aT : ~ an WT The Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test of Visual—Motor Integration . With Supplemental Developmental Tests of Visual Perception and Motor Coordination and:: Stepping Stones Age Norms From Birth to Age Six AME MU Mig yy i Administration, Scoring, and Teaching Manual > Sigh Ration " Keith E. Beery and Natasha A. Beery @ PsychCorp +t sles tel) ei /IXIDIFLX IIE:Contenis Summary... |. History and Perspective... 6 I. Rationale and Overview 10 Rationale... 10 | Visual, Motor, and Visual-Motor Development... i . 11 cn 1 12 12 12 Visual-Motor Development. 12 | Phyletis 12 | 12 13 14 14 14 Neuropsychological Localization... . 15 Overview of the Beery VMI and Its Supplemental Tests . 15 Uses, 17 Cautions. 7 User Qualifications. 17 Ill. Administration and Scoring... 18 VMI Administration—Childrenand Adults. 18 | RTI and the Whole Child... Beery VMI Classroom Screening Options. Group Administratio Individual Administration .. Individual Children Under Functional Age 5.. Individual Children at or Over Functional Age 5 and Adults. Testing the Limits Visual Perception Motor Guidance. Examiner (Teacher) Verbalization. Child (Learner) Verbalization.Supplemental Tests... Sample Selection and Demographics Standard Scores Other Derived Scores... Vi. 103 103 Internal Consistency 104 Standard Error of Measurement (SEI 107 Time Sampling .. 107 Interscorer Reliabilit VIL. Validity. Content Validity Concurrent Validity. Construct Validity, Factor Analysis Predictive Validity Controlling for Bias Adults, Occupational Therapy. Vill. Teaching Visual—Motor Integratiot Academics, Arts, and Athletics. Beery VMI Teaching Tools Developmental Stepping Stones Beery VMI Stepping Stones Parent Checklist Beery VMI Developmental Teaching Activities. Beery VMI My Book of Shapes... Beery VMI My Book of Letters and Numibers. Beery VMI Developmental Wall Chart for : Visual-Motor Integration... Rationale for the Beery VMI My Book of Shapes... Rationale for the Beery VMI My Book of Letters and Number: | | | Evaluation. Bibliography and References...Appendixes (Norms) A. Beery VMI Developmental Stepping Stones. B. Beery VMI Raw Score Age Equivalents C. Beery VMIRaw Scores to Standard Scores (Ages 2: Through 99:11).... D. Standard Score Conversions to Percentiles and Other Scaled Scores... Tables 1. Standard Score Interpretation... as 94 2. Demographic Characteristics of the Children’s Normative Sample 101 3, Demographic Characteristics of the Adults’ Normative Sample..... 102 4. Rasch-Wright Item Separations by Age and Total Sample 5. Children’s Internal Consistency by Age and Total Sample. 6. Adults’ Internal Consistency and SEMs by Age and Total Sample. 106 7. Standard Score Standard Errors of Measurement by Age... 8. Raw Score Correlations Among Three Beery VMI Tests, the WRAVMA, and the DTVP-2.. 9. Raw Score Correlations Among the Beery VMI and Its Supplemental Visual Perception and Motor Coordination Tests. 10. Raw Score Correlations Between the Beery VMI and the WISC-R.... 116 11. Raw Score Correlations Between the Beery VMI and the CTBS. Figures . 1. Visual Perception Scoring Key. 2. Visual-Motor Medians Developmental Curve 3. Visual Medians Developmental Curv 4, Motor Medians Developmental CurvWith the provision of adult norms, the Beery VMI has the widest range of any test in its field. Independent research indicates that the test has considerable promise as a tool for identifying Alzheimer’s and other forms of adult dementia. The Beery VMI can be administered to individuals or groups in about 10 to 15 minutes. The 30-item Full Form can be used with all ages, 2 to 100 years. The 21-item Short Form can be used by most children ages 2 through 7 years. Two optional standardized tests, the Beery VMI Visual Perception test and the Beery VMI Motor Coordination test, are also available (for children and adults) for those who wish to statistically compare an individual’s Beery VMI results with relatively pure visual and motor performance data. The two tests use the same stimulus forms as the Beery VMI, unlike other visual—motor test batteries that mistakenly compare less related stimuli and tasks. Optional means for screening entire classrooms for Response to Intervention (RTI) and other purposes are presented on page 19. The results from a number of Beery VMI renormings have been. virtually identical. Therefore, unless a clear need is indicated, this sixth edition will probably remain unchanged over the next decade.ll. Rationale and Overview This chapter provides (a) a rationale for the Beery VMI, (b) a basic background in visual, motor, and visual—motor development, and (c) an overview of the Beery VMI and its supplemental visual and motor tests. From amoebas to humans and from infants to adults, successful development is characterized by increasing articulation and integration of parts with wholes. Rationale The foregoing is an operating assumption that is based on Sherrington’s work in biology and the work of others in various fields of study, including the social sciences (323). In the broadest sense, this operating assumption is the Beery VMI’s basic premise and purpose. Ideally, a test of visual—motor integration will help some children move forward toward more fully integrating all of their physical, intellectual, emotional, and spiritual parts with the whole of their selves and others. More specifically, the primary purpose of the Beery VMI is to help identify, through early screening, significant difficulties that some children have integrating, or coordinating, their visual—perceptual and motor (finger and hand movement) abilities. Through early identification, it is hoped that further difficulties can be prevented or remediated by appropriate educational, medical, or other inter- ventions. In chapter VIIL, the Beery VMI authors describe teaching methods and materials to help prevent and remediate visual-motor problems. It is not assumed that the appropriate intervention for all children who score poorly on the Beery VMI is to have them draw circles, squares, and other forms. In fact, many children may be best helped by developing other modalities and/or learning processes, particularly if their visual—motor difficulties seem resistant to development. In some cases, it may be that Beery VMI test results simply help to identify the need to bring services of various kinds to a child who appears to be at risk, which is another one of its important purposes. The Beery VMI may also be useful in serving the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness of whatever educational, psychological, and/or medical services are provided. Additionally, it can serve a variety of purposes in educational, neuropsychological, and: other forms of basic research. Beyond its intended purposes, the construct, or what it is that the Beery VMI attempts to measure and how well it measures that construct, need to be defined. In order to do so, more background in visual, motor, and visual-motor development should be helpful. 10Visual, Motor, and Visual—Motor Development When the Beery VMI was originally published in 1967, it was accompanied by a monograph, Visual-Motor Integration, that provided more detailed background in the phyletic (interspecies) and ontogenetic (human species) development of visual perception, motor coordination, and visual-motor integration than will be provided on the following pages (14). That monograph also reported on the author’s experimental work, such as children’s estimations of angles. The following are brief developmental highlights, which are still valid today. Visual Development Phyletic. All organisms are sensitive to light. Fairly high on the phylogenetic scale, some marine forms have paired pigment spots near the brain. At higher levels, pattern and size discrimination becomes possible. In some vertebrates, optic nerves completely cross to opposite sides of the brain. However, in mammals, the tight half of each retina is connected to the right hemisphere of the brain and the left half of each retina is connected to the left hemisphere, an arrangement that probably contributes to the coordination of eye movements. In primates, the eyes are placed forward. This placement allows broad overlap between left and. right visual fields. Thus, depth perception, convergence, and visual tracking are possible without moving the head. The result of this arrangement is binocular vision. Ontogenetic. The human eye develops out of the forebrain as early as the third week after fertilization. Babies born two months premature can differentiate light from darkness. By the fourth month after birth, most babies can visually pursue a moving object to some degree. Visual perception is probably best defined as the interpretation of visual stimuli, the intermediate step between simple visual sensation and cognition. Visual perception, therefore, is not visual acuity or sensation. Nor is it reading or other cognitive meanings. However, sensation, perception, and cognition probably all affect one another to varying degrees. The Gestalt view that certain basic forms, such as the square, are given in perceptual experience is generally opposed today. Various combinations of light and dark boundaries are probably learned gradually and remembered to form percepts as the nervous system matures. As early as 28 weeks, most infants can learn to discrim- inate between a circle, cross, square, and triangle. (Other early developmental milestones are listed in Appendix A.) Part-whole integration has been of special significance in visual- perceptual development (275). Parts of figure and ground must be oodifferentiated and integrated with the whole. Many brain-injured persons seem able to analyze parts but cannot synthesize the parts into wholes. Normal child development has been roughly outlined as follows. First, there is a focus on wholes (little attention to details) through age 3. The focus then shifts to parts at ages 4 and 5, to details by age 6, and to integration of well-differentiated parts into wholes about age 9. These are rough foci of attention. Analysis and synthesis of parts and wholes are probably occurring at all ages. Motor Development Phyletic. Many mammals possess manipulative ability, and the ability to grasp and move a variety of objects is well developed in primates. Thumb-finger opposition, which allows intricate and precise manipulation, is common among primates and is most pronounced in humans. Ontogenetic. There is a developmental trend from generalized to specific activity. Mass action is followed by increased differentiation and subsequent integration of movement. Development also tends to progress in cephalo-caudal (from the head downward) and proximo- distal (spine outward) directions. Finger activity is the last ontogenetic refinement of the shoulder-arm-hand complex. Spontaneous arm movements can be detected by the third fetal month. (Other such early developmental milestones are listed in Appendix A.) Hand activity has been associated with cortical areas midway. along the central fissure. The cerebellum seems to coordinate the actions of the various muscles involved in a specific act. Visual—Motor Development Phyletic. From amoebas to humans, the nervous system seems to have progressed toward improved interaction among sensory and expressive modalities that were, in some cases, formerly separate. In adult humans, sensory and expressive modalities are usually well connected and coordinated, or integrated. Ontogenetic. Visual—motor may be the first sensory-response integration to develop. Kephart emphasized the importance of integration (135). He noted that a child could have well-developed visual and motor skills but be unable to integrate the two. Kephart speculated that integration might partly function subcortically, perhaps in the brainstem, somewhat akin to a telephone switch- board. If there were lack of development or damage in such areas, a visual-motor test might be sensitive to various kinds of integration problems, not only to visual-motor difficulties. Vereeken reported that to copy forms with a pencil, a child must first -be visually aware of location and direction (293). This awareness is made possible through voluntary eye movement in a given direction. The child then proceeds to a constructive realization 12of this location through arm movements that correspond to the eye movements. Children can scribble vertical, horizontal, and circular lines before being able to imitate them because scribbling requires little or no eye-hand coordination. Imitation is probably achieved before direct copying of these same forms because, in imitation, eye movements are rehearsed while the task is being demonstrated. Vereeken reviewed Piaget’s work on the development of spatial perception and reproduction (293). The earliest spatial level is topological and occurs during the first five years. During the topological period, neighborhood and separation, flatness or pointedness, continuity or discontinuity, and the containment or enclosure of one object by another are spatial attributes that are apprehended and reproduced. Euclidean spatial dimensions are usually achieved between ages 5 and 10. These include direction, rectilinear and curvilinear lines, lengths, and distances. Projective spatial achievement normally begins to develop during the euclidean period and progresses thereafter. At this stage an object can be seen in relation to other objects or from other points of view. Finally, it is important to recognize that development may not always be smooth. Often, progress is in spurts and may even involve temporary regressions. Keeping the foregoing and other development theories and research in mind, the Beery VMI author set out to see if any existing form-copying tests were adequate and, if not, how a more adequate sequence of geometric forms could be developed. Now, perhaps, would be a good time to articulate the construct that the Beery VMI attempts to measure and to consider how well it measures that construct. In doing so, some research will be briefly mentioned. A more detailed presentation is given in chapters VI and VIL. Visual—motor integration is the degree to which visual perception and finger-hand movements are well coordinated. The Beery VMI is designed to measure the hypen in the term visual— motor integration on the premise that a whole can be greater than the sum of its parts and that the parts may function well independently but not in combination. Reliability A test can only be as valid as it is reliable. Thus, one would hypoth- esize that, if well constructed, the Beery VMI will display acceptable internal, interjudge, and test-retest reliability: As detailed in chapter VI, the Beery VMI provides such reliabilities at high levels. 13,Validity In terms of validity, one would first hypothesize that the Beery VMI should correlate well with chronological age. As shown in chapter ‘VI, the Beery VMI measures up:at very high levels, between .80 and -95. Secondly, one would hypothesize that the Beery VMI should correlate at moderate levels, but not very high levels,-with good visual-perceptual tests and with good motor-coordination tests for the fingers and hands. One would also hypothesize that the Beery VMI should correlate at relatively high levels with other tests that attempt to measure visual-motor integration. The foregoing relationships have been demonstrated and are detailed in chapter VIL. The visual—motor integration construct implies that individuals with educational, psychological, and/or medical difficulties may have, on average, more problems than their peers with integration. Therefore, one would hypothesize that the Beery VMI at least moderately differentiates such groups. As detailed in chapter VI, overall, groups of children with various disabilities have performed less well than their peers on the Beery VMI. The Beery VMI has correlated highly with automatic-sequential integration tests with which many children with learning disorders have displayed the most difficulty. It was reported to be an effective measure for differentiating subtypes of reading disabilities. The Beery VMI has correlated, often more significantly than other kinds of tests, with children’s difficulties such as lead poisoning and low birth weight ina wide variety of neuropsychological and medical studies. Prediction Few perceptual-motor tests besides the Beery VMI have offered evidence of their ability to predict academic or other problems. Generally, researchers have found the Beery VMI to be a valuable predictor when used in combination with other measures. It has been reported to be a particularly good predictor of achievement by children from low socioeconomic groups. However, predictive correlations appear to decline as children move up the grade levels, presumably because academic demands on visual—-motor skills decline, relatively, and many children learn to compensate for visual-motor weaknesses by using other skills. The question still remains: Would these children achieve more fully and easily if their visual-motor weaknesses were remediated? And the related question remains: How can such weaknesses best be remediated? Bias A very important means of defining something, like the construct of visual-motor integration, is to clarify what it is not. The Beery VMI does not appear to be significantly related to gender, residence, or ethnicity, as detailed in chapter VII. 14Neuropsychological Localization Where does visual—motor integration take place in the nervous system? Neuropsychologists generally ascribe visual—motor functions to the right hemisphere and to the motor cortex opposite the dominant hand (94). Grafton and others, on the basis of relative cerebral blood flow, concluded that it is unlikely that any single point in the brain is responsible for integrating visual infor- mation into discrete motor plans. Rather, it seemed likely that this conversion occurred in both motor and sensory association areas, in the cerebellum, and in subcortical nuclei in a dynamic, parallel manner (105). Nawrot and others (196) found visual motion disturbances to be associated with acute cerebellar lesions. Said and others (241) found that Beery VMI performance was positively related to right-hemisphere gray-matter volume among children with neurofibromatosis. Based to a great extent on Halstead’s (117), Luria’s (167), and Reitan’s (226) research, Rourke posits a model in which failures of development or disruption of various white-matter neural connections seem likely to create visual-motor and/or other integrative disabilities in performance (238). These connections include those from the right to left side of the brain (the corpus callosum in particular), from front to back (especially for new tasks), and from top to bottom (cortex to brainstem). More localization research is needed. Overview of the Beery VMI and lts Supplemental Tests The Beery VMI and its two supplemental standardized tests, Visual Perception and Motor Coordination, provide one of the most valid and economical visual-motor screening batteries available for preschool to adult ages. The Beery VMI is a developmental sequence of geometric forms to be imitated or copied with, paper and pencil. The 30-item Beery VMI Full Form for ages 2 through 100 can be group or individually administered in about 10 to 15 minutes. The 21-item Short Form is available for ages 2 through 7; this form is usually administered individually in less than 10 minutes. First published in 1967, the Beery VMI is used. with and enjoyed by children throughout the United States and in other countries. Research indicates that the Beery VMI is virtually culture-free. Because children with different backgrounds often have widely varying degrees of experience with alphabets and numbers, geometric forms are used in the Beery VMI rather than letter or numeric forms. The Beery VMIis designed to assess the extent to which individuals can integrate their visual and motor abilities. If a child performs poorly on the Beery VMI, it could be because he or she has adequate visual-perceptual and/or motor coordination abilities but has not yet learned to integrate, or coordinate, these two domains. 15Alternatively, it is possible that the child’s visual and/or motor abilities are deficient. Therefore, examiners frequently follow up a Beery VMI with an assessment of visual—perceptual and motor abilities. This follow-up can be done with informal clinical evalu- ation, as outlined on pages 24~25. Or, if an examiner wishes to more formally and statistically compare a child’s visual and motor abilities, the Beery VMI’s new standardized supplemental tests (Visual Perception and Motor Coordination) can be administered. These standardized supplemental tests use the same stimulus forms as the Beery VMI, whereas other existing visual—motor test batteries attempt to compare less related stimuli and tasks. All three tests were standardized on national samples of 2,512; 1,021; and 1,737 individuals and have established reliability and validity. Standard scores are provided at two-month and four-month intervals. Either one or both of the standardized supplemental tests may be administered individually after the Beery VMI. If all three standardized tests are administered, they must be administered in the same order in which they were normed in order to yield valid results. The valid order of administration is as follows: (1) Beery VMI, (2) Visual Perception, and (3) Motor Coordination. A statistical comparison of results from the three tests can be quickly and easily made on the graphic profile that is provided on the Beery VMI test booklets for this purpose. The three test results are not averaged into one composite score as in some batteries. Composites of disparate measures are often meaningless. In the standardized Visual Perception test, the first three items require very young children to identify parts of their own bodies, picture outlines, and parts of a picture. For the remaining 27 items, one geometric form that is exactly the same as each stimulus is to be chosen from among others that are not exactly the same as the stimulus. During a three-minute period, the task is to identify the exact match for as many of the 27 stimuli as possible. To make this as pure.a visual—perceptual task as possible, the motor requirements of the task are reduced to a minimum by having the child simply point to her or his choices. The stimuli on the Visual Perception test ‘were made smaller than those on the Beery VMI test because a very Jarge and expensive test booklet would have been required other- wise. Pilot tests of the stimuli were made before norming and were found to be satisfactory even for very young children who did not have visual acuity problems. Examiners should be alert for possible visual problems on this and all other tests that require good near- point visual acuity. Referral to the school nurse or to a vision specialist should be made if there is doubt about a child’s vision. 16In the standardized Motor Coordination test, the first three items require very young children to climb ona chair, hold a pencil with their thumb and fingers, and hold the paper as they -mark it. For the remaining 27 items, the task is to simply trace the stimulus forms with a pencil without going outside double-lined paths. Although visual perception cannot be entirely eliminated in such motor tasks, visual-perceptual demands have been reduced greatly by providing examples, starting dots, and paths as strong visual guides for the required motor performance. The Motor Coordination test takes about 5 minutes to administer. Details regarding admin- istration and scoring are provided in Chapter IL. Uses The purposes of the Beery VMI and its supplemental tests are to (1) help identify significant difficulties in visual—motor integration, (2) obtain needed ‘services for individuals who exhibit these difficulties, (3) assess the effectiveness of educational and other intervention programs, and (4) serve as a research tool. It is hoped that, through early screening with the Beery VMI, those children. and adults who may need extra help in their educational or other aspects of development will be identified and referred to appro- priate professionals for further evaluation and help. Cautions Ifa child’s or adult's behavior during testing causes an examiner to suspect a visual acuity or other problem, referral to a school nurse, an opthalmologist, or another specialist may be indicated. No single test or score is sufficient for making a diagnosis-or for creating a treatment plan. Team evaluation and planning is almost always best whenever possible. User Qualifications All test materials offered by Pearson are assigned a qualification level. Refer to the current Pearson psychological assessments catalog for additional information about the various qualification levels. Beery VMI users must provide credentials indicating that they have a bachelor’s degree in psychology, education, human relations or human resources, business, or a closely related field. For research, screening, and other purposes, the Beery VMI and its supplemental tests can be administered and scored by almost any intelligent adult who is thoroughly familiar with the test materials and who has had supervised practice with an experienced examiner. However, for interpretation of test results, these tests require the educational background and experience of specialists in psychology, learning disabilities, or similar professions. v7Ili. Administration and Scoring The Beery VMI can be validly administered as either a group screening test or for individual assessment purposes with children. or adults. Specialists often teach classroom teachers to administer the Beery VMI as a class screening device, which simultaneously stimulates collaborative instructional and other planning. Supplemental standardized Visual Perception and Motor Coordi- nation tests are provided as a means of statistically assessing relative visual and motor contributions to Beery VMI performance. Although the Visual Perception and Motor Coordination tests have considerable potential for group testing, at present they are recommended for individual testing of those who score below the average range on the Beery VMI. It is not necessary to administer all three standardized tests to meaningfully assess visual, motor, and other factors that may affect Beery VMI performance. In fact, Beery VMI clinical “Testing the Limits” procedures (pages 24~25) are strongly recommended for this purpose. Ifthe Visual Perception and Motor Coordination tests are administered, it is extremely important that the sequence of testing be as follows: first the Beery VMI, then Visual Perception, and then Motor Coordination. As is true of many test batteries, exposure to one related test commonly affects performance on the next related tests. Therefore, norms can be seriously affected by changing the test order. Readministering the test too soon can produce a practice effect. Generally speaking, the test- retest interval should be at least one month. Most clinicians choose to administer the test in the fall and again in the spring. Norms may be invalid if the directions for administering tests are not followed or if the original testing materials are not used. The Beery VMI materials were carefully constructed to prevent glare, translucency, and other problems. Be sure to use only 2004 or 2010 test booklets. VMI Administration — Children and Adults The Full Form booklet is appropriate for all ages. Although the administration instructions were written for children, there is no need to modify them for adults. The Full Form contains all 24 Beery VMI forms, including the initial three that are both imitated and copied directly, and three types of marking or scribbling, for a total of 30. items. The Short Form is designed for use with most children ages 2 through 7 years. It is the same as the Full Form except that it contains only the first 15 Beery VMI forms, for a total of 21 scoréd items. 18Usually, preschool children should be tested individually, using the individual instructions on pages 21-23. Kindergartners can usually be screened as an entire class if two or more adults serve as monitors. See the Beery VMI Classroom Screening Options section below. Children in first grade or above can be tested as an entire class. Older children can enter their own name, gender, and birth date on the test booklet cover. With all ages, monitor, encourage, and gently correct posture and procedural errors as needed. RTI and the Whole Child The Federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 2004 legislation guidelines state that the primary focus of assessment and its follow-up interventions should be upon prevention of problems in early childhood education, which includes Kindergarten and other primary school children. IDEA also enables Response to Intervention (RTI) assessment in schools. The first step in RTI assessment calls for screening of entire classrooms (95). RTI and other early childhood screening efforts in schools are very often limited to reading and math assessments, such as assessments of phonemic awareness. Important as such measures are, they are not sufficient. Schools need to attend to the whole child, including physical and other factors that affect academics as well as other important aspects of a child’s life. We know that a hungry child or one with various other physical limitations is less able to learn or to perform in many ways. For example: A group of 35 children ages 4 years 6 months with uncor- rected refractive vision problems scored significantly below the Beery VMI norms. However, six weeks after their vision was corrected, the group scored above the norms (233). We need to screen for the “whole” child, including neuropsycho- logical and medical variables, with assessments like the Beery VMI. Beery VMI Classroom Screening Options A variety of different ways to screen entire Kindergarten classes with the Beery VMI have been successfully used. Some methods allow more opportunity to observe and immediately record pencil grips, page turning, and the like. Following is a listing of three basic methods, together with advantages and disadvantages. Variations of these three basic methods, such as having two Occupational Therapists (OTs) or other specialists doing the screenings together, have also been used successfully as shown on the following page. 19All of these three methods yield valid scores when used properly. Basic Methods Advantages Disadvantages A. 2ormore adults with Faster (20 minutes), Less time to observe 20+ children at one time inexpensive B. lor 2adults with More observational Several times 2+ children at one time information Method A’s cost C. Ladult with More diagnostic 20+ times 1 child at one time information Method’A’s cost We believe that Method A, coupled with good follow-up by the specialist with the classroom teacher, is the most effective method. It takes only about 20 minutes or so with help from the classroom teacher to complete the screening, versus many hours to screen 20+ children with Method C. ‘The specialist scans all of the Method A class protocols and scores at least the ones that suggest those children may be at risk. The classroom teacher and/or the specialist then observe at-risk children’s. pencil grips, page turning, and other relevant behaviors in class. They then meet to share ideas and materials for helping the children who seem to be at-risk with their visual-motor integration. Method C can then be pursued for the few children who do not respond well to classroom assistance and might require IEP diagnosis and planning. (There is rarely any positive practice effect upon a second Beery VMI administration if it is done one month or more after the first administration.) Especially after classroom teachers have participated in the initial Method A screening, they are typically very interested in Beery VMI follow-up with the specialist. Thus, Method A screening is also an excellent door-opener for consultation and follow-through regatding other matters as well. OTs and other specialists are urged to utilize Method A when possible for Beery VMI screenings, following up with Method C as needed. Some school systems do not require parent permission for Method A screenings; others simply send notices that the screening will take place and parents can request that their child be excluded. On the other hand, school systems typically require written parent permission for Method C assessments. Group Administration (all Forms for Children and Adults) 1. Bach child or adult should have a sharpened No. 2 pencil, ideally without an eraser. A soft primary pencil or a ballpoint pen is also permissible. 202. Distribute the appropriate test booklets (Full or Short Forms) and say: Please do not open your booklets until I ask you to do so. The page with the hand pointing up should face you. of 3. Itis important that the booklets and each child’s or adult’s body be centered and squared with the desk during testing. As you demonstrate, say: This is the way your booklet must stay on your desk until you are finished. This is the way you sit. 4. As you demonstrate, say: Now open your booklet by turning from the top, like this, to page 4. Page 4 has forms in the top squares. It looks like this. Show page 4 to the class or group. 5. Say: Copy what you see at the top of each page. Make your drawing of each form in the space below it, like this. Use the chalkboard to show how to copy forms, but do not use any of the’actual test forms as examples. Create other forms, using single-line strokes. Demonstrate that lines as thick as the printed ones in the test booklet are not wanted. 6. Say: Copy the forms in order. Start with item number 7, the vertical line. (Only if asked about it, say: The pages and numbers before this are just for very young children.) 7. Say: Some of the. forms are very easy, and some are very hard even for adults. 8. Say: Do your best on both the easy and the hard ones; do not skip any. (Repeat this phrase as needed.) 9. Say: Remember—only one try on each form and you cannot erase. 10. Testing can be ended after all members of the group appear to have made three consecutive forms that do not earn points. Usually, 10 minutes is sufficient. If time and energy permit, however, you can allow everyone to try all of the forms. Those who finish early can draw, read, or engage in other activities of your choice. Individual Administration (all Forms for Children and Adults) 1. Many experienced examiners who plan to administer a variety of tests to an individual will begin with the Beery VMI for two major reasons. Rapport: Almost all children and adults enjoy doing the Beery VMI, become absorbed in it, and feel successful. Typically, they like to try the harder items and want to do more. If not, that can be diagnostically significant. Beery VMI time is also a quiet time to become comfortable with the examiner without having to use much. verbal language. Observation: As the subject draws, the examiner has a chance to sit back and observe the subject's attitude, body Positions, movements, and other potentially important behaviors, 212. Some examiners remove the test booklet cover (pages 1, 2, 15, and 16 on the Short Form; pages 1, 2, 23, and 24 on the Full Form) in order to record observations during the course of individual exami- nations, using page 15 on the Short Form or page 23 on the Full Form. 3. The subject should have a sharp No. 2 pencil without an eraser, a primary pencil, or a ballpoint pen. Do not allow erasures! 4, Place the test booklet face down in front of the subject and squared to the subject’s desk or table. 5. Keep both the test booklet and the subject’s body centered and squared to the desk throughout testing. A different position of the booklet or the body can greatly affect the task. 6. When you draw, you hold the booklet. When the subject draws, ask the subject to hold the booklet. If the subject does not eventually hold it, you hold it. Keep the booklet straight and centered to the subject's body. Individual Children Under Functional Age 5 : Start on Task 4, Page 2 (Full Form and Short Form) 1, Remember that imitated drawing of forms is typically much easier than direct copying. If the child is under 5 or if you anticipate a functional Beery VMI level under age 5, open the booklet to page 2 and say: Watch me. I'm going to draw a line here. If possible, sit beside the child. Then draw a top-to-bottom vertical line approximately the same size, about 2 inches, as the one in box 7 on page 4. Point to the vertical line you just drew and then to the blank space below it. Say: Make one like that. Make yours right here. If the child does not respond successfully, make repetitive up and down vertical lines over your own first line. Then point to the child’s space and say: Do that, Make yours right here. 2. Whether or not, after ample opportunity, the child draws one or more vertical lines in imitation of yours, make repeated horizontal lines in the top-center box on page 2 and invite the child to imitate you in the space below yours. Whether or not the child responds, repeat this procedure with a circle at the top right-hand box on page 2. 3. If the child scores one or more points on the foregoing three imitation tasks, just skip the scribbling tasks below and go on to page 4 in the booklet for the copying tasks (see instruction #10 below). Butif the child still has not marked the paper at all by now, try the spontaneous drawing or scribbling tasks described below. 4, Spontaneous Drawing or Scribbling: Turn to page 1 of the test booklet. Point to the blank box closest to the child and say, You can draw anything you want inside this box. Go ahead. 225. If the child scribbles or makes any other kind of mark (or marks), say: Good for you! You can draw! Now, draw this (as you try page 2 again). ag 6. If the child does not spontaneously scribble or mark on page 1, take the next step below, Imitated Scribbling. ; 7. Imitated Scribbling. Scribble wp and down in the blank box closest to you, being careful not to scribble close to the box lines and while you scribble, say: Let’s scribble-scrabble like this. It's fun! Do yours in here (point to the box closest to the child) and say: Stay in the box—don’t go outside the lines! 8. If the child scribbles or otherwise marks, try doing imitation again of the two lines and a circle on page 2 (follow instruction #1 above). 9. If the child still does not scribble or mark here, discontinue visual—motor assessment for now and consider administering the Visual Perception assessment. Individual Children at or Over Functional Age 5 and Adults: Start on Task 7, Page 4 (Full and Short Forms) Note: In the previous addition, a separate form was available for adults which eliminated the easy items intended only for children. . Although these adult forms are no longer produced for the current version, the Full Form or the Adult Form and its respective instruc- tions from the previous edition may be used equivalently. When using the Full Form on adults, follow instructions 10-19 below. 10. If the subject is about 5 years old or older and you do not antic- ipate a functional Beery VMI level under five years, open the booklet to page 4. Point to Task 7 (the copied vertical line) and then to the blank space below it. Say: Make one like that. Make yours right here. . L 5 . Encourage the subject if necessary. Do not, however, trace the form with a finger or pencil because such motions provide important cues. Do not let the subject trace the form either. Avoid calling the form by its name or by a descriptive term. 12. If the subject does not understand the direct copying task or does not copy any one of items 7, 8, or 9 well enough fo earn a point on it, tum to page 2 in the test booklet and follow instrue- tions 1 through 9 above for children under functional age 5. 13. If the subject responds by imitating you on any one of the three imitation items, re-expose the first three printed forms, Items.7 through 9, and allow the subject to try again to copy the forms directly. (If the subject does not earn at least one point on these 23imitation tasks, follow the spontaneous scribbling and other instructions for subjects under the functional age of 5.) 14. As maniy times as necessary, prompt by pointing to an item and saying: Make one like this. 15. Allow only one try per task, with no erasing. Allow only single line strokes, not thickened or hollow “lines” to emulate the thick lines of the printed forms. Once the subject is responding well, say: Good. Go ahead and do the rest of them. Turn to the next page when you finish this one. 16. Say: Do your best on both the easy and the hard ones; do not skip any. (Repeat this phrase as needed.) 17. Record your test observations inconspicuously. The subject should not be timed overtly. 18. Testing may be ended after three consecutive items for which the child eams no points. You may wish to continue, though, because it is often informative to see how a child approaches more difficult items. Subjects usually enjoy copying and often ask to do even more forms. 19. Record the subject’s scores on page 23 (Full Form) or page 15 (Short Form) of the test booklet. Credit all untested points prior to the subject’s first success, the “Basal” (see page 29). For example, if the subject succeeded on Tasks 7, 8, and 9 (the direct copy tasks) and therefore was not tested on Tasks 1 through 6. Testing the Limits Sattler (245) and others have suggested some excellent ways to informally assess the possible causes for a child’s poor visual— motor integration performance and/or a child’s potential for Jearning such skills. The following procedures are suggested. Visual Perception. After the regular Beery VMI procedure has been completed, return to the first item on which the child did not meet the Beery VMI scoring criteria. Ask the child to look at the stimulus and then at her or his attempted copy of the stimulus. Ask: Does the form you drew look just the same as the one you copied? (Pause for answer.) How is it different? Note whether or not the child perceives any differences that exist. Motor Control. Ask the child to érace the stimulus form with her or his pencil. Note the child’s accuracy and ease in tracing. Integration. Ask the child to copy the stimulus form again on a blank sheet of paper. Note if the child’s copy improves. If it improves, ask the child why he or she thinks it improved. Imitation. If the second try did not improve, sit next to the child and ask her or-him to watch carefully as you copy the stimulus. Then give the child another chance to copy. 24Motor Guidance. If significant improvement has not been noted yet, hold and guide the child’s hand and pencil while making another copy. Then let the child try again, unguided. ase Examiner (Teacher) Verbalization. If significant improvement still has not occurred, ask the child to watch and listen carefully as you recopy the stimulus and verbalize what you are doing, including your starting point(s), direction(s), and the key spatial relations that you monitor. Then ask the child to recopy the stimulus. Child (Learner) Verbalization. If significant improvement still has not been noted, ask the child to verbalize what you are doing as you copy the stimulus. Then ask the child to copy the stimulus while he or she verbalizes the actions. Variations. Develop and use variations of these suggested teach and test procedures that seem best suited to the individual’s and your own examination needs. Retention and Extension of Learning. Using some or all of the foregoing procedures, consider teaching the child to adequately copy several or all of the Beery VMI forms on which he or she did not meet criteria on your first examination. About two weeks later, repeat the regular Beery VMI procedure with the child to see how well learning has been retained and/or extended to other stimuli. This retention check often reveals which children are simply inexperienced in visual—motor integration efforts. These children tend to retain what you have taught. Other children will display the leaky bucket syndrome characteristic of many children with learning disabilities. These children tend not to retain or extend visual-motor integration learnings unless they are provided with clear cognitive supports, such as rules about how to proceed and/ or extensive.rote practice and review.Scoring Scoring of the Beery VMI is essentially the same as it was in previous editions—one point for each imitated or copied item up to three’ consecutive failures. To obtain a raw score, the number of items that are not successfully completed prior to this ceiling of three consecutive failures is subtracted from the ceiling. For example, if a child fails items 5, 8, and 11-13, the raw score is 13-5=8. These scoring criteria and Procedures apply to both Beery VMI test forms, the Full and Short forms. Record individual form results on the next to last page of the forms Beery VMI Recording and Scoting OL. mn FL es FOL 2. be blz EIo= IN lx =e IAI = sector mtamaitancnictinvatg nin, tay tee erate a and overall results on the last page. BeSFee elev aragten ey sot eery seem Te ie caeenaeanaaneemee Caagetage ‘by KelthE Bory. Nonna A. Bublenicn and Natasha A Beery ee Seth Boy VM me ath Sudeley Vinal Motor San Tae pen comteion rocale Rowsens a 5 SeederiSanms | a : Poole s 3 Obese : 2 Comoe in aneenttone 5 ; 26Early Development Scoring Stepping Stones , The Visual-Motor Integration Stepping Stones provided on page 22 of the Beery VMI Full Form and on page 14 of the Short Form are informational and are not used for scoring the Beery VMI test, per se. However, this information can be very useful when confer- encing with parents and for evaluating a young child’s progress. See Appendix A for additional Stepping Stones for gross motor, fine motor, visual, and visual~motor development. Marking and Scribbling As with the imitated forms, the first three Beery VMI tasks do not need to be administered if a child scores a point on one or more of the copied forms. If the first three Beery VMI tasks are adminis- tered, they are scored as follows. 1. Imitated Marking: One point for any mark(s) or scribble(s) on the Beery VMI test form that a child makes in imitation of an adult. 2. Spontaneous Marking: One point for any mark(s) or scribble(s) on the Beery VMI test form that a child makes in response to an adult’s gestural and/or verbal request—without the adult having to demonsirate for the child to imitate. 3. Contained Marking: One point if none ‘of the child’s mark(s) or scribble(s) on the Beery VMI test form go beyond the edges of the 8.5” x 11” paper. Imitated and Copied Forms The scoring criteria for both imitated and copied forms, such as a circle, are exactly the same. Only the age equivalents differ, as shown on the following reduction of the Recording and Scoring sheet, which appears on the inside back cover of the Beery VMI test booklet. The Recording and Scoring sheet (page 23 in the Full Form and page 15 in the Short Form) shown on page 24 lisis the “Age Norm” or each form, the age at which about 50% of children meet the developmental criteria for a given form. Many examiners use this sheet and the supplementary Stepping Stones (developmental age norms) on the adjoining test page to help parents better understand their child’s current level of development. Criteria Beery VMI scoring is based on Score and No Score criteria and the examples shown for each of the 24 forms on pages 30-79. The criteria and examples.were derived from careful study of each form’s developmental evolution, based on thousands of children’s reproductions. Developmental comments and trend illustrations 27 7 7 frfor the forms can be found on the pages facing the scoring criteria pages. Please note that if a child’s imitated or copied form touches or goes slightly outside the blank box, a score or credit should be given if all other scoring criteria for that form have been met. Experienced scorers will find the Summary Scoring information on. pages 78-79 useful as a reminder of the basic scoring criteria. Children will sometimes make multiple attempts at drawing a form inorder to correct errors. When this happens, remind the child that he or she has only one try for each form. In addition, only the first attempt (not the best attempt) should be scored. Protractor A number of the scoring criteria pages contain illustrations for using a protractor. All protractor degrees are read clockwise with the base of the protractor on the horizontal. These illustrations are intended as aids for learning how to'score the Beery VMI; they have been effective for this purpose in university and other settings. The authors are particularly indebted to Lepkin and Pryzwansky (158) for their research in this regard. Most experienced scorers will seldom need a protractor or ruler to score the Beery VMI. In general, it is better to gain a good devel- opmental sense or gestalt for each form's evolution by studying its developmental trends than it is to focus on the details of repro- duction. Exceptions An experienced examiner will develop a gestalt of a given child’s developmenial behavior on the Beery VMI. For example, it is common to encounter an older child who somewhat hastily copies the easier forms, not bothering to dot the i’s and cross the t's, because the forms are well within the child’s command. An experi- enced examiner takes such behavior into account in scoring. Occasionally, a child makes a second attempt at a form. Always score the first attempt of children below age 9. If you did not actually see which one was first, it can often be identified by comparing the sizes of dual attempts relative to the sizes of the child’s single attempts on other forms. Accept productions of children over age 9 who first sketch with light lines and then complete a form with darker lines. If in Doubt Rule It is very important to remember when scoring a form that, if in doubt, score it as meeting the criteria. Inexperienced scorers tend to be too strict, which can greatly affect the norms.