Percept#& md Motor Skills, 1978,46, 1284-1286. @ Perceptual and Motor Skills 1978
ANALYSIS OF THE DEVELOPMENTAL TEST OF VISUAL PERCEPTION AND THE MOTOR-FREE VISUAL PERCEPTION TEST G. DONOVAN' AND M. M. MITCHELLa University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Summary.-To identify children with learning problems and to compare test results, 28 kindergarten children were tested with the Developmental Test of Visual Perception and the Motor-free Visual Perception Test. The tests identified some children already noced by the reacher to exhibit characteristics of learning difficulty, failed to confirm the teacher's judgment in others, and identified some children with previously undetected difficulties. Basic differences in the rwo tests are reported. T o screen and identify children with learning problems and to compare the results 0 of the Developmental Test of Visual Perception (Frostig, Maslow, & Lefever, 1963) and the Motor-free Visual Perception Test (Colamsso & Hammill, 1972), these tests were administered to 28 kindergarten children enrolled in a state-approved private kindergarten in a middle-class suburban neighborhood. The children, 16 boys and 12 girls, ranged in chronological age from 5-6 to 6-5. Both tests were administered to all children within a 2-wk. period, with the order of test administration alternated to control for experience or practice effect. T o determine weak skill areas, scoring followed the instructions in the manual (Frostig, 1966) of the Developmental Test of Visual Perception For the Motor-free Visual Perception test, two criteria for a weak skill area were established: ( 1) the child must have made proportionately at least twice as many errors on items assessing a skill as compared with his mean number of errors on all subtests combined; and ( 2 ) the number of errors had to exceed the mean number of errors of the population sample on items assessing that particular skill. The scores were expressed as Perceptual Quotients. Table 1 shows both raw scores and Perceptual Quotients for each subject. Fig. 1 shows a plot of raw scores on both tests. A comparison of the Perceptual Quotients on both tests indicates that in general the Developmental Test of Visual Perception scores were higher. Comparison of the two tests shows that scoring of the Developmental Test of Visual Perception is somewhat subjective, while the Motor-free Visual Perception Test is simple and objective in scoring. The former test requires 45 min. to 1 hr. for administration and scoring, while the latter requires 15 m i a In this study, subtle deficits such as visual memory and visual closure were detected by the Motor-free Visual Perception Test, suggesting usefulness as a screening device. Before the testing, the following children were identified by the teacher as the children about whom she was most concerned: E, C. W, and A. She also identified, R, T, K, and D as children about whom she wanted information. The data confirmed the teacher's concerns about some of the children (A, C, D, E) and raised questions about others (B) . The children identified by the teacher, but not the tests (R, T, W ) , as most likely to have problems in first grade may indeed have problems. If so, they are probably not due to deficits in visual perception, but to some other cause. 'Gail Donovan, M. Ed., now at Durham, Nonh Carolina 'Address correspondence to Marlys M. Mitchell, Ph.D., Occupational Therapy Division, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514.
TESTS OF VISUAL PERCEPTION
TABLE 1 TESTSCORES OF KINDERGARTKN CHILDREN ON THE ~ ~ L A R U S SAON D FROSTTG Children A
B C D E P
Raw Scores Colarusso Frostig 50 21 58 21 46 22 38 23 20 51 25 51
Perceptual Quotients Colarusso Frostig 95 115 95 >I16 97 100 100 94 105 106 105
108
One of the purposes of this study was to serve a screening function to identify children who might experience learning difficulties because of visual perceptual deficits. Teachers' judgments were only moderately useful in predicting deficits of children as measured by these tests. Neither manual specifies an exact score which indicates a deficit, but those children whose scores fall at the lower end of the scale for their age group are considered to be in need of special instruction.
0
20
24 26 . 28 33 32 COLARUSSO A N 0 H A M M I U
22
34
36
FIG. 1. Raw scores on Frostig Developmental Test of Visual Perception and Colarusso and Hammill Motor-free Visual Perception Test
1286
G. DONOVAN
&
M. M. MITCHELL
The second purpose of the smdy, to analyze two tests of visual perception, showed that the Developmental Test of Visual Perception involves more than visual perception alone-it indudes motor responses; it specifies fine skill areas but appears not to detect visual memory and visual closure. The Motor-free Visual Perception Test is faster and easier to score and administer; it assesses visual memory and visual closure but does not assess subskills. The user is to be aware of each test's strengths and weaknesses and be aware of what he is testing-caveat emptor-when he interprets results and plans remedial instruction based on test results. T o identify children with learning problems and to compare test results, 28 kindergarten children were tested with the Developmental Test of Visual Perception and the Motor-free Visual Perception Test. The tests identified some children already noted by the teacher to exhibit characteristics of learning difficulty, failed to confirm the teacher's judgment in others, and identified some children with previously undetected difficulties. Basic differences in the two tests are reported. REFERENCES R., & HAMMILL,D. Motor-free Visual Perception Test. San Raphael, Calif.: COLARUSSO, Academic Therapy, 1972. FROSTIG, M. Admhistraiion and scoring manual, the Developmental Test o f Virual Perception. Palo Alto, Calif.: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1966. FROSTIG,M., MASLOW,P., & LEPEVER,W. The Marianne Frostig Developmenrd Test of Visual Perception. Palo Alto, Calif.: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1963.
Accepted May 19, 1978.
ANALYSIS OF THE DEVELOPMENTAL TEST OF VISUAL PERCEPTION AND THE MOTOR-FREE VISUAL PERCEPTION TEST G. DONOVAN' AND M. M. MITCHELLa University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Summary.-To identify children with learning problems and to compare test results, 28 kindergarten children were tested with the Developmental Test of Visual Perception and the Motor-free Visual Perception Test. The tests identified some children already noced by the reacher to exhibit characteristics of learning difficulty, failed to confirm the teacher's judgment in others, and identified some children with previously undetected difficulties. Basic differences in the rwo tests are reported. T o screen and identify children with learning problems and to compare the results 0 of the Developmental Test of Visual Perception (Frostig, Maslow, & Lefever, 1963) and the Motor-free Visual Perception Test (Colamsso & Hammill, 1972), these tests were administered to 28 kindergarten children enrolled in a state-approved private kindergarten in a middle-class suburban neighborhood. The children, 16 boys and 12 girls, ranged in chronological age from 5-6 to 6-5. Both tests were administered to all children within a 2-wk. period, with the order of test administration alternated to control for experience or practice effect. T o determine weak skill areas, scoring followed the instructions in the manual (Frostig, 1966) of the Developmental Test of Visual Perception For the Motor-free Visual Perception test, two criteria for a weak skill area were established: ( 1) the child must have made proportionately at least twice as many errors on items assessing a skill as compared with his mean number of errors on all subtests combined; and ( 2 ) the number of errors had to exceed the mean number of errors of the population sample on items assessing that particular skill. The scores were expressed as Perceptual Quotients. Table 1 shows both raw scores and Perceptual Quotients for each subject. Fig. 1 shows a plot of raw scores on both tests. A comparison of the Perceptual Quotients on both tests indicates that in general the Developmental Test of Visual Perception scores were higher. Comparison of the two tests shows that scoring of the Developmental Test of Visual Perception is somewhat subjective, while the Motor-free Visual Perception Test is simple and objective in scoring. The former test requires 45 min. to 1 hr. for administration and scoring, while the latter requires 15 m i a In this study, subtle deficits such as visual memory and visual closure were detected by the Motor-free Visual Perception Test, suggesting usefulness as a screening device. Before the testing, the following children were identified by the teacher as the children about whom she was most concerned: E, C. W, and A. She also identified, R, T, K, and D as children about whom she wanted information. The data confirmed the teacher's concerns about some of the children (A, C, D, E) and raised questions about others (B) . The children identified by the teacher, but not the tests (R, T, W ) , as most likely to have problems in first grade may indeed have problems. If so, they are probably not due to deficits in visual perception, but to some other cause. 'Gail Donovan, M. Ed., now at Durham, Nonh Carolina 'Address correspondence to Marlys M. Mitchell, Ph.D., Occupational Therapy Division, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514.
TESTS OF VISUAL PERCEPTION
TABLE 1 TESTSCORES OF KINDERGARTKN CHILDREN ON THE ~ ~ L A R U S SAON D FROSTTG Children A
B C D E P
Raw Scores Colarusso Frostig 50 21 58 21 46 22 38 23 20 51 25 51
Perceptual Quotients Colarusso Frostig 95 115 95 >I16 97 100 100 94 105 106 105
108
One of the purposes of this study was to serve a screening function to identify children who might experience learning difficulties because of visual perceptual deficits. Teachers' judgments were only moderately useful in predicting deficits of children as measured by these tests. Neither manual specifies an exact score which indicates a deficit, but those children whose scores fall at the lower end of the scale for their age group are considered to be in need of special instruction.
0
20
24 26 . 28 33 32 COLARUSSO A N 0 H A M M I U
22
34
36
FIG. 1. Raw scores on Frostig Developmental Test of Visual Perception and Colarusso and Hammill Motor-free Visual Perception Test
1286
G. DONOVAN
&
M. M. MITCHELL
The second purpose of the smdy, to analyze two tests of visual perception, showed that the Developmental Test of Visual Perception involves more than visual perception alone-it indudes motor responses; it specifies fine skill areas but appears not to detect visual memory and visual closure. The Motor-free Visual Perception Test is faster and easier to score and administer; it assesses visual memory and visual closure but does not assess subskills. The user is to be aware of each test's strengths and weaknesses and be aware of what he is testing-caveat emptor-when he interprets results and plans remedial instruction based on test results. T o identify children with learning problems and to compare test results, 28 kindergarten children were tested with the Developmental Test of Visual Perception and the Motor-free Visual Perception Test. The tests identified some children already noted by the teacher to exhibit characteristics of learning difficulty, failed to confirm the teacher's judgment in others, and identified some children with previously undetected difficulties. Basic differences in the two tests are reported. REFERENCES R., & HAMMILL,D. Motor-free Visual Perception Test. San Raphael, Calif.: COLARUSSO, Academic Therapy, 1972. FROSTIG, M. Admhistraiion and scoring manual, the Developmental Test o f Virual Perception. Palo Alto, Calif.: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1966. FROSTIG,M., MASLOW,P., & LEPEVER,W. The Marianne Frostig Developmenrd Test of Visual Perception. Palo Alto, Calif.: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1963.
Accepted May 19, 1978.
