The Feifer Assessment of Mathematics (FAM) is a 19-subtest diagnostic test from PAR that identifies a student's dyscalculia subtype, pre-K to college.
Dr. Russell T. WarneChief Scientist
Share
The Feifer Assessment of Mathematics, usually shortened to FAM, is an individually administered diagnostic math test published by PAR in 2016 and written by school neuropsychologist Steven G. Feifer, with the professional manual co-authored by Heddy Kovach Clark. It covers examinees from prekindergarten through college, draws on a pool of 19 subtests, and is designed to sort a student's math difficulty into one of three "dyscalculia" subtypes so that intervention can follow the specific profile. This article covers what the FAM measures, how it is structured, scored and timed, how it differs from ordinary math achievement batteries, and where its limits sit.
What the Feifer Assessment of Mathematics measures
Most math tests answer one question: how much math does this student know relative to peers? The FAM was built to answer a different one. According to PAR, it examines the underlying neurodevelopmental processes that support the acquisition of proficient math skills, on the premise that several distinct neural pathways feed into mathematical problem solving and that a breakdown in any one of them can produce the same surface result of a low math grade.
That premise shapes the content. PAR describes the 19 subtests as covering math fact retrieval, numeric and spatial memory, perceptual estimation skills, linguistic math concepts, and core number sense development. Some of those look like schoolwork, such as addition and division fluency. Others look more like a neuropsychological screen, such as counting backward from a given number, holding a sequence of digits in mind, or judging which of two quantities is larger without calculating.
PAR positions the test as a companion to conventional achievement measures, noting it can be used alongside broader batteries that measure overall math performance. PAR assigns the full FAM its Qualification Level B, which restricts purchase to users with relevant graduate training in testing.
The three dyscalculia subtypes the FAM indexes
The FAM's headline feature is its index structure. PAR reports that the test yields three index scores, each representing one proposed subtype of dyscalculia, plus a Total Index representing overall performance.
• Procedural Index: Measures the ability to count, order and sequence numbers, and to sequence the steps of a mathematical procedure. PAR's interpretive report explains that low scores here often point to trouble following an algorithm when an equation is too long to solve from memory.
• Verbal Index: Measures automatic fact retrieval and the linguistic components of math. PAR notes that weakness here does not necessarily damage a student's conceptual understanding, but it does reflect difficulty encoding and retrieving overlearned facts such as single-digit multiplication in an automatic way.
• Semantic Index: Measures the visual-spatial and conceptual side of mathematics, including magnitude representation, patterns and relationships, higher-level problem solving and number sense. Low scores, per PAR, suggest weak quantitative reasoning and difficulty applying math to real-world situations.
The three-way split has roots in the research literature, where cognitive accounts of math learning disability have long separated fact-retrieval problems from procedural ones. The field has not settled on a single taxonomy. Karagiannakis and colleagues, writing in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, reviewed the same evidence base and proposed a four-domain classification instead. The FAM operationalizes one defensible model of math disability, and clinicians should treat its subtype labels as descriptive hypotheses about a score pattern.
Subtests, timing and scoring
Nobody sits all 19 subtests. The battery is tiered by grade, and PAR gives the following structure and administration times.
• Prekindergarten: Nine subtests, roughly 35 minutes.
• Kindergarten to Grade 2: Fourteen subtests, roughly 50 minutes.
• Grade 3 to college: Eighteen subtests, roughly 60 minutes.
Examiners can also administer only the subtests belonging to a single index, or individual subtests on their own, which makes the FAM usable for targeted follow-up after a broader evaluation.
PAR's published sample report shows how the subtests group. The Procedural Index draws on Forward Number Count, Backward Number Count, Numeric Capacity, Sequences and Object Counting. The Verbal Index draws on Rapid Number Naming, Addition Fluency, Subtraction Fluency, Multiplication Fluency, Division Fluency and Linguistic Math Concepts. The Semantic Index draws on Spatial Memory, Equation Building, Perceptual Estimation, Number Comparison, and knowledge subtests for each of the four operations.
Scoring uses a metric that will be familiar to anyone who has read an IQ report. PAR states that subtest and index scores are scaled to a mean of 100 with a "standard deviation" of 15, the standard deviation being a measure of how spread out scores are in the population. Roughly two-thirds of students score between 85 and 115 on a scale like that. The FAM reports confidence intervals, percentile ranks, z scores and normal curve equivalents for index scores, and age and grade equivalents plus percentiles for subtest scores. Norms are grade-based, with age proxies supplied.
The normative sample is the number to keep in view. PAR reports standardization on 1,061 examinees from prekindergarten through college, drawn from more than 30 states and stratified on 2013 United States Census statistics. Spread across a span of roughly 16 grade levels, that works out to a modest number of cases per band, which is a reason to read individual subtest scores with generous error bars.
A separate FAM Screening Form exists for progress monitoring and response-to-intervention work. PAR reports that it uses three subtests, one from each index (Sequences, Linguistic Math Concepts and Number Comparison), yields a single risk index, takes about 15 minutes to administer and another 15 to score, and carries the lower Qualification Level S. It flags students who may warrant a full evaluation and does not diagnose anything on its own.
How the FAM differs from a math achievement test
The distinction that matters when choosing an instrument is between measuring attainment and explaining it. A norm-referenced achievement measure tells you where a student stands; the FAM is an attempt to say why they stand there.
Compare it with the neighboring tools. The KeyMath-3 is a broad diagnostic inventory of math content, mapping which curricular skills a student has and has not mastered across basic concepts, operations and applications. The TEMA-3 concentrates on early numeracy in young children, covering informal and formal counting, number facts and concepts. Both are useful for deciding what to teach next. Neither is organised around cognitive processing pathways, and neither produces a subtype label.
The FAM approaches the problem from the opposite end. Its value case, as PAR frames it, is a student who looks unremarkable on a standard achievement test and an ability test yet keeps failing math, where the diagnostic question is which underlying process is failing. Feifer has built the same design into a family of tests covering reading and written expression as well, each with its own subtype structure.
The limits worth knowing
PAR is candid about scope, and the caution in its own interpretive report deserves quoting: the FAM "should not be used in isolation as a diagnostic tool," and should sit inside a wider picture that includes developmental and academic history, curriculum-based data, prior response to intervention and social-emotional factors. The same report adds that not every student with a math learning disability will show a distinct subtype; some present a global deficit instead.
Two findings from the wider literature sharpen that point. Mazzocco and Myers, tracking children through primary school, found that different groups of children meet math-disability criteria depending on which measure is used, and that a given child may stop meeting criteria over time even on the same assessment. Their conclusion was a warning against single-tool, one-time diagnosis. Haberstroh and Schulte-Körne, in a guideline paper for Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, put dyscalculia prevalence at 3 to 7 percent of children, adolescents and adults, and likewise recommend that diagnosis rest on history, test findings, clinical examination and psychosocial assessment together.
PAR does not publish FAM reliability or validity coefficients on its public product pages, so anyone evaluating the test for adoption should read the professional manual and the independent test review published in the Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology rather than rely on marketing copy. For the broader evaluation process the FAM feeds into, our guide to how dyscalculia is diagnosed walks through the steps.
Where general cognitive ability fits
Math difficulty is not always specific. A student whose reasoning, working memory and processing speed all sit well below average will struggle with math for reasons that no math-specific subtype explains, which is why a general cognitive measure usually belongs in the same evaluation.
For adults who want a properly normed estimate of their own cognitive ability, the RIOT IQ test is an online option built for ages 18 and up. Developed by RIOT IQ with psychometrician Dr. Russell T. Warne, the Reasoning and Intelligence Online Test uses 15 subtests across six cognitive indices covering verbal reasoning, fluid reasoning, spatial ability, working memory, processing speed and reaction time, takes about 52 minutes, and reports scores on the same mean-100, standard-deviation-15 scale used by the FAM. It is a measure of general cognitive ability and does not replace an individually administered diagnostic evaluation for a suspected learning disability.
Frequently asked questions
Who publishes the Feifer Assessment of Mathematics?
PAR, also known as Psychological Assessment Resources, based in Lutz, Florida. The test was authored by Steven G. Feifer, DEd, with the professional manual co-authored by Heddy Kovach Clark, PhD, and published in 2016.
What age range does the FAM cover?
PAR lists the grade range as prekindergarten through college. PAR's United Kingdom distributor, Hogrefe, gives the equivalent age span as roughly 4 to 21 years.
How long does the FAM take to administer?
About 35 minutes for prekindergarten, 50 minutes for kindergarten through Grade 2, and 60 minutes for Grade 3 through college, according to PAR. The Screening Form takes about 15 minutes to administer and 15 minutes to score.
What are the three dyscalculia subtypes on the FAM?
The Verbal Index covers automatic fact retrieval and the language of math, the Procedural Index covers counting, ordering and sequencing, and the Semantic Index covers visual-spatial and conceptual aspects including number sense. A Total Index summarizes performance across all three.
Does the FAM diagnose dyscalculia by itself?
No. PAR's own interpretive report states that the test should not be used in isolation and should form part of a comprehensive assessment that includes developmental history, curriculum-based data and prior response to intervention.
Is the FAM an IQ test?
No. It measures math-related processing and achievement, and its scores happen to use the same mean-100, standard-deviation-15 metric as most IQ tests. A general cognitive ability measure answers a separate question and is usually administered alongside it.
2. PAR. (n.d.). Feifer Assessment of Mathematics Screening Form (FAM SF). Psychological Assessment Resources. parinc.com
3. Feifer, S. G., & PAR Staff. (2020). FAM interpretive report: Sample client. Psychological Assessment Resources. parinc.com
4. Mulchay, C., Wolff, M., Ward, J., & Han, N. C. (2022). Test review of the Feifer Assessment of Mathematics (FAM). Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology, 8(3), 143-147. doi.org
5. Haberstroh, S., & Schulte-Körne, G. (2019). The diagnosis and treatment of dyscalculia. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, 116(7), 107-114. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
6. Mazzocco, M. M. M., & Myers, G. F. (2003). Complexities in identifying and defining mathematics learning disability in the primary school-age years. Annals of Dyslexia, 53(1), 218-253. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
7. Karagiannakis, G., Baccaglini-Frank, A., & Papadatos, Y. (2014). Mathematical learning difficulties subtypes classification. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 57. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
