fabian, 19^5) •

Other invc 3 bic,ator s confirm the belief that, rotations of

2endv.r' s fi.cures are of diagnostic significance (Griffith

& Taylor, I960, 1961; Chorest, Soicaeb, ci Lev-ire, 1959;

Hannah, 1953; nanviek C; Anderson, 1950; Ealpin, 1955*

fi'osti ;, Lefever, * 'Jhittlesey, (1961) report a

developnental test in five areas of visual perception that

was standardized on a sample of Ij.34- normal children, ages

3| to 8 years. It was ^iven to a sample of ?1 children,

diagnosed as brain injured or suspected of being brain

injured, all of when had learning difficulties. Perceptual

disturbances 'were found in nearly all of the clinical sample,

Analysis of the scatter between the five subtests showed

that the perceptual difficulties were r>ot unifcnn. For a

t^iven child the test mi:-:"ht show that in scire perceptual

areas, the child functioned wc-1.1 vhile in others there -was

disturbance. Koreove.r, disturbance was likely to occur in

different degrees in the different areas. Specific training

based on the test results produced clinically observed

changes in perceptual ability ana subsequent improvement in

academic p e rf ormanc e .

The problem with which the present study is concerned

is, "Can the KRT generally and test six particularly act as

a suitable screening device for detecting brain injury?" The

study reports the results obtained from a comparison of KRT

scores for two groups of children. The first -?roup consisted

of 21j. children placed in special education classes for the

minimally brain injured, (MSI). The second ,p»oup consisted

of PJ4 children who were matched for a .e, sex, and IQ with

the first r;:roup ana was selected from children in regular

class placement.

It was hypothesized that the mean scores on test six

of the KRT for the KBI ^roup x-zould be significantly lower

than the mean score for the children in regular classes, Ho

hypotheses were advanced concerning group differences on

the other tests of the KRT.

10

I*e ft hod

Subjects

The design of the present study required the identification

of a group of 'or a in injured _Ss (BI). The Dallas Independent

School District has special education classes for the

minimally brain injured (KBI). Criteria for pi ac-ciicnt In

such a o 13,3s consist of an evaluation by a psychologist of

the Dallas Independent School District Psychological Services,

which yields various significant indications of brain injury.

Secondly, finding of i'.BI on the basis of a neurological

exsjcin at ion by a neurologist nast be obtained. And, finally.,

approval for placement by a staff in;-: cer.iait.tee of the Dallas

Independent School District consisting of department heads

frota: Psychological Services, Special Education, and Health

Services. The control group consisted of matched Ss from

a regular class setting not Vnown to be brain injured. There

were 2L| students from XBI classes serving as the brain

injured (BI) group of the present study, and 2.i\ -students

from regular classes vrho v:ere designated as the non-brain

injured ( 1a1 3 i) control group of "the present study. School

records were used to obtain all test infermation. Age,

sex, and IQ's vere obtained for the students currently

enrolled in I-J3I classes. Students from regular classes

were matched with the BI Ss in terras of IQ, sex and age at

adriinis trat 3 on of the ilRT and served as the KB I control

group of the present study.

11

The KBT is administered to all incoming first graders .

in the Dallas Irdependent School District. Therefore, the

ages of all Ss were either six or seven years. School

records did not, in every cane, indicate the students!s age .

in terms of both years and months. Therefore, 3s' a;:es are

reported in terms of years only. The BI group was comprised

of 23 six-year-olds and one seven-year-old. The ITBI group

was made up of 23 six-year-olds and one seven-year-old. The

31 group was composed of 21 males and three females. The

N31 group was composed of 21 males and three females. The

mean IQ for the BI group was 9^.29] the standard deviation,

The mean IQ, for the 1TBI group was 9^.29J the standard

deviation, 9.6?. IQs for both groups were taken from the

California Test of Mental Maturity.

Ins trur.?ent

The instrument used in this study is the Metropolitan

Readiness Tests (MRT). The MRT were devised to measure the

extent to which school beginners have developed the several

skills and abilities that contribute to readiness for first

grade instruction (Hildreth, et al., 1969). There are six

tests. Test One is ¥ord Meaning, a 16-item picttire vocabulary

test. The pupil selects from three pictures the one that

illustrates the word the examiner names. Test Two is

Listening, a 16-it era test of ability to comprehend phrases

and sentences. The pupil selects from three pictures the one

which portrays a situation or event described by the phrase

• 12

or sentence the examiner reads. Test Three is I-mfcching, a

Ill-item test of visual perception involving the recognition

of 3imilarities among symbols and words. The pupil marks

which of three pictures matches a given picture. Test Four

is Alphabet, a 16-item test of ability to recognise lower-

case letters of the Alphabet. The pupil chooses a named

letter from among four alternatives. Test Five is Numbers,

a 26-itera test of number knowledge. Test Six is Copying, a

Ill-item test which measures a combination of visual perception

and motor control,

Gardner (1953) reports a general high level of excellence

and careful workmanship both with respect to item construction

and statistical analysis. Prom the technical point of view,

the MET are among the superior readiness tests now available.

Pesign and Procedure

The design for this study consisted of establishing two

groups of students, one brain injured and the other non-

brain injured. The mean scores were obtained on each test

of the MRT for each group. The KRT are administered to

groups of first-graders ana scored by their teachers.

Six t tests were used to evaluate the significance of

obtained mean differences between the 31 and NBI groups. The

.05 level of significance was accepted as evidence that the

differences obtained were not due to chance. Since a

directional hypothesis was stated for Test Six, the difference

on this test was evaluated by a one-tailed test. All

13

other differences were evaluated by ^ a n s -of two-tailed

tests since any differences, no inatter the direction,

were of interest.

Results

Test One, word meaning, is a picture vocabulary test.

Table 1 presents the means and standard deviations of the

scores on Test One. Results indicate that the- 31 ^roup

obtained higher scores than the 1131 group. This difference

was significant at the .001 level of confidence.

TASiiii 1

MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AND t TEST OM I'iST ons, dQRD KiAfllNG ~

Group Mean 3D t ' P

MB I 7.063 3.091 BI 13.208 3.718 6.20$ <.001

Test Two, Listening, is a test of ability to cor.vprehend

phrases and sentences instead of individual words. Table 2

presents the raeans and standard- deviations of the scores on

Test Two. Results indicate that the BI group obtained higher

scores than the NBI group. This difference was not, however,

signif leant.

]J-J.

'TABLE 2

MSAWS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AND t TEST 01? iiST TWO, LISTENING

Grouts

NBI BI

i-jean

9® 083 9.373'

3D

2,932 3.132 0.333 y 0 05

Test Three, Hatching, is a test of visual perception

involving the recognition of similarities. Table 3

presents the means and standard deviations cf the scores

on Test Three. Results indicate that the BI ;;;roup obtained

higher scores than the KBI group. This difference was

significant at the . 0? level of confidence,

TABLE" 3

KEAi>33, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, Al\D t TisST OH T-iST THREE, MATCHING

Group Kean SD t P

FBI 6.1458 U-116 <.05 BI 9.12 3.992 2,277 <.05

Test Four, Alphabet, is a test of ability to recognize

lower-ease letters of the alphabet. Table !.{. presents the

means and standard deviations of the scores on Test ?our.

Results indicate that the NBI obtained higher scores than

the BI °;roup. However, this difference was not significant,

15

TABLE k

MEANS. STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AND t TEST ON TEST FOUR, ALPHABET

Group Mean SD t ?

NBI BI '

8.208 6.583

^.925 5.061+ 1.1269 >. 05

Test Five, Nxuabers, is a test of number knowledge.

Table 5 presents the means and standard deviations of the

scores on Test Five. Results indicate that the NBI group

obtained higher scores than the 31 group. This difference

was significant at the .05 level of confidence.

TABLE 5

I; 12AN3, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AND t TEST ON TEST FIVE, NUMBERS

Group Mean 3D t P

NBI 11.833 5.615 BI 8.708 3.383 2.2)421 <.05

Test Six, Copying, is a test which measures a combination

of visual perception and motor control. The hypothesis

predicted that the wean scores on Test Six of the MRT would

be significantly lower for the BI group than the inean score

for the NBI group. Table 6 presents the means and

standard deviations of the scores of Test Six. Resuli

16

indicate that the 31 group was lever on the score a than the'

NBI jroup, 'Phis difference was significant at the .01 level

of confidence. Therefore, the hypothesis was accepted.

TABLE 6

M5AHS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AiiD t TEST OH TEST SIX, COPYING

Group

NBI BI

I*] e a n

5.53 3 2.958

SD

2.811 2 o 926 3.1688 <.01

Discussion

The statistical results of the present study indicate

that the KRT would appear to be a suitable screening device

for the presence of minimal brain injury. Pour of the XRT

indicated significant differences between the BI and NBI:

tests 1, 3, 5> and 6 . The BI group obtained significantly

lower mean scores on Test Six, as hypothesized, and Test

Five than did the RBI group. However, it ;i s important to

emphasize that other tests of the MRT showed superior ability

on the part of the BI group. The BI group obtained

significantly higher isean scores on Test One and Three than

did the NBI ;-;roup.

Results of this study indicate that the BI group

obtained significantly higher scores than did the ITBI group

on Test One, "Word Meaning, and Test Three, Matching. The

17

:iord Meaning test Measures the cnlid's store of verbal

concepts. These results provide strong evidence of

superiority of the BI group over the KB I group in verbal

skills. The matching test seeks to get; at visual™

perceptual skills akin to those Involved in discriminating

word forms In beginning reading. This test has consistently

correlated well with beginning reading ski3.'ls (Hildrefch,

et al., 1969). It should be noted here that such results,

indicating significantly better visual-perception in the

BI group is important evidence that the BI group has better

reading skills than would be expected on the basis of simple

knowledge of general IQ. /Jith regard to reading skills and

vocabulary, the results of the present study Indicate that

the BI child is better able to profit from noraisl claas.rocm

instruction than is the 1-TBI child of equal IQ,. It is

possible that the superior readiness of the BI child for

reading instruction may be due to greater attent'iveness on

the part of the parents to the skills which the child

possesses rather than those he shows disability in, i.e.,

sotor skills.

It would seem evident, therefore, considering results

of Test One and Three, that the BI group is significantly

better prepared to perform certain verbal skills necessary

for academic achievement than is the RBI group. In the

absence of demonstrable evidence that would contraindicate

regular class placement, students who are irinimally brain

18 -

injured would appear to be better suited in scree respects

for regular class placement than those of a "normal"

3ample of like IQ.

The 31 group obtained significantly lower mean scores

on Tests Five and Six than did the K3I group. Test Five,

Numbers, is an inventory of the child's stock of number

concepts, number knowledge, ability to produce number symbols,

and related knowledge, such as concepts of money (Hildreth,

et al., 1969). Therefore, difficulties in the quantitative

area, such as number skills, are likely to be encountered in

the 31 child. Difficulties on visual-motor tasks will also

likely be found in the 31 child, such as problems with

•writing. Test Six is a visual-r.;obor task, and the 31 group

was significantly inferior to the NBI group, as hypothesized.

Such statistical evidence of visual-motor difficulties among

the brain injured is congruent with many other studies of a .

s1m i1ar nature.

Per-haps, specific attention can be given to each

individual student who exhibits a learning difficulty in the

classroom, without regard for his "special" status as BI

or KBI,(Kelly, 1970; Solan & Seiderman, 1970). Training

programs could be implemented to correct any objectively

measured learning difficulties whether of the BI or NBI

student. Such programs could be used in the child's home

school and eliminate many problems involving special class

placement, e.g., transportation, waiting list, etc.

19

However, there are other problems that wii-'ht require

special attention in a regular class setting. One auch

problem ard a major diagnostic variable for the mla-tmally

brain injured is hyperactivity, l*"ith the use or drug therapy,

many of the detrimental effects of hyperactivity can be

ameliorated. Kedication alone, of course, is not the total

solution. Changes uust be effected in the behavior,s,

reactions, and attitudes of both home and school.

The attitudes and reaction of the others in the

hyperactive child's environment are \Tery important factors,

h'ithout doubb, the particular child under observation may

function at a higher rate of speed than the average child.

However, it is quite likely that all too often fchc reaction

of parents contributes to the behavior pattern, and tends

to perpetuate it, when the pattern of hyperactivity could

be broken by simple behavior modification techniques. Their

reaction may take the way of overprotection; they may tend

to becone permissive and overlook undersirable behaviors,

excusing him because the child is "brain injured". Thus,

they eliminate the very thing the child needs, that is,

structure and security in his environment. Other parents,

themselves hypertense and "hyper-reactive", resort to screams,

threats and punishment; thus a "sno\/balling" effect, may be

in operation. The child seeing that he gains attention in

this way, responds with more of the same, and so on and on.

A more positive approach is the use of encouragement and

structured but kindly management (Gunderson, 1971).

20

Knowledge of the basic abilities as well as the

disabilities of the 51 is an important element in planning,

for their educational needs. The T-iRT 1, 3> 6 would,

along with a general IQ, test score, appear to be a very

useful screening device for the minimally brain injured«

Screening with the MET v ' o u l d also serve to .remind the

professionals responsible for making educational decisions

concerning the minimally brain injured that they have some

educational abilities as well as disabilities.

21

B a r k l e y , B. A n o t e on ^he d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e V/e s t e r n R e s e r v e Han to--Vine 3 t h e b i e G e s t a l t T e s t . P s y c h o l o g y , 19U9, 5 , 1 7 9 - 1 6 0 .

Bar o f f , G. Bender G e s t a l t v i s u o - i f i c t o r f u n c t i o n i n m e n t a l d e f e c t i v e s . A m e r i c a n J o u r n a l o f K e n t a l D e f i c i e n c y , 1957, 61, 75-3-750.' " "

B e c k , H. S, A c o m p a r i s o n of c o n v u l s i v e o r g a n i c , n o n -c o n v u l s i v e o r g a n i c and n c n - o r . t a n i c p u b l i c s c h o o l c h i l d r e n , American J o u r n p l o f l l e n t s l D e f i c i e n c v , 1 9 5 9 , .63, S5F~. " " " ' .

B o c k , II. 3 . D e t e c t i n g p s y c h o l o g i c a l symptoms o f b r a i n i n j u r y . E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n , 1 9 6 1 , 2 7 , 5 7 - 6 2 .

B e n d e r , L. A V i s u a l K o t p r G e s t a l t T e s t and i_ts C l i n i c a l Use . iVew ScrYT Aacf-Tcan Cr- thopsych ia fcr i c A s s o c i a t i o n ,

6 ,• j i J •

B e n d e r , L. I n s t r u c t i o n s f o r t h e u s e o f V i s u a l K o t c r P e s b a i t To s t . Keu York :~7[Herfesn Orthc -psycn ia fcr i c A s s o c i a t i o n , -f-.n-r XV140.

B e n d e r , L. V i s u o l no t o r G e s t a l t T e s t find I t s C l i n i c a l U s e . (3 e 4 e a r c h T, onot-jr aph H o . 3 l Hew York: Aner i c an 0 r t h c p s y c h i a t r i e A s s o c i a t i o n , 1 9 5 2 .

B e n d e r , L. P sy c hop a t ho lev-:y o f Cl.ii.ld_ren w i t h O r g a n i c B r a i n Di_sord'/?s^ SpVTivffield", 1 1 1 . : C h a r l e s C. Thomas, 1 9 5 6 .

B e n s b e r g , G. J . P e r f o r m a n c e o f b r a i n i n j u r e d and f a i n i l i a l nieni ,al d e f e c t i v e s on t h e Bender G e s t a . l t T e s t . J o u r n a l o f C o n s u l t i n - ? P s y c h o l o g y , 1 9 5 2 , 1 6 , 6 l - 6 l | . .

C h o r o s b , S , B . , S p i v a c k , G . , & L e v i n e , M. Bender G e s t a l t r o t a t i o n s and KEG a b n o r m a l i t i e s i n c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l

5°5su2\L:Ltl£' P s y c h o l o g y , 1 9 5 9 , 2 3 , 5 5 9 .

C l a w s o n , A. J h £ V i s u a l Motor G e s t a l t T e s t f o r Children:"" A raanual.~ W i c h i t a , K a n s a s : W i c h i t a Guidance (Tent e7", 1958 •

C l a w s o n , A. R e l a t i o n s h i p o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l t e s t s t o c e r e b r a l d i s o r d e r s i n c h i l d r e n : A p i l o t s t u d y . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1962, 1 0 , 1 8 7 - 1 9 0 .

22

Clements, S. iliniisal Rp£~in Dysfvno fci on in Children. (National TnatiTute" of Neurological Diseases & Blindness, Monograph Fc. 3# Public Health Servicc, Bulletin No. IJ4I!?) Washington, D. C., U. S. Department of Health, Education, & V:elfsre,' 1966.

Cruick^hank, Vf. K. The 3rain-Inurcd Child In Hoino, School, co Corotixmifcy. Syracuse,~fti r"Tl: Syr ecu s'e" University Pre 3 s7" 196'7 „

Fabian, A.'A. Vertical rotation in visual-motor- performance : 118 relationships bo readinq reversals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1945, 36, 129-154.

Feldman, I. Psychological differences among moron and borderline mental defectives as a function of Etiology; 1 visual-motor fane t ion in/;, American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1953, £7, lf3ii.-li.94•

Frosti,-;, H,, Lefever, D. '><., & VJhittleaey, J. R. B. A developmental cost of visual perception for evaluating norraal. and .neurolorically handicapped children. Perceptual £<; looter Skills, 1961, ' 12, 390-391.

frosti;.;, J1. Visual perception in the brain-injured child. American Journal of Orth or)sycliiat r £, 1963, 331 665-671.

Gardner, E. P. The Metropolitan Readiness Tests. In 0, Burns (Ed.), The Fourth, rental Mea_sur^ien_t3 Yearbook. Highland' Farki Tf7~J77 Gryphon "Press, l9fT3«

Griffith, R. M. & Taylor, V. Incidence of Bender Gestalt firur-c rotations. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1960, 2^, 189-190. " ~

Griffith, R. M.' <5c Taylor, V. Bender Gestalt figure' rotations: A stimulus factor. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1961, 2£, 39.

Gunderson, 3. V. Diagnosis of learning disabilities: The team approach. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1971, k, 107-113*.

Halpin, V. G. Rotation errors made by brain-injured & familial children on two visual motor tests, to.erican Journal of menta 1 Deficiency, 1955, .59, 485-4897"

Hannah, L, D. Causative factors in the production of rotations on the Eender Gestalt designs. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1958, 22, 398-399.

23

Hanvick, L. & Anderson, A., 3. The effect of focal brain lesions on recall and on the production of rotation in the Bender 0 estalt Tesb. Journal of Consulting Psycholo-:y, 1950, _lh, 1.97-19^.

Hanvick, L. A note on rotation in the Bender Gcstalt Teat as oredictors of EPJG abnormalities in children. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1953, 9, 399.

Hildreth, G. A., Griffiths, N. L., & KcOauvran, M. S. Metropolitan Rcadirjess Tests: Ksnual of Plrec b ions. ITew^orkT" Harcourt, Brace cc World, 196-9.

Hunt, J, V. The early detection of potential learning disorders. Academic Therapy, 1969, ]£., 253-^3•

Hurst, ¥. A. A basis for diagnosing and treating learning disabilities within the school system. Journal of

Disabllities, 1968, 1, 263-275•

Johnson, D. J. Educational principles for children with learning disabilities, Hini^pl Brain Dy sfunc blon: A. Naw Problem Area for Social Work. Syioposiura presented at the meat it) g of the National Easter Seal Society for Crinnled Children and Adults, Chicago, 1963.

Johnson, D. J. & Ky 'klebus t, tl, Lea ml ng Di sa_bil tie_s: Bducabional Principles & Practices T .I;5v Yr7rk:~Grune & StratToo r~19c;?. " "

Kelly, G. R. Group perceptual screening at first grade level. Journal of Learning Disab'iliti_es> 1970, _3, Li. 1.—Lj5-

Knights, R. M. ®o Hinbon, G. C, Minimal brain dysfunction: Clinical Zz psychological test characteristics. Academic Theraoy, 1969, 265-273.

Koppita, E. I*. The Bender C-estalt Test & learning disturbances in young children. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1958, ll|, 292-295.

Koppitz, E. M. The Bender Gestalt Test for children: A normative study. Journal of Clinical Psychology, I960, 16, J|32-ii35. " ~ """*

Koppitz, PJ. H», Mardis, V., .Sc Stephens, T. A note on screening school beginners with the Bender Gestalt Test. Journal of Sducational BsJrohology, 1961, 52, 80-81.

2/4

Koppitz, E. H. ' Di aero sin;-: brain da jvo^e in youn,'" children with the Bender Oestnlt T^st. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1962, 26, $1^1-^6,

Koppitz, 3. K. The Bender Ge_s-bcl_t Test for Younrj Children. New York: Grune' & "S"tratton"7'T9SIt. ' * ~ *

Koppitz, 15. K. Brain damage, reading disability and the Bender Gestalt Test, Journal of Lcarnin," Disabilities, 1970, 3, J429-1+33• ~ ~ ~~ ' " " "

McGuire, P. A comparison of the Bender Gestalt and Flicker Fusion as indicators of central nervous system involve-ment. Journa1 of Clinical Psychology, I960, 16, 276.

I-Iyklebust, K. cc Boshes, 3. Psychoneurological learning; disorders in children. Archieves of Pediatrics, I960, 77, 21.7-256. — '

Myklebust, 7., Learning disorders: Psychoneurological disturbances in childhood. Rehabilitation Literature, 1961I, 25, 354-360. "

Tlyklebus t, H, Learning disturbances in psychoneurological^ disturbed children: Behavioral correlates of brain dysfunctions. In P. Koch £ J. Zubin (3de.) Psychopatho1o~y of Kental Development. New York: GinineTZ: "Strafcton7~lW?~i *~

Kyklebust, H. Progress in Learning MsabjJ itie_s: Volnne I. New York T& London: Grune & Stratt~on7 T96"8".' ~

Niebuhr, K. 5: Cohen, D. The effect of psychopabholo^y on visual discrimination. Journal of Abnormal tc Social Psychology, 1956, 53, 173-177. ' """ ~ '

Shaw, M. C. & Cruickshank, ¥. K. The use of the Bender Gestalt test with epileptic children. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1956, 12, 192-193. '

Shipe, D, & Miezitis, S. A pilot study in the diagnosis and remediation of specie! learning disabilities in pro-school children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1969, 2, 579-592. ; " 1

Slin^erland, B. H. Early identification of pre-school children who mi./rht fail. Academic Therany, 1969, k. 21*5-252. " *

Solan, H. A. & Seiderrnan, A. S» Case report on a grade one child before and after perceptual.-motor training. Jonrnal of Learning Dlsab illtie 3, 1970, 3., 635-639.

25

Strauss, A. Labbinen, L. Psvca.cpafchol o~y Education of the Brain-In lured Cbild. Ho*.; Torlc G-rune k Strattcn, 19M'7T

Strauss, A. <:c Eepharfc, 'J.. G. P s y c hop a t h o 1 o • r j and Education of the Br a i n -1 n j u red Gjii_ld: Volune II Pro;: re.-3 3 in The i;V"s[ and Clini_c. New York: G-rune oc 3 bra fcton, 191?!? •

•ie'-jstzer, K. H. Das Hirn^eschadir"be Kind . Stuttgart, Georg Thier.ie Verlac,, 1959*