SIGNIFICANCE OF PERSONALIZED

COGNITIVE INTERVENTIONS
STRATEGIES TO IMPROVE
LEARNING OUTCOMES IN
NEURODIVERSE LEARNERS - 2021

Student Name: Sanaa Pradhan

(American School of Bombay)
 Date – October 2021

—
Research Title:
Significance of personalized cognitive interventions
strategies to improve learning outcomes in
neurodiverse learners - 2021

—
Researcher – Ms Sadaf Merchant
(Clinical Psychologist | Advanced SOI Practitioner |
Chief Learning Officer)

Neurodiversity focuses on strengthening the

student and does not see differences as
weaknesses. They’re not problems that need to be
“fixed” or “cured.” They’re simply variations of
the human brain

Significance of personalized cognitive interventions strategies

to improve learning outcomes in neurodiverse learners
PAGE 2
 ABSTRACT
Neurodiversity states that students have different ways of understanding and processing
information than the counterpart of - ‘neurotypicals’. This is due to differences in individual
learning rather than difficulties. A classroom will have neurodiverse learners- who are identified
as having special educational needs such as autism spectrum disorder, dyslexia, dyscalculia,
dysgraphia, dyspraxia, attention deficit hyperactive disorder, and some students may have
behavioral challenges and specific learning needs. These learning needs are described often as
cognitive readiness– which means their brains function differently.

Students with immediate special educational needs (20-25% school population) receive
remedial education, this may help to fill some of a student’s learning gap. “Teaching the ability
to learn should be considered equally as important a goal as is a mastery of prescribed content.”
If students do not have the requisite skills needed for learning curricular content, regardless of
what intelligences such content might involve, attempts to remediate content deficiencies are
likely futile.

When students become frustrated and find schoolwork difficult because they do not have the
cognitive skills required to process information properly. It should be noted that, irrespective of
age, cognitive skills can be improved with the right training. Weak cognitive skills can be
strengthened, and normal cognitive skills can be enhanced to increase ease and performance in
learning.

The Structure of Intellect Model by J.P Guilford provides personalized cognitive strategies to
improve the student’s cognitive abilities across content areas. Once students develop these
skills, teachers can then approach the essential skills of education confident in their students’
abilities to learn challenging material. These learning skills will then become the basis for
lifelong tools for mastering any learning task.

This study is a qualitative analysis to highlight how cognitive abilities training in students (both
neuro typical and atypical) from the ages 4 to 13 benefits in improving learning outcomes. This
study aims to add a valuable literature on the significance of personalized cognitive strategies
to reforming the education system.

Significance of personalized cognitive interventions strategies

to improve learning outcomes in neurodiverse learners
PAGE 3
 INTRODUCTION
The term Neurodiversity is derived from scientific studies, arising from many brains imaging studies. These studies
emphasize on the fact that there exists a learning and thinking difference amongst students, and that student think,
learn and process information in a different manner. The term Neurodiversity was coined by Australian
Sociologist, Judy Singer in the late-1990s. Neurodiversity infers that variation in an individual's thoughts, traits
and behavior is due to several neurodevelopmental differences. This explains why neurodivergent students
experience learning challenges.

In understanding neurodiversity, the neurological differences pose several challenges for children, particularly in
a classroom setting for examples:

• they struggle in work that involves a lot of writing and text work
• they have difficulties with attention and focus
• they find copying from the board a difficulty
• they have trouble following instructions
• they have difficulties in remembering information
• they struggle learning new language – expressive and receptive
• they have difficulties starting, staying on and with completion of tasks
• they find it difficult to follow specific pattern or sequence
• they might engage more effectively with speaking- listening rather than reading - writing
• they find group participation challenging

Hence, the term neurodiversity, sees a student with neurological conditions as normal variations in brain
functionality, rather than a “disability”. The most significant role of a neurodiverse approach has been that the
difference between strengths and weaknesses are often magnified. An increasing number of authors in recent years
have advocated for early intervention programs such as personalized cognitive training programs, which form the
foundation for learning. (Bryck & Fisher, 2012; Heckman, 2006; Shonkoff & Levitt, 2010; Sonuga - Barke &
Halperin, 2011).

Cognitive training is based on the assumption that repeated practice within the domain leads to increased positive
effects in learning. (Wass, Scerif, & Johnson, 2012). The passage from infancy to childhood represents the most
critical period for child development. Hence, several studies have suggested that parent and teacher mediated
remediation with increased educational and social provision for children of younger age is more effective, if the
training is applied at an early age. (Campbell et al., 2008; Old’s, Sadler, & Kitzman, 2007). Research has also
shown that these training programs are more effective for children who are developmental risk. ( Scionti, Cavallero,
Zogmaister & Marzocchi, 2020). Studies have shown that cognitive training in early childhood days have positive
results, such as well-developed semantic ability, reasoning, problem solving and mathematical abilities. Cognitive
education is known as the application of cognitive theory in remediation of various difficulties in reading and
writing within children. (Ashman & Conway, 1997).

The reading difficulties experienced by children are because they fail to decode the words and thus are unable to
comprehend the text. Difficulties in comprehending information emerge due to complications in focusing on
perceiving the interrelationship among the obtained information. (Mahapatra, 2015). Hence, there won't be
successful transfer in other aspects of reading, unless the basic cognitive process underlying reading for example
is the focus of intervention or remediation. (Das et al., 1994). One such training module is the Structure of Intellect
(SOI) model. J.P Guilford was the pioneer of the SOI model. According to Guilford's Structure of intellect (SI)
theory (1955), intelligence can be traced to an individual's underlying mental abilities or factors of intelligence.
Guilford’s SI model (1955) comprises 150 such different intellectual abilities, which are organized in three
dimensions- operations, content and products. These abilities are correlated with one another. (Guilford, 1955).

Significance of personalized cognitive interventions strategies

to improve learning outcomes in neurodiverse learners
PAGE 4
 BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF STRUCTURE OF INTELLECT

It began during World War II. The Army Air Corps was training pilots, navigators, and bombardiers. The
need for trained personnel was urgent, yet the Air Corps was losing more than one of every three men who
entered the program - although carefully selected, these men could not complete the training satisfactorily.
They “washed out.”

The Air Corps used three criteria for personnel selection: good health (with an emphasis on vision), the
ability to operate under stress, and high intelligence. Doctors screened for health. Performance measures
were used to evaluate the ability to handle stress.
IQ tests were used to screen for intelligence. The cutoff score was 120, which, at the time, was considered
adequate for college entrance. All the flight school cadets met these criteria, but, even so, many of them
were not graduating.

The washout rate stood at about 35%. The Air Corps needed to improve. They were satisfied with the
health and stress measures, so they focused on improving the measure of intelligence. They called upon
Dr. J. P. Guilford to find a better measure.

Guilford began with a set of job descriptions for pilots, navigators, and bombardiers. From these job
descriptions he drew up a set of intellectual functions required for each job, and then constructed paper-
and-pencil tests that he thought would measure the required abilities. He used this “long” test on two sets
of men - those who had successfully completed the training, and those who had not.

SUCCESS OF THE GUILFORD INTELLIGENCE MEASURE

Guilford now had tests that could be used to select personnel with the most intellectual potential for the
training. The test was so successful that the washout rate dropped more than 25% - he had reduced the
failures from more than 1-in-3 to less than 1-in-10. Guilford went one step further. He analyzed the items
by a (then) new statistical technique called “factor analysis,” a technique that identified clusters of related
items called “factors.” This was the key to his stunning success. He replaced a general intelligence measure
(IQ) with a differentiated measure of intellectual abilities. This was the first step toward the development
of the Structure of Intellect.

THE HISTORY OF THE SOI

The SOI development began in the early 1960s by Dr.Meeker, then Guilford’s doctoral student and a
school psychologist. She saw the potential of the Structure of Intellect, especially for diagnosing learning
difficulties. As a first step, she developed templates that translated the protocols of well-known IQ tests
(Stanford-Binet and WISC) into Structure of Intellect terms. In this way she was able to provide classroom
teachers with information that was relevant to how their teaching could meet the different needs of their
students. These SOI profiles were much more relevant for teachers than were general IQ scores.

Dr. Meeker and her associates devised the Structure of Intellect (SOI) which was based on J.P Guilford's
three- dimensional (SI) model. J. P. Guilford’s (1956) Sl model initially helped identify an individual's
specific learning styles. Drawing from Guilford’s findings, Meeker developed a learning ability test that
is used to diagnose and identify the child's strength and weakness, the model also helps identify the skills
necessary for school learning. (Buisman, 2016). She soon found that certain intellectual abilities were
closely related to basic learning: reading, arithmetic, higher math, and creativity. These insights (gained
from studies - 1962 to 1974)

Significance of personalized cognitive interventions strategies

to improve learning outcomes in neurodiverse learners
PAGE 5
INTELLIGENCE CAN BE TAUGHT
Dr. Meeker’s most important contribution to the SOI was the realization that intellectual abilities could be
taught. Thanks in large part to her work, this is well-accepted today, but in 1963 it flew in the face of
conventional wisdom which held that IQ scores were invariant - once a 109, always a 109 (±7)!
The possibility that intellectual abilities could be taught added a new dimension to Guilford’s work. He
had found a better way of assessing intelligence, the SI theory - and redefined intelligence in the process -
but he had concentrated on measurement for the purpose of selection.

Structure of Intellect (SOl) is a cognitive training model which emphasizes on creative and critical thinking
which adapts to classroom instruction and meets the cognitive needs of all ability students. (Buisman,
2016). The SOI provides a comprehensive system for testing, diagnosis based on the individual's needs
and various other areas of intellect. Various theorists such as Kelly (1928), Thurstone (1938), and Cattell
(1953) have supported a differentiated concept of intelligence. Psychometric instruments consisting of
several SOI factors predict academic success and diagnose learning failures. (Oepet 1960).
Dr.Meeker's SOI model comprises 90 cognitive abilities. It is also known as the 5x3x6 model. Which
consists of 5 operations, 3 contents and 6 products which forms the basis of learning ability. Several factors
of SOI are predictors of school learning and achievement, similar to that of Binet and WISC. The SOI
Model consists of Five such operations that have been organized in a structured manner. The operations
build the foundation skills necessary for various classroom learning and achievement. They consist of the
following: cognition, memory, problem solving, decision making and creativity. (Buisman ,2016). Hence,
SOI is an empirically verified cognitive training program that helps build the foundation for various
cognitive skills necessary for learning.

Significance of personalized cognitive interventions strategies

to improve learning outcomes in neurodiverse learners
PAGE 6
 LITERATURE REVIEW

Neurodiversity is a view point that brain differences are normal, rather than deficits. The idea of
neurodiversity can have benefits for kids with learning & thinking differences. This concept can help reduce
stigma around learning & thinking differences. Rather, neurodiversity is seen as a healthy state which is
neurologically different from that of ‘neurotypical’ individuals. (Hutchinsons, 2020). Hence, Educators and
learning specialists have a significant role in making neurodiversity more inclusive and mainstream, in
thought, life and culture. One way through which one can boost the neurodiverse approach is by applying
various cognitive training programs that help emphasize on the strengths of the child and train various
cognitive abilities, so that several educational challenges can be addressed.

The main concern of educational psychology is focused on the learning process and individual differences in
learning as well as the several psychological factors that affect academic performance. Intelligence is one
such component that has been defined as one's ability to learn. There are several factors that collectively form
the intelligence of a person. Guilford (1967) was careful to point out that the SI model is designed as a frame
of reference for understanding intellectual abilities came up with 150 such factors that form the Structure of
intellect. Hence, known as the S-I (structure of intellect theory). Guilford described intelligence as being a
systematic collection of many abilities for processing different kinds of information in various ways. There
are six kinds of operations (cognition, memory recording, memory retention, convergent production,
divergent production, and evaluation); five kinds of contents (visual, auditory, symbolic, and semantic,); and
six kinds of products (units, classes, relations, systems, transformations, and implications).

The SOI model resembles a cube with contents, products, and operations each occupying one side. Each
ability is defined by a con- junction of the three categories, occupying one cell in the three-dimensional figure.
Many of these abilities are acknowledged to be correlated with each other. This 5 x 5 x 6 figure yields a total
of 150 possible unique abilities, over 100 of which have been empirically verified.

Teaching the Ability to Learn Dr. Guilford’s doctoral student, Dr. Mary Meeker (Ed.D., University of
Southern California) refined his “structure of intellect” measure and applied it directly to K-12 learning by
developing instructional materials to strengthen specific areas of cognitive or perceptual weakness (M.
Meeker, 1969). In her model, intelligences, like physical abilities, can be exercised and developed through
cognitive and perceptual exercises. She asserts: “Teaching the ability to learn should be considered equally
as important a goal as is a mastery of prescribed content.” If students do not have the requisite skills needed
for learning curricular content, regardless of what intelligences such content might involve, attempts to
remediate content deficiencies are likely futile. In contrast, SOI provide skill-development activities to
improve the student’s cognitive abilities across content areas. Once students develop these skills, teachers
can then approach the essential skills of education confident in their students’ abilities to learn challenging
material. These learning skills will then become the basis for lifelong tools for mastering any learning task.

Dr. Meeker found the SOI model as a tool for diagnosing learning difficulties and organizes intelligence into
five operations abilities linked to reading, reading comprehension, arithmetic, math, creativity, and problem
solving (Meeker. 1989; M & M System. 1996). Several studies have been conducted in the last decade which
validate the current SOI model, however, these have not been published in journals. (M & M System. 1996).
One study conducted by (Bradfield and Slocumb, 1997), compared the reading and math performance of
students in five schools of 1 year of SOI intervention program from Rosenberg, school, Texas. The results of
the study indicated that the schools that completed the 1-year Intervention program showed significant gains
on the Texas Academic Achievement Scores (TAAS) in math and reading tests. Another study conducted by
Sisk (1998), evaluated the SOI Intervention Lab in rural schools in Paris. The results of the study found
significant year-to-year improvements in both reading and math on the Texas standardized tests, for Grades
2 through 12.

Significance of personalized cognitive interventions strategies

to improve learning outcomes in neurodiverse learners
PAGE 7
In a study by Feldman, B. (1970), who studied the relationship between Structure of Intellect (selected) factors
and academic achievement such as reading success at the primary level, for students of first grade across 15
different schools, found that factors such as MFU-V, MFU-A, EFU-V and CMU were confirmed at the 6-
year level. Abilities such as EFU-A, were responsible for word reading. Whereas EFU-V was a strong
predictor of reading success. Another factor such as the CMU, which is the ability to comprehend meaning
of words, predicts reading skills such as paragraph meaning and word reading. Study done by Hays, B. M.
Pereira, E. R. (1972), researched the effect of visual memory training on reading ability of kindergarten and
first grade children. The study determined whether MFU-V from the SOI factor can be affected by training
KG and first grade children. The results of the study indicated that there was no relation between Visual
Memory and CA, Visual Memory, and home environment. The median scores of both control and
experimental groups on the MSU-V subtest improved drastically.

Study by Dailey, Joanne V. (1975), who studied the effect of selected Structure of Intellect memory ability
materials on second grade reading achievement found that reading comprehension, vocabulary and auditory
memory skills were improved through the consistent use of S.O.I. memory ability experiences.
Another Indian study by Chauhan, C.P.S. (1980), who studied evaluation in algebra with reference to abilities
of structure of intellect, found that three SI abilities (CMU, CST and NSS) out of eight were a significant
predictor for achieving academic success in Algebra. For boys, NSS was found to be the best predictor of
achievement in algebra. However, for girls, CSI and CMU were relevant predictors for achieving academic
success.

In a study that determined the value of SOI-L tests for identifying gifted children and predicting the perception
of teachers in gifted children it was found that SOI-lA scores for subtests such as CFC, CFU, CSS CFS, DMU,
ESS and NSS was used to predict teacher perception beyond chance level. Cognition was a major factor in
predicting which children were achievers. Divergent production helped predict teacher perception of student
creativity and determine which student is a gifted student. (Cunningham, Thompson, Alston & Wakefield, Jr,
1978).
In a study by (Blazey & Mead, 1972), that investigated if the SOI training is effective in improving
intelligence in EMR children, it was found that 39% of the children increased their 1Q. In 6 out of 14 SOI
dimensions, there was average improvement in their IQ.

In the 15 years of SOI intervention investigated by R, Meeker (1999), it was found that children who
successfully completed the SOI program reported to have performed well by classroom teachers and had well
developed abilities that allowed them to perform better in their educational settings. Some additional studies
by (Bradfield & Slocumb, 1997; Sisk. 1998), reviewed the current SOI intervention model. Reading and math
achievement were examined on a large scale and significant improvements in both were found. The SOI
model of intervention fits the school environment, which emphasizes reducing learning failure and increasing
academic success.

Hence, through various theoretical evidence, this study aims to investigate the success of the SOI cognitive
training program on various neuro-diverse groups of children, in order to bridge the existing learning gap. In
summary, research on the current SOI intervention model in various Neuro-diverse groups of population is
greatly needed and highly recommended.

Significance of personalized cognitive interventions strategies

to improve learning outcomes in neurodiverse learners
PAGE 8
PRESENT STUDY
The present study aims to investigate the effectiveness of the Structure of Intellect cognitive strategies
intervention. The research was conducted on neurodiverse group of students. The students participated in
Structure of Intellect Advance Learning Abilities and Primary Learning Abilities assessment. The Structure
of Intellect is a 2-part approach that involves an initial assessment followed by an individualized training
program that enhances the student’s ability to be successful in any area of life. It gives valuable information
about the brain, learning style, and how to further develop cognitive abilities. At the completion of 80-100
hours training a post assessment was conducted to analyze the effectiveness.

METHODOLOGY:

1. Rationale- Learning is a natural ongoing process. All learning situations are predicated on a set of
expectations about the student’s cognitive abilities – acquisition of new data or concepts
(cognition), recall of data acquired (memory), information discrimination (evaluation), reasoning to
acquire new concepts (problem-solving), and the ability to explore new applications (creativity).

Low learning performance may be cognitive in nature—the learner has not developed the cognitive
abilities required for success in the instructional program. Learning abilities can be developed. The
key to their development is focused experience. Our focus has been primarily on making sure that
the student’s capacities for learning are matching the expectations of the teaching situation –
whether that is in a school, a university, or less formal circumstances like home schooling.

When the student’s capacities for learning do not match the expectations of the learning situation,
we take a clinical approach to the situation – isolate and identify the learning problem; make a
preliminary diagnosis, test to find the probable cause; prescribe an intervention; and monitor to see
if the intervention is effective.

This program recognizes the diversity within students by bridging the learning gap by reducing the
learning failure in students. This intervention is reviewed and analyzed with the participant and their
family. Then, the results are shared about what abilities the student possesses and what abilities can
still be developed. Vision, auditory, and sensory motor integration will also be analyzed, and a
personalized learning plan will be developed to help the student connect their body, mind, and heart
so they can become successful, lifelong learners.

Cognitive Ability Training using the Structure of Intellect is based on the concept that the brain has
the ability to change and grow, also known as neuroplasticity. Brains are like physical muscles, they
get stronger the more they are used. Brain training helps build new pathways in the brain to make
learning easier.

The SOI Cognitive Ability Assessment?

• Gifted students
• Near-gifted, average students
• Learning-disabled students
• High school students
• College students
• Adults

In other words, anybody looking to enhance their life skills and learning abilities!

Significance of personalized cognitive interventions strategies

to improve learning outcomes in neurodiverse learners
PAGE 9
2. Participants: The participants of the study were Neuro diverse students (male and female) from the
age range of 4-12 years of age. The students were from an urban background. These students went
to regular school. Our personalized cognitive training Programme is an 80- 100 hours Programme
(once a week / 2 hours per session). Before the start of training, each child will undergo a
comprehensive Cognitive Assessment using SOI’s diagnostic tool to help us determine their areas of
strengths and areas for improvements. Children aged 5-8 years old will be assessed for 14 cognitive
areas and students aged 9-12 years old will be assessed for 30 cognitive areas. Based on the
assessment, we will review the results with parents and customized modules was provided to help
the student strengthen and improve their cognitive profile. A post-assessment upon the completion
of training will help to evaluate and measure the areas of improvements.

3. Assessment and measures: SOI Primary learning abilities Assessment. This Assessment is for
students 4-9 years of age. There are fourteen learning abilities that are assessed in the areas of
cognition, creativity, problem solving, memory, problem solving, memory and evaluation. SOI
Advance learning abilities Assessment. This is appropriate for 9 years and above right up to an adult.
Thirty abilities are tested in the areas of cognition, creativity, problem solving, memory, and
evaluation.

These tests are not tests of achievement, knowledge or how much a student learned and retained in
school. Instead, the SOI test is diagnostic and leads directly to a treatment plan. The student's
cognitive strengths and weaknesses are fully outlined in their test results. The analysis identifies the
student's learning style - figural, symbolic, or semantic, and produces a profile in the areas of
comprehension, problem solving, evaluation, memory, visual perception, sensory integration, and
creativity. Through this detailed profile, a Personalized Learning Plan is developed, and education
therapy can be initiated.

4. Meeker Paradigm

This is not a one-size-fits-all approach – it is individualized for each student-client. On the other
hand, as with any clinical practice, there are broad guidelines based on years of experience. These
guidelines define three general areas.

• Area 1—Encompasses language, Structure of Intellect learning abilities, and academic

performance. Scholarship and creativity show up here with high functioning.
• Area 2—Encompasses social and emotional functioning, sometimes called “affective”
functioning by educators. Leadership shows up here.
• Area 3—Encompasses physiological and neurological functioning. Talent shows up here.

Significance of personalized cognitive interventions strategies

to improve learning outcomes in neurodiverse learners
PAGE 10
 5. Procedure: Structure of Intellect cognitive training of 80- 100 hours was conducted, where the
students were tested precognitive training as well as post- training to measure the effectiveness of
cognitive training in various neuro-diverse groups of children.

6. Results: The t-value was found to be significant at P-value < o.oo1 for both the studies. This indicates
that our alternate hypothesis was accepted, and the null hypothesis was rejected. This tells us that there
is a substantial change in children's cognitive ability pre-training and post training for both Primary
learning abilities as well as Advance learning abilities groups of students.

Table 1: Descriptive statistics for Primary learning abilities

From table 1, the mean was found to 3.11 pre training whereas the mean was found to be 5.34 post training. this
indicates that the mean for post training was higher than the mean for pre training.

Table 2: Primary learning abilities T test results-

t VALUE P VALUE
5.91 < 0.01

Table 3: ALA Descriptive statistics-

From table 2, it can be seen that the mean for pre training was found to be 3.29. Whereas the mean for post
training was found it be 4.69. This indicates that the mean for post training was higher than the mean for pre
training.

Table 4: ALA test results-

t value p value
3.48 < 0.01

Significance of personalized cognitive interventions strategies

to improve learning outcomes in neurodiverse learners
PAGE 11
Discussion: The study found a significant difference in the precognitive training and the post-cognitive
training test scores on both primary learning abilities and advance learning abilities tests. This suggests that
cognitive strategies intervention significantly improves cognitive abilities for both younger and older
children. The findings of the study can be understood in the light of past research done by several researchers.

Using the SOI program, teachers obtain more than an IQ score, A profile on a student identifies the strengths
and weaknesses of his intellectual abilities. With an SOI assessment the teacher can determine how the
student learns and, as a teacher, more fully. Understand the seemingly paradoxical student. Further, the
prescription provides a-plan accompanied by recommended tasks which can be used to improve the student's
level of thinking and strengthen problem-solving abilities, additionally.

If teachers recognize that students have special needs, then teachers must all so recognize that these needs
can only be meet when the students are offered a program that is "qualitatively different" from that being
offered in the regular school curriculum. SOI provides such a program. It challenges students to perceive, to
brainstorm, and to make sound judgments and decisions. It encourages students to approach problems in a
significantly different way, to be creative, and to enjoy the pleasure of using their minds effectively in the
thinking process.

The careers our students will undertake and the problems they will encounter when they join the labor force
are unknown. Teachers' goals then must be not only to give students the "survival skills" for that world, but
to teach them how to use their decision-making skills to solve the problems they will face in the complex
societies of the future.

This study has found results in line with previous studies as well as the hypotheses. This indicates that
relevant cognitive training programs can help improve cognitive abilities in both neurodiverse and
neurotypical children. This finding is promising in the field of neurodevelopmental counselling as it helps
psychologists as well as learning practitioners to focus on the strengths of the children, and work on them to
improve their intelligence as well as adaptive functioning.

Conclusion:
The study felt that Structure of Intellect modules were making a consistent difference with at-risk students.
This study highlighted that most teachers assume that each student brings certain foundational skills to the
classroom, such as attention span, memory and recall, compare/contrast thinking, process orientation,
symbolic decoding, contextual comprehension” and yet, upon assessing these brain skills function
individually. With Structure of intellect assessment, it was possible to locate those which are not functioning
as the teacher would expect. I believe every child should be granted an SOI assessment early in their school
years.

Future Research and Implications:

The implications of this study are that this study helps us understand that neuro diverse children benefit
greatly from cognitive training and thus this should be incorporated in the formal educational system. The
study also implies the need for learning practitioners and child psychologists to be inclusive in their
approach towards education and bridge the gap in learning. The SOI training model focused on individual
abilities of children and can be used to refine and develop them irrespective of language barriers, cultural
backgrounds as well as curriculum that the child follows. Hence, it can be integrated within learning
institutions and formal educational systems to benefit the children in terms of improving their cognitive
abilities. Future research under this topic can isolate the factors under the SOI system and individually
evaluate the impact of the training under each ability. The impact of cognitive training on neuro-typical
children can also be studied and relevant comparisons can be made with neuro diverse children.

Significance of personalized cognitive interventions strategies

to improve learning outcomes in neurodiverse learners
PAGE 12