Not necessarily. The evaluation is only as good as the psychologist. Two kids in same school YEARS apart evaluated by two different psychologists, one came out brilliant but with "slow processing speed" the other came out dumb as a rock with a "specific learning disability" in math. We knew about the LD, but did not agree re intelligence. For the second kid, we were very upset, and our ped recommended a full neuropsych evaluation at KK - we also got on their waitlist, and they did an amazing job. While child does have visual motor problems which are causing a "specific learning disability in math" which is so specific they did not identify it? The kid has math issues, but her other scores were no longer "average, average, average" but rather >99.9th percentile and they clocked her in 2nd grade reading (and comprehending) at a 5th grade level. THIS was the child we knew. So be careful if you let the school do an initial IQ test. They also picked up on how her fine motor delays (the school gives her OT 2x a week) affect performance scores on IQ tests, which were on the WISC (which they could not redo - couldn't redo any of the tests the school had done) "below average", which the school psychologist did not. Terrible Terrible Terrible report and Terrible testing. KK did focus a lot on her fidgeting and potential ADHD (I guess it is in vogue) but our survey and the teacher survey did not confirm it so they had to drop it. Anyway, I would do private neuropsych testing if your insurance will pay for it and if your kid is old enough so that makes sense before letting the school have access to test your child or the results............. we expected sort of stratosphere and below zero results, we did not expect average average average which can be 39th% or 89th% and sentences like with such a score, child should be able to master..... As opposed to, a score in the 99th percentile shows that this is one of child's strong points, and she can use it to compensate for........... Completely different scores, completely different tones, completely different results.......... |
Childfind doesn't actually "diagnose." You are qualifying for services b/c the delays your child is having meet a certain threshold and has an "educational impact." Early Intervention also doesn't diagnose. You are qualifying for services by meeting a certain percentage of delays. Either way, your kid can have delays not acknowledged by Childfind or EI. |
| I agree that the evaluation is only as good as the person doing it. I have paid for testing that was incredibly poorly executed. |
Maybe not subtle things, but their findings typically point to larger issues, if there are any. |
Nope, they don't. Their findings may point that your kid has a speech delay. With ST, that may resolve. (They may resolve on their own without ST but why take that chance.) Or they persist even with ST and be connected to language based LDs down the road. I've also known many kids (including my own) who have had significant delays and been rejected by EI and Childfind for services and received them after appealing and documenting delays from outside sources. |
My child's 0-3 evaluation was at a Children's Hospital and took hours. When I look at the results from the evaluation, done when he was about 23 months old, they are surprisingly accurate, even though my child is now a teen. They got a very good snapshot of what was going on. It wasn't a diagnosis per se, but they didn't miss anything. |
A evaluation through Children's isn't comparable to an evaluation through Childfind or EI. One would hope it would be a lot more comprehensive. I agree though, sometimes you don't get a diagnosis, but being thorough is extremely helpful, especially at a young age. |
This wasn't Children's up here. It was a children's hospital and diagnostic center in Florida that was designated to do the ChildFind evaluating (I think it was called Early Steps in Florida). It was thorough and spot-on. There were some things they saw there that didn't manifest until years later. I had put the report aside but looked at it recently, and was surprised and even the more subtle things they noticed back then. |
| Just like with many medical professionals, the range in quality of psychologists is quite large--probably larger than in many other fields. Even with the PhD programs they go to, some are fantastic, many are good, plenty are adequate but not great, and some are crap. Let alone their specific mentorship, training, skills, etc... The better ones will be at more prominent institutes. A school that pays poorly is not a prominent institute so unless it's someone doing it for the love of it in that environment, you aren't getting the best and the brightest in the field. There will always be exceptions, but it definitely adds to the challenge of getting a good evaluation that is free. |
| My DS was definitely 'over' diagnosed at an evaluation - but it was hedged, since many of the diagnoses are a range of what it might be - or could develop or not - when kids are young. My bigger takeaway was that the evaluation is part of a process and not an end point - more a beginning - where he started therapy, responded to it well & has benefited from it, no matter what the 'labels' may or may not have been. The OTs he saw still shrug that it may be one thing or another - but I tried after a while to focus on the 'how to help my child' more than the imprecise nature of diagnoses in this field |
As some PPs have suggested, if the teacher is insistent there is a problem then the schools should be doing the testing. I would start there because they'll do some standardized testing as well as classroom observations. Based on those results, you can either do nothing, accept any services the school may offer or take the school reports to a private professional for your own evaluation. The school testing is at no cost to you and there is little risk involved. It's just a start and a snapshot in time. |