SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

vol.40 issue3Women surviving chronic poverty and psychiatric disabilityThe relationship between developmental dyspraxia and sensory responsivity in children aged four years through eight years - Part I author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand



Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • On index processSimilars in Google


South African Journal of Occupational Therapy

On-line version ISSN 2310-3833
Print version ISSN 0038-2337

S. Afr. j. occup. ther. vol.40 n.3 Pretoria Dec. 2010




The relationship between a teacher check list and standardised tests for visual perception skills: A South African remedial primary school perspective



Janet RichmondI; Kathy HollandII

IBOT (UP) MOT (UKZN), PhD Edith Cowan University; Lecturer Occupational Therapy, Edith Cowan University (Australia)
IINat Dip OT B(Hons) OT (UP) MEd (Tertiary Education) (UND); Lecturer Occupational Therapy University of KwaZulu Natal





Occupational therapy in remedial education settings has been questioned by the South African Government as they see occupational therapy as a costly service and thus has challenged occupational therapy clinicians' approach to assessment. This study was undertaken to establish whether the results of standardised tests of visual perception skills, relate to teachers' observations in respect of primary remedial school age children (six to eleven years) attending a short term remedial school because of low scholastic achievement despite having average or above intellectual ability. The Test of Visual Perceptual Skills - Revised, the Developmental Test of Visual Perception-2, the Jordan Left-Right reversals Test and a teacher check list as the only teacher observation source, were used. Scores on the visual perceptual tests and the teacher check list ratings were compared using Spearman's rho coefficient.
The overall scores on the visual perceptual tests and teachers' observations were found to be related; however this was often not the case between the subscales of the visual perceptual tests and the teacher check list. The check list may be a valuable tool in identifying children with visual perceptual difficulties but further development and standardisation is required to establish it as a valid, cost-effective measure of visual perception for use in schools where there is a limit on occupational therapy time.

Key words: Developmental Test of Visual Perception-2, Test of Visual Perceptual Skills-Revised, Jordan Left Right Reversals Test, Teacher Checklist



“Full text available only in PDF format”




1. South-Africa. Education White Paper 6 on Special Needs Education - Building an inclusive education and training system. In: Education Do, editor. Pretoria: Triple CCC Advertising and Research, 2001.         [ Links ]

2. Department of Education Directorate: Inclusive Education. Draft guidelines for the implementation of inclusive education (second draft). In: South-Africa DoEDIE, editor. Pretoria: Government Printer, 2002.         [ Links ]

3. National Commission on Special Needs in Education and Training. Education for all - From "Special Needs and Support" to developing quality education for all childs - Public Discussion Document. In: South-Africa NCoSNiEaT, editor. Pretoria: National Committee for Education Support Services, 1997.         [ Links ]

4. Department of Education, South-Africa. Education White Paper 6 on Special Needs Education - Building an inclusive education and training system. In: Education Do, editor. Pretoria: Triple CCC Advertising and Research, 2001.         [ Links ]

5. The Education Labour Relations Council. Brunton CA. Policy handbook for educators. In: The Education Labour Relations Council. Brunton CA-S-A, editor. Pretoria: Universal Print Group, 2003.         [ Links ]

6. Gardner MF. Test of Visual Perceptual Skills (non-motor) Revised. Hydesville CA: Psychological and Educational Publications incorporated, 1996.         [ Links ]

7. Hammill DD, Pearson NA, Voress JK. Developmental Test of Visual Perception. Second ed. Austin, TX: Pro-ed, 1993.         [ Links ]

8. Jordan BT. Jordan Left-Right Reversal Test. Novato, CA: Academic Therapy Publications, 1990.         [ Links ]

9. Erhardt RP, Duckman RH. Visual-perceptual-motor dysfunction and its effects on eye-hand coordination and skill development. In: Gentile M, editor. Functional visual behaviour in children: An occupational therapy guide to evaluation and treatment options. Bethesda, Maryland: AOTA Press, 2005: 171-228.         [ Links ]

10. Goldstand S, Koslowe KC, Parush S. Vision, visual-information processing, and academic performance among seventh-grade schoolchildren: A more significant relationship than we thought. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2005, July/August; 59(4): 377-89.         [ Links ]

11. Richmond JE. Teacher Checklist - Classroom performance [Research].         [ Links ] Durban: University of KwaZulu-Natal, 2002.

12. Reid CC. A comparative study of visual perceptual skills in normal children and children with diplegic cerebral palsy. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy. 1990; 57(3): 141-6.         [ Links ]

13. Fawcett A. Screening and intervention for dyslexia: from cradle to grave. In: Difficulties SAAoLwE, editor. The First International Conference in South Africa on Reading Difficulties and Dyslexia at the Turn of the Century - Biological and environmental influences; South Africa, 2002.         [ Links ]

14. Frostig M, Lefever W, Whittlesey JRB. Developmental Test of Visual Perception: Administration and scoring manual. Calif: Consulting psychologists press, 1966.         [ Links ]

15. Hanneford C. Smart moves: Why learning is not all in your head. Virginia: Great Ocean Publishers, 1995.         [ Links ]

16. Kephart NC. The slow learner in the classroom. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill, 1960.         [ Links ]

17. Piaget J. The mechanisms of perception. London, UK: Rutledge & Kegan Paul, 1969.         [ Links ]

18. Kirk SA, Gallagher JJ. Educating exceptional children. Third ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1979.         [ Links ]

19. Kranowitz CS. Out of sync child. New York: A Skylight Press.; 1998.         [ Links ]

20. Johnson DJ, Myklebust HR. Learning disabilities - educational principles and practices. New York: Grune and Stratton Inc, 1978.         [ Links ]

21. Chinn S, editor. Dyslexia and mathematics. 28th Annual conference of South African AAssociation of learners with educational difficulties; 2002 September 2002; University of the Western Cape, Bellville, Cape Town.         [ Links ]

22. Schneck CM. Visual perception. Case-Smith J, Allen AS, Pratt PN, editors. United States of America: Mosby Year Book Inc, 1996.         [ Links ]

23. Fisher AG, Murray EA, Bundy AC. Sensory integration theory and practice. Philadelphia: F.A.Davis Company, 1991.         [ Links ]

24. Hung SS, Fisher AG, Cremak SA. The performance of learning disabled and normal young men on the Test of Visual Perceptual Skills. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 1987; 41(12): 790-7.         [ Links ]

25. Levine KJ. Fine motor dysfunction. Therapeutic strategies in the classroom. Arizona: Therapy Skill Builders (A Division of Psychological Corporation), 1991.         [ Links ]

26. Catts HW, Kamhi AG. Language and reading disabilities. United States of America: A Viacom Company, 1999.         [ Links ]

27. Cherry C, Godwin D, Staples J. Is the left brain always right? : A guide to whole child development. United States of America: Fearon Teacher Aids, 1989.         [ Links ]

28. Green C, Chee K. Understanding ADHD. A parent's guide to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children. London: Vermilion, 1997.         [ Links ]

29. Kulp MT. Relationship between visual motor integration skill and academic performance in kindergerten through third grade. Optometry and Vision Science. 1999; 76(3): 159-63.         [ Links ]

30. Amundson SJ, Weil M. Prewriting and handwriting skills. In: Case-Smith J, Allen AS, Pratt PN, editors. Occupational Therapy for Children. Third ed. United States of America: Mosby-Year Book Inc, 1996: 524-41.         [ Links ]

31. Case-Smith J. Effectiveness of school-based occupational therapy intervention on handwriting. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2002; 56(1): 17-25.         [ Links ]

32. Tseng MH, Chow SM. Perceptual motor function of school-aged children with slow handwriting speed. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2000; 54(1): 83-8.         [ Links ]

33. Tseng MH, Cremak SA. The influence of ergonomic factors and perceptual motor abilities on handwriting performance. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 1993; 47(10): 919-26.         [ Links ]

34. Ziviani J, Watson-Will A. Writing speed and legibility of 7 to 14 year old school students using modern cursive script. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal. 1998; 45(2): 59-64.         [ Links ]

35. Miles T, Chinn S, Peer L. Dyslexia and mathematics. A guide for parents and teachers. British Dyslexia AAssociation, 2000.         [ Links ]

36. Belka DE, Williams HG. Prediction of later cognitive behaviour from early school perceptual-motor, perceptual and cognitive performances. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1979; 49: 131-41.         [ Links ]

37. Amundson SJ. Evaluation Tool of Children's Handwriting - Manuscript (ETCH). Homer, Alaska: O.T. Kids Inc, 1995.         [ Links ]

38. Lee S. A frame of reference for reversal errors in handwriting (A historical review of visual-perceptual theory). School System Special Interest Section Quarterly. 2006; 13(1): 1-4.         [ Links ]

39. Zaba J. Visual perception versus visual function. Jounal of Learning Disabilities. 1984; 17: 183-5.         [ Links ]

40. Boone HC. Relationship of left-right reversals to academic achievement. Perceptual Motor Skills. 1986; 62: 27-33.         [ Links ]

41. Siegel LS. Issues in the definition and diagnosis of learning disabilities: A perspective on Guckenberger v. Boston University. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 1999 July/August; 33(4): 304-19.         [ Links ]

42. South-Africa. Draft guidelines for the implementation of inclusive education (second draft). In: Education DoEDI, editor. Pretoria: Government Printer, 2002.         [ Links ]

43. Gordon M, Lewandowski L, Keiser S. The LD label for relatively well-functioning students: A critical analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 1999; 32(6): 485-90.         [ Links ]

44. Grove MC, Haupfleisch HM. Perceptual development - A guide. Pretoria: N H W Press, 1978.         [ Links ]

45. Siefert KL, Hoffnung RJ. Child and adolescent development. United States of America: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1997.         [ Links ]

46. Gregg N, Scott SS. Definition and documentation: Theory, measurement and the courts. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 2000; 33(1): 5-12.         [ Links ]

47. Richardson PK. Use of standardised tests in paediatric practice. In: Case-Smith J, Allen AS, Pratt PN, editors. Occupational therapy for Children. St Louis: Mosby-Year Book Inc, 1996: 200-24.         [ Links ]

48. Bailey DM. Research for the health professional: A practical guide. Philadelphia: F. A. Davis Company, 1991.         [ Links ]

49. Mc Millan JH, Schumacher S. Research in education. A conceptual introduction. New York: Longman Incorporated, 2000.         [ Links ]



Janet Richmond
Kathy Holland

Creative Commons License All the contents of this journal, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License