LD CHECK LIST FOR PRIMARY SCHOOL CHILDREN

1. LD CHECK LIST FOR PRIMARY SCHOOL CHILDREN By Rukhshana Sholapurwala & Dr. Madhuri Kulkarni

2. Introduction • Why early diagnoses • Teacher’s awareness • Screening check-list developed by the M.S.C.E.R.T’S Divisional office & Institute of vocational guidance & selection along with L.D. experts • Usefulness of the check-list

3. Aims & Objectives • To study teacher’s perception about the use of screening check-list for high risk L.D. children • To analyse percentage of children studying in 3rd standard positive on screening check-list • To study the profile of high risk children as regards their clinical, psychological and educational assessments • To determine the number of L.D. children detected using screening check-list.

4. Materials & Method • 10 schools in different zones of Mumbai were selected • All English medium schools • All co ed schools • 5 ICSE and 5 SSC schools

5. Names of the Schools • Christ Church School • Shishuvan School • Beacon High School • Swadhyay Bhavan School • St.Gregorios School • Balmohan Vidhyamandir • D.P.Y.A. High School • I.H. Bhatia High School • Little Angle’s High School • Bombay Cambridge School

6. Cont… • 27 3rd Standard class teachers participated • Teachers were given the training on how to use the check-list • Teachers were given a time of 7 days to fill up the data • On the day of returning the data teachers were given a pre structured questionnaire • Consent of the Principals, Parents was taken before the study started. • Total students screened are 1101

7. CHECK LIST

8. Cont….

9. Profile of Screened Students as per School

10. Demographical Data

11. Profile of Students Making Mistakes In Reading • 71.3 % of students never made any mistakes in Reading • 23.2% of students sometimes had difficulty in Reading • Only 5.5% of students had difficulty in Reading

12. Profile of Students Having Difficulties In Writing Answers • 74.4% of the students never had difficulty in writing answers. • 18.7% of the students had difficulty sometimes • 6.9% of the students had difficulty in writing answers

13. Profile of Students Writing or Reading Figures or Letters in Wrong Way • 92.6%of the students never observed to have writing or Reading Figures in wrong way • 6.0%of sudents had Sometimes Difficult • 1.4%of students had difficulty in writing and readind the figures in wrong way

14. Profile of Students Having Difficulty In Differentiating Letter Sounds • 86%of students did have any problems in this area • 10.3%of students sometimes had this problem • 3%of students had problems in this area

15. Profile of Students Having Difficulty in Rhyming and Repeating Them • 87.8%of students never had any difficultiesin this area • 10.5%of students sometimes showed problem in this area • 1.7%of students had difficulty in this area

16. Profile of Students Having Difficulty in Taking Notes or Copying From Black Board • 80.4%problem in this area of students never had • 14.2%of students sometimes showed problem in this area • 5.4%of students had problems in this area

17. Profile of Students Having Confusion With Mathematics Symbols • 90.7%of students had no difficulty in this area • 7.7%of students sometimes showed difficulty in this area • 1.6%of students had difficulty in this area

18. Profile of Students Having Difficulty In Spellings • 66.3%of students had no problems in this area • 25.2%of students sometimes showed difficulty in this area • 8.5% area students had difficulty of in this area

19. Profile of students Having Difficulties With Spatial Orientation And Direction • 87.4%of students had no difficulty in this area • 11.6%of students showed problems in this area • 1.0%of students had problems in this area

20. Profile of Students Misplacing Upper And Lower Cases Letters • 90.7%of students had no problems in this area • 6.7%of students sometimes showed problems in thisarea • 2.6%of students had problems in this area

21. SUMMARY

22. Cont…..

23. Cont….. • From total students (1011) assessed 39 fell into Frequent category and 152 fell in sometimes category. • 3% students in frequent category and 15% in sometime category. • From 39 students 32 have been further assessed and from that 29 have been assessed as having L.D.

24. Teacher’s Evaluation • 27 all Std. III class teachers were interviewed after they had filled up the Check list. • They were given a Pre Structured questionnaire • Their evaluation shows as follows

25. TEACHER’S QUESTIONNAIRE

26. Cont…

27. Cont…..

28. Profile of Time to Fill Questionnaire • 11.1% of teachers required 1-2 or 3-4 minutes to fill the questionnaire • 48.2% of teachers required 5-7 minutes • 29.6% of teachers required morethan 7 minutes

29. Profile of Experience in Filling The Check list • 72.0% of teachers did not feel difficult to fill the Check list • 28.0% of total teachers found it difficult to fill the Check list

30. Profile of Time Required To Observe The Child and To Comment on Statement in the Check list • 38.5% of teachers felt that 2-3 or 3-4 months were needed to observe the child and to comment • 19.2% of teachers felt that 6 months are needed to observe and comment

31. Profile of Check listN=27 Questionnaire 1) • Did you have to especially plan activities or worksheets • 9 Teachers said yes that is 33.3% • 18 Teachers said No that is 66.7%

32. Cont…. 2) According to you can the check list be filled by observing child’s day-to-day activities or worksheet 24 Teachers said Yes…88.9% 03 Teachers said No…..11.i%

33. Cont….. 3) Do you think this check list should be regularly administered 22 Teachers said Yes….81.5% 05 Teachers said No……18.5%

34. Profile of Understanding Students Better • 55.6% of Teachers felt that Check list has Helped them to understand their students Better • 7.4% of Teachers felt that it was not sufficient for understanding the students better • 37.0% felt that somewhat it helped to understand

35. Profile of Awareness Among Teachers Regarding Children Having Learning Disability • 100% Teachers were aware of children having Learning Disability • 81.5% of Teachers informed the Head about children having Learning Disability • 66.7% of Teachers had informed the parents or referred them for further assessment

36. Profile of Number of Students In Each Class • 53.8% of teachers have 41-50 students in each class • 23.1% of teachers have 30-40 students in each class

37. Profile of Number of Children Appropriate To Know Each Child Individually • 52.0% of teachers felt that total no. of children in each class were not appropriate to know each child individually • 61.5% of teachers feel that 20-30 children in each class would be the ideal no. ofchildren in each class for assessment

38. Profile of Action Taken When The Child Falls Into A High Risk Category • 85.2% of the teachers informed the head when they know that child is falling into high risk category • 55.6% of teachers also informed the parents/guardian when child falls into a high risk category

39. Profile of Suggestions To Modify The Check list • 88.5% of teachers feel there is no need to modify the check list • 11.5% of teachers feel there is a need to modify the check list

40. Profile of Identifying The Students With Learning Disability • 61.5% of teachers agree that check list was useful in identifying students with learning disability • 3.9% of teachers do not know that the check list was useful or not

41. SUMMARY • Teachers require more time to fill the check list. • Before giving the check list training of the teachers is very much essential. • Teachers felt that the check list can be filled by observing student’s daily work. • Teachers felt that the class room strength should be less. 20-30 students per class.

42. Conclusion • L.D. Check list seems to be Teacher Friendly and Easy to use. • It is useful in screening high risk children with L.D. from std. III.

43. THANKYOU