Neuropsychological predictors of poor school performance

Relevance. Underachieving schoolchildren are characterized by underdevelopment of higher mental functions (HMF) as compared to well-performing pupils. At the same time, there is a lack of explicit data on which dysfunctions are the most specific to underachievers.

It is unknown how much particular neurocognitive dysfunctions affect school performance and what are the possibilities to compensate for isolated defects. 

Objectives. To identify the predictors of poor academic performance in school and to evaluate capabilities for children with certain neurocognitive dysfunctions for better progress at school. 

Method. The neuropsychological examination was used to evaluate the characteristics of neurocognitive development. Four daily routine activities, fourteen HMF, and the overall level of neurocognitive development were assessed. The index of isolation-multiplicity of neurocognitive dysfunctions was calculated. To evaluate academic performance (average grade for all disciplines) interviews with pupils and their parents were conducted, school exercise-books and assignment books were thoroughly studied. The study involved 427 children (292 boys and 135 girls) aged from 6 to 17 years, (11.7 ± 3).

Results. The results of neuropsychological diagnostics explain 24% variance in the academic performance in school grades 1–4 and 18% variance in grades 5-11. Underachievement is predominantly related to the reduction in thinking, attention, audio-verbal memory, and overall level of neurocognitive development. Time orientation turns out to be more reduced than other everyday functions in underachievers. Certain mental functions in underperforming elementary school pupils can spontaneously improve through education. Isolated neurocognitive dysfunctions (up to 3) do not result in poor school performance.

Conclusion. Thinking, attention, and audio-verbal memory dysfunctions against the background of the low overall level of neurocognitive development are most specific to underachieving schoolchildren. Under-development of attention is the most significant predictor of poor school performance in 1–4 school grades, low level of thinking – in 5–11 grades. Isolated neurocognitive dysfunctions (up to 3) that can be compensated for have no negative impact on educational performance. 

References

Akhutina T.V., Kamardina I.O., Pylaeva N.M. (2012). Neuropsychologist at school: a manual for teachers, school psychologists and parents. Moscow: V. Sekachev. (in Russ.).

Akhutina T.V., Pylaeva N.M. (2015). Overcoming the difficulties of learning: Neuropsychological approach. Moscow: Izdatel'skii tsentr [Publ.] “Akademiya”. (in Russ.).

Brain mechanisms of cognitive activity formation in pre-school and primary school age. (2014). R.I. Machinskaya, D.A. Farber (Eds.). Moscow: NOU VPO “MPSU”; Voronezh: MODEK. (in Russ.).

Glozman Zh.M. (2017). The neuropsychology of childhood. 2nd ed., rev. and add. Moscow:Publ. Yurait. (inRuss.).

Glozman Zh.M., Soboleva A.E. (2013). Neuropsychological diagnostics of school-age children. Moscow: Smysl. (in Russ.).

Hale J.B., Fiorello C.A. (2004). School Neuropsychology: A Practioner’s Handbook. New York: The Guilford Press.

Korsakova N.K., Mikadze Yu.V., Balashova E.Yu. (2017). Unsuccessful children: neuropsychological diagnostics of younger schoolchildren. 3rd ed., rev. and add.Moscow: Publ. Yurait. (inRuss.).

Luriya A.R. (1969). Higher cortical functions in man and their disturbances in local brain lesions. 2nded., add. Moscow: Publ. MSU. (inRuss.).

LuriyaA.R. (1970). Human brain and mental processes. V. 2. Neuropsychological analysis of conscious actions. Moscow: “Pedagogica”. (in Russ.).

Luriya A.R., Tsvetkova L.S. Neuropsychology and problems of education in general education school. 2nded., rev. Moscow: Publ. MPSU; Voronezh: Publ. NPO“MODEK”. (in Russ.).

Methods of neuropsychological examination of 6-9 years children. (2016). T.V. Akhutina (Ed.). Moscow: V. Sekachev. (in Russ.).

Mikadze Yu.V. (1996). Neuropsychological diagnostics of learning ability. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 14. Psikhologiya (Moscow University Bulletin, Issue 14. Psychology), 2, 46–50. (in Russ.).

Mikadze Yu.V. (2013). Childhood neuropsychology. St. Petersburg: Piter. (in Russ.).

Mikadze Yu.V., Korsakova N.K. (1994). Neuropsychological diagnostics and correction of primary schoolchildrendue to poor progress at school. Moscow:Pravlenie obshchestva “Znanie” Rossii; TOO “IntelTekh”. (in Russ.).

Miller D.C. (2013). Essential of School Neuropsychological Assessment. 2n ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.

Miller D.C., Defina P.A. (2010). The application of neuroscience to the practice of school neuropsychology. In D.C. Miller (Ed.), Best Practices in School Neuropsychology: Guidelines for Effective Practice, Assessment, and Evidence-Based Intervention(pp. 141–157). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.

Neuropsychological diagnostics. Classicstimulusmaterials. (2014). E.Yu. Balashova, M.S. Kovyazina (Eds.). 4th ed. Moscow: Genezis. (inRuss.).

Neuropsychology of Learning Disabilities. Essential of Subtype Analysis. (1985). B.P. Rourke (Ed.). New York, London: The Guilford Press.

Polonskaya N.N. (2007). Neuropsychological diagnostics of children of primary school age. Moscow: Izdatel'skii tsentr [Publ.] “Akademiya”. (in Russ.).

School and mental health of pupils. (1988). S.M. Grombakh (Ed.). Moscow:Meditsina. (in Russ.).

Semago N.Ya., Semago M.M. (2007). The diagnostic kit of the psychologist: manual. 3rded., rev. Moscow: APKiPRORF. (in Russ.).

SemenovichA.V. (2013). Introduction to the neuropsychology of childhood. 3rd ed., rev. and add.Moscow: Genezis. (in Russ.).

Shamlikashvili Ts.A., Semenova O.A. (2010).Why it is difficult for a child to learn and how to help him. Neuropsychological approach: orientation course. Moscow: Mezhregional'nyi tsentr upravlencheskogo i politicheskogo konsul'tirovaniya. (in Russ.).