The programme is being updated.
Keynote Lectures
Heidi Keller
Heidi Keller is a Professor emeritus of Psychology at the University of Osnabrück and a director of Nevet, the Greenhouse of Context-Informed Research and Training for Children in Need at the Paul Baerwald School of Social Work and Social Welfare at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Her interests concern the interrelationship between culture and biology for the understanding of human development. She has done extensive (longitudinal) research in diverse cultural contexts across the globe and taught at different universities in different countries. She received the Award for career achievement from the German Society of Psychology in 2014. She is interested in the application of basic science for application in the counselling/clinical as well as educational fields, especially with respect to the implementation of culture sensitive approaches. In recognition of her achievements in this area she received the ISSBD Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award for the Applications of Behavioral Development Theory and Research in 2014. She is currently mainly concentrating on the development of culture sensitive approaches to attachment and their implementation in practice.
Cultural appropriateness of psychological evaluations.
Methods developed in WEIRD contexts (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic, Henrich, Heine & Norenzayan, 2010) are exported all over the globe. Several biases are discussed in the literature, especially construct, method and item bias in order to generate equivalence as a prerequisite for comparisons. However, validity of assessments across cultural contexts as more far reaching, it comprises modes of conduct and communication and conventions of social encounters in general. In the first part of this presentation, the research practice in cross cultural developmental psychology will discussed. In the second part shortcomings of this practice, the false diagnoses and the missing links will be presented. Besides research methods and diagnostic tools (tests), also interventions based on Western psychology in non Western samples will be targeted. In the third part of the presentation the moral and ethical implications will be discussed. The conclusion is that the export of Western methodology and methods is based on the assumption that Western psychology is universal. This assumption and the implied implications of evaluation is unscientific and unethical.
Helen Bakker
Dr. Helen E. Bakker is an Associate Professor in the department of Developmental Psychology at Utrecht University, the Netherlands. She is program coordinator of the Master program in (Clinical) Child & Adolescent Psychology and Chair of the Dutch Post-Master program for School Psychologists at RINO Amsterdam and Radboud Center Social Sciences. Helen is former President of the International School Psychology Association (ISPA) and currently member of the Board of Educational Affairs of the European Federation of Psychologists Associations (EFPA) and of the Board of the Dutch National Youth Care Register. Her areas of interest and expertise include ethics and professional development, children’s rights, evidence-based teaching and needs based assessment. Dr. Bakker is registered Child- & Adolescent Psychologist Specialist NIP, Health Psychologist and certified supervisor. She is also holder of the Europsy certificate in Education and Health.
Intelligent testing of intelligence in practice: some international reflections
Testing intelligence has traditionally been included in many, if not most assessment processes in children internationally. Intelligent testing of intelligence requires thorough knowledge of the theoretical framework of the particular test, the psychometric qualities as well as insight in the various constructs included in the measurement. This should match the goal and context of the evaluation: what questions do we need to answer? What problem do we need to solve?
In practice, many of these aspects are ignored. Subtest scores are used where the aim of a test is measuring a general intelligence factor, measured IQ scores are interpreted as if they are precise and exact, etc. And maybe we should ask ourselves more often if an intelligence test is the best answer to the question at hand.
In the Netherlands, sometimes external parties (schools for special education, insurance companies) set strict cut off scores for e.g. admission to special education or mental health care providers, or for the right to coverage of support by insurance. That often creates a dilemma: what if the measured IQ score falls just outside of the set standard, but part of the confidence interval is within the range of the required standard? Do you report the measured IQ? And is it ethical to begin with to limit yourself to an intelligence test for questions regarding educational or mental health support needs? In this presentation, these and other dilemmas psychologists face when using (or considering) intelligence tests in practice are being discussed, and related to the Czech school context and professional practice.
Dawn Flanagan
Dr. Dawn P. Flanagan is Professor of Psychology at St. John's University in Queens, NY. She is also an Affiliate Clinical Professor at Yale Child Study Center, Yale University School of Medicine in New Haven, CT. In addition to her teaching responsibilities in the areas of cognitive assessment and specific learning disabilities, she serves as an expert witness, SLD consultant, and test/measurement consultant and trainer for organizations both nationally and internationally. She is a widely published author of books and articles. Her most recent books include Clinical Use and Interpretation of the WJ IV: Scientist-Practitioner Perspectives; Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification; Essentials of WISC-V Assessment; and Essentials of Planning, Selecting and Tailoring Interventions for Unique Learners. Dr. Flanagan is also an author of the Cross-Battery Assessment Software System (X-BASS) and lead professor for a 21-hour, online, CE course on Cross-Battery Assessment and X-BASS. She is a Fellow of the American Psychological Association and a Diplomate of the American Board of Psychological Specialties. She recently received APA’s Division 16 inaugural Contributions to Practice Award in recognition of her longstanding and extensive contributions to the field of School Psychology. Dr. Flanagan is best known for the development of the Cross-Battery Assessment approach and the development of an operational definition of specific learning disability, now known as the Dual Discrepancy/Consistency “PSW” method for SLD identification. Her forthcoming books include Essentials of SLD Identification, Second Edition, and Contemporary Intellectual Assessment: Theories, Tests, and Issues, Fourth Edition.
Current Trends in Diagnosis of Specific Learning Disabilities and Intellectual Disability
This presentation will provide a broad overview of the current theory, research, and practices that are influencing the diagnosis of specific learning disabilities (SLD) in the United States, as well as other countries around the world. Attention will be devoted to understanding the unique pattern of strengths and weaknesses among cognitive abilities, neuropsychological processes, and specific academic skills that support the SLD construct. In addition, given the breadth of abilities and processes that are measured by current intelligence and cognitive ability tests, the cognitive composites from these tests that are most relevant to the diagnosis of intellectual disability (ID) will be discussed. This presentation will commence with the most defensible means of diagnosing SLD and ID considering current theory and research.
David Tzuriel
David Tzuriel, Ph.D. is a clinical and educational psychologist and an expert on dynamic assessment of learning potential. David Tzuriel has received his Ph.D. from Peabody College of Vanderbilt University in 1977 and currently is a Professor Emeritus at Bar Ilan University (Israel) and the Head of the Research Unit at Feuerstein Institute in Jerusalem. David Tzuriel served as the President of the International Association for Cognitive Education and Psychology (1999-2001) and as Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology (JCEP; 2006-2011; 2017--). His scientific work is related to empirical validation, implementation, and modification of the theories of Feuerstein and Vygotsky, and his research is cited frequently in the literature. David Tzuriel has published many studies and books in the field of dynamic assessment, mediated learning experience, and cognitive education programs, as well as 7 dynamic assessment tests for preschool children that are used all over the world. David Tzuriel is known as a leader and developer of the dynamic assessment movement and taught more than 185 international workshops around the world.
Effectivity of dynamic assessment
The major objective of my presentation is to demonstrate the effectiveness of dynamic assessment (DA) in revealing the elusive effects of outcomes of cognitive education programs. The logical argument is that if the declared objective of the intervention is teaching children how to learn and to benefit from mediation, then the criterion outcome measure should be assessed by DA, which aims at revealing the ability to benefit from teaching. DA measures do not simply target the same abilities that cognitive education programs intend to develop. Four cognitive education programs based on mediated learning experience (MLE) theory are reviewed: Instrumental Enrichment, Bright Start, Peer Mediation with Young Children (PMYC), and The Seria-Think Program (STP). In all programs DA was more effective than standardized tests in revealing their effects. The DA findings, across different studies, indicate clearly that children in experimental groups benefited more from the mediation given to them within the DA procedure than did control children. Application of DA reveals that the contribution of the cognitive education program was not simply supporting the development of a skill practiced during the program but it involved teaching children how to benefit from mediation in a different setting and consequently improve their cognitive performance across other domains. The significance of the greater gains of the experimental children should be evaluated in relation to the fact that the tests given tap a different cognitive skill than those taught in the program, and that the standardized tests in most studies failed to reveal the effectiveness of the program. The presentation includes discussion of MLE theory and its relation to DA. The content and focus of the cognitive education programs are described as are the specific test instruments selected for use in the DA sessions.
Upcoming sections
Measurement and diagnostics of attachement in adulthood
New tests on the market
Psychometrics
The life cycle of tests