DENVER II TEST AND SCHOOL PERFORMANCE

B.U.Bayolu, F. Elibol, B.Anlar, K.Yalaz Hacettepe University Ihsan Doramac Childrens Hospital, Department of Pediatric Neurology, Ankara, Trkiye

ABSTRACT : Total 155 six years old children from two schools of different socioeconomical status ( SES ) were tested with Denver II in the beginning and the end of the school year. Children from lower SES had a higher number of failures than the other school. The difference between schools decreased of the end of the year with low SES children having more pronounced improvement in their developmental skills. When school performance was examined in relation with Denver II, children who failed at Denver II in the beginning of the year were also found to be poor achievers at school according to teachers criteria.

INTRODUCTION : Developmental tests are frequently used to screen for developmental delays in preschool children. Denver II the revised form of Denver Developmental Screening Test ( DDST ), has been proposed to overcome some limitations of previous tests by the use of a different scoring system and inclusion of more items, particularly in the language area. Socio-cultural conditions influence child development and school performance. In this study are planed to examine: 1- Denver II scores of six years old children in relation with SES 2- The effect of one year of schooling on the Denver II results 3- The predictive value of Denver II in school performance

RESULTS : 75 children from low SES and 80 children from high SES completed the study.
Table : Denver II results Children who failed 2 or more items Beginnig school year N % 24 ( 32.0 ) 9 33 ( 11.3 ) ( 21.3 ) 9 End year N 7 2 school % ( 9. 3 ) ( 2.5 ) ( 5.8 )

Low SES school High SES school Total

Failure at Denver II defined as delay in at least 2 items, was observed in significantly more children in school A ( low level ). The number of failed tests diminished in both schools at the end of the school year more markedly in school low SES.
Table : Denver II results and school performance Denver II results Abnormal n= 33 24 122 Teachers Score ( max. 5 ) 3-5 2 or Lower ( 73% ) 9 ( 27% ) ( 100% ) 0

Normal/ Questionable n=122

Children with normal or questionable Denver II results had good school performance, with scores 3-5 according to teachers assessment. 27% of children with an abnormal Denver II had low teachers scores. Four of these children needed to receive special education or repeat the grade. Table : List of items failed

Low SES School ---------------------------Draw person 6 parts Opposites Define words

High SES School -----------------------------Opposites Draw person 6 parts Heel-to Toe walk backwords

DISCUSSION : In this study 32% of children from lower SES had an abnormal Denver II. This is within the range expected from a screening test. The lower figure obtained in children from high SES ( 11% ) shows the influence of cultural and environmental factors on Denver II results. Denver II scores of children from lower social level improved more at end of the first grade. This may be due to schools teaching about concepts and functions included in Denver II, its stimulatory function as aimed in intervention programs, and also to exposure to peer interaction diminishing the effect of home environment. An important result of this study is at children with normal or questionable Denver II had good school performance. On the other hand 27% of children with abnormal Denver II had low school scores. This indicates that school performance is highly influenced by factors other than the childrens capabilities such as interaction school or family characteristics. Denver II is a screening test intended to identify children for further evaluation, and not a diagnostic tool. Therefore, over diagnosis of children at risk for school problems is preferred to under diagnosis since it avoids the exclusion of children at risk, and only increases the number of children to receive special preschool education. According to our results, Denver II can identify children more likely to have school problems and therefore more likely to benefit from preschool program.

REFERENCES : 1. Frankenburg WK. Preventing developmental delays : is developmental screening sufficient ? Pediatrics 1994; 93:586-593 2. Frankenburg WK, Dodds J, Archer P, Shapiro H, Bresnick B. The Denver II a major revision and restandardization of the Denver Developmental Screening test. Pediatrics 1992; 89: 91-97 3. Najman JM, Bor W, Morrison J, Andersen M, Williams G. Child Developmental Delay and socio-economic disavantage in Australia : a longitudinal study. Soc Sci Med 1992; 34:829-35 4. Williams PD, Williams AR, Dial M. Children at risk: perinatal events, developmental delays and effect of a developmental stimulation program . Int J Nurs Stud 1986 ; 23: 2138