When we ask a child at Tailored Developmental Therapies to draw a picture of a person, we are not looking for artistic talent. We are not assessing creativity or aesthetic judgment. We are reading the brain.

A simple pencil drawing of a human figure, completed without prompting or assistance, is one of the most revealing clinical assessment tools available. In the ten to fifteen minutes it takes a child to produce their drawing, we observe language processing, visual perception, executive function, working memory, fine motor control, hand dominance, and bilateral integration all at once. We watch how they approach the task, where they start, what they include, what they leave out, how they hold the pencil, and what their body does while they work.

And when we see a child’s drawings change over time, as their brain grows and reorganises through TDT’s programs, that change is not incidental. It is evidence. Evidence of genuine, measurable neurological development happening beneath the surface, before the changes in learning and behaviour become fully visible in everyday life.

This post explains what the Draw-A-Person assessment is, why it was developed, what TDT is observing during and after it, and what changing drawings tell us about a child’s brain. And at the end, we share a real before-and-after case study — two drawings by the same child, nine months apart — that illustrates what neurological progress actually looks like.

TDT uses the Draw-A-Person assessment as part of our comprehensive developmental evaluation, alongside reflex integration testing, visual processing assessment, and other tools. If you would like to understand your child’s full developmental picture, our free 30-minute phone consultation is the right place to start. Book your complimentary call, available Mondays 3:30–4:30pm.

The Goodenough Draw-A-Person Task: Why Drawing a Person?

The Draw-A-Person assessment was originally developed by psychologist Florence Goodenough at the University of Minnesota as a measure of intellectual development in young children, one that could provide meaningful information without requiring language, general knowledge, or reading and writing skills. This made it particularly useful for children who struggled with verbal assessments, and it remains one of the most widely used developmental assessment tools globally.

Goodenough and the psychologists who followed her work established that children’s drawings of people are not random, they follow a predictable developmental sequence that reflects the maturation of the brain. A two-year-old’s “person” is typically a circle with two lines. A five-year-old’s includes a head, body, arms, legs, and facial features. A ten-year-old’s adds proportion, detail, clothing, and expression. Each addition is not simply more practice at drawing, it reflects genuine cognitive and neurological development: more sophisticated visual perception, more organised motor planning, better working memory, more integrated brain function.

White board drawing of person

As Lehrer (2014) notes, drawing reflects something fundamental about how we make sense of the world, how we hold a mental image of something as complex as a human body, translate that image into a motor sequence, monitor the output, and adjust it. This is an act of intelligence that develops with age and cognitive ability. The drawing is not just a picture. It is a window into the brain.

At TDT, we use this task with both children and adults as part of our comprehensive developmental assessment process. It is as much about the process of drawing as the final product, which is why we watch carefully throughout.

Why We Ask for a Person Specifically

We ask the child to draw a person — rather than a house, an animal, or a free choice — for a specific reason: there is an established, universally shared expectation of what a person looks like. A head is expected to be roughly round. Arms should attach at approximately the right place. Eyes, nose, and mouth should be present and roughly proportioned.

This shared expectation means we can measure the child’s drawing against a developmental standard. If we asked for a free drawing, there would be no way to determine whether a child’s choice of subject or representation was age-appropriate, we would simply be assessing artistic preference. By asking for a person, we can observe where the child’s visual representation falls in the developmental sequence and what that tells us about their perceptual and cognitive development.

We are not judging the drawing as good or bad. We are comparing it to a developmental norm, and then using the specific details of what is present, what is absent, and how the drawing was made to build a picture of the child’s brain.

What TDT Observes: Seven Windows Into the Developing Brain

During and after the Draw-A-Person task, TDT observes the following seven areas. Each one reveals something specific and important about how the brain is working.

1. Language Processing and Instruction Following

The first thing we observe is whether the child can hear, process, and act on the instruction: “Please draw your best picture of a person.” Do they begin immediately? Do they need the instruction repeated? Do they need a detailed explanation or a demonstration before they can start?

A child who needs the instruction repeated multiple times, who asks many clarifying questions, or who cannot begin without seeing someone else do it first is showing us something important about how they process verbal language and instruction. This is not reluctance or defiance, it is the nervous system’s response to a language processing demand that may exceed its current efficient capacity.

We also assess spoken language by asking the child to talk us through their drawing once they have finished, what each part is, why they drew it that way, what the person is doing or thinking. This reveals expressive language skills, vocabulary, narrative ability, and the connection between visual representation and verbal description.

You might notice this in your child: they need instructions repeated or demonstrated before they can start, they ask many questions before beginning a task, they have difficulty translating what they understand into what they do.

2. Visual Perception

Visual perception is one of the most revealing things a drawing shows us, because drawing a person accurately requires the brain to hold a precise visual model of the human form, compare the drawing to that model in real time, and make adjustments when the output does not match the model.

Research has shown that people who have difficulty drawing to scale or making realistic representations of objects may not be seeing the world as it truly is (Wolchover, 2012). Visual perception difficulties, including weaknesses in spatial relationships, form constancy, and figure-ground perception, directly affect the brain’s ability to hold and reproduce accurate visual information.

White board drawing

A child with a younger developmental visual age will draw a very large head with arms and legs attached directly to it (“tadpole figure”), because the head is the most visually significant part of the person and the brain does not yet have the perceptual sophistication to represent the whole body accurately. As the visual system matures — through development and, in TDT’s clients, through neuroplasticity programs — the drawing becomes more proportionate, more detailed, and more accurately organised.

Visual perception difficulties that show up in drawing will also show up in reading (difficulty distinguishing similar-looking letters), writing (difficulty with spatial layout and letter formation), and mathematics (difficulty with diagrams, number placement, and spatial reasoning). The drawing gives us early, clear visibility of difficulties that will affect academic learning across all subjects.

You might notice in your child’s drawing: a very large head relative to the body, arms attached to the head rather than the body, body parts missing or in the wrong location, difficulty getting features to look approximately right despite obvious effort.

3. Executive Function

Executive function is governed by the frontal cortex, the last region of the brain to mature, and its development depends on the lower levels of the Taylor & Trott Pyramid of Learning being organised first. When there are apparent struggles in executive function, it tells us that the lower levels — sensory, auditory, and visual processing — need strengthening before executive function growth can be sustained.

During the drawing task, we observe executive function in real time. A child with well-organised executive function approaches the task with an implicit plan, deciding where to start, maintaining a mental image of the goal, monitoring progress, and making corrections. They work with a sense of purposeful sequence.

Child playing with toy bugs

A child with executive function difficulties may:

• Begin without any apparent plan and add parts randomly
• Start with an unusual starting point, feet first, or a single feature in the centre of the page
• Forget parts they know should be included (“Oh, I forgot arms!”) because they cannot hold the mental checklist in mind while executing the motor task
• Become stuck or distressed when the drawing does not go as intended, and struggle to self-correct
• Rush to finish without reviewing the drawing for completeness

All of these behaviours in the drawing task are signals that the same executive function difficulties are affecting how the child approaches learning tasks, transitions, multi-step instructions, and classroom organisation.

You might notice: the child seems to have no starting strategy, produces drawings that are disordered or fragmented despite trying hard, cannot seem to review and correct their own work, or becomes very frustrated when the drawing does not match what they intended.

4. Working Memory

Working memory is the ability to hold information in mind while using it to do something else. In the drawing task, it is the ability to remember all the parts a person should have while simultaneously executing the motor task of drawing them.

We observe working memory through what the child includes and what they leave out. A child with strong working memory will produce a drawing that is relatively complete — head, body, arms, legs, face, and details like hair, hands, and feet — because they can maintain the full mental checklist while drawing. A child with weak working memory will produce a drawing that is systematically incomplete: often the same parts are missing every time, not because the child does not know those parts exist, but because they cannot hold the full list in mind while executing the drawing.

The planning component of working memory is also visible here. Planning, deciding where to start, working out where each part will go on the page, requires holding a mental model of the finished product while executing the first steps. A child who runs out of page space for the legs, or who draws the head in the bottom corner leaving no room for the body, is showing us a working memory and planning difficulty that will also affect how they approach written work, multi-step tasks, and any activity requiring forward planning.

Working memory difficulties in the drawing task are very directly connected to executive function challenges in the classroom, the same child who forgets to include arms in their drawing is likely the child who forgets what they were sent to do before they get there, or who cannot hold a four-step instruction in mind while executing the first step.

You might notice: the same body parts missing every time (often hands, feet, or ears), body drawn much too small because the head used most of the page, or the child immediately saying ‘I don’t know what to draw’ despite understanding the instruction.

5. Cognitive Load and Self-Regulation

One of the most important things we observe during the drawing task is not what goes on the page but what happens in the child’s body while they draw. The physical signs of cognitive load — holding the breath, poking the tongue out, excessive wriggling or leg bouncing, gripping the pencil so tightly the knuckles whiten — tell us a great deal about the neurological effort the task is requiring.

When a child holds their breath while drawing, they are responding to the increased cognitive demand with a primitive breath-holding pattern, the same response that can be observed in anyone concentrating hard on a difficult task, but that should diminish as the task becomes more within the child’s neurological capacity. When a child pokes their tongue out while writing, they are showing us the palmar grasp reflex connection, the oral-motor system activating alongside the hand because the reflex that links them has not fully integrated.

These physical signs of cognitive load during a drawing task predict the level of effort that same child is expending on every learning task throughout the school day. A child who finds drawing a simple person cognitively taxing enough to hold their breath and wriggle is finding reading, writing, and mathematics — all of which are significantly more demanding — even more so. The drawing task makes this visible in a low-stakes, non-threatening context.

💡  If you notice your child holds their breath, pokes their tongue out, or becomes physically rigid during fine motor tasks like drawing or writing, this is worth mentioning to TDT. These are observable signs of the neurological effort those tasks are requiring, and they are things that can be specifically addressed through Emily’s programs.

6. Fine Motor Skills, Pencil Grip, and Hand Dominance

The drawing task reveals fine motor skills both through the product, the line quality, the control of size and direction, the ability to join lines accurately, and through the process: how the child holds the pencil, how much pressure they apply, whether they turn the page to avoid crossing the midline, and which hand they use.

A mature, efficient pencil grip uses the tips of the thumb, index, and middle finger in what is called a tripod grip, allowing maximum control with minimum effort. Immature grips, whole-hand grips, fisted grips, or grips that involve significant tension throughout the hand and arm, require more effort to produce less control. They also fatigue the hand more quickly, which directly affects how long a child can sustain written output before quality deteriorates.

Hand dominance — the consistent preference for one hand — is another important observation. While most children establish a dominant hand by age 5–6, some children with retained primitive reflexes (particularly the ATNR — Asymmetrical Tonic Neck Reflex) show mixed or unclear hand dominance well beyond this age. The ATNR links head turning to arm extension on the same side, which can make consistent use of either hand more difficult when the reflex is retained.

We also observe bilateral integration, whether the non-dominant hand is used to stabilise the paper while the dominant hand draws, or whether the child works with one hand while the other hand does nothing or holds an unusual position. Poor bilateral integration affects not just drawing but every task that requires two hands working together.

You might notice: a very tight, tense pencil grip; a child who switches hands during the drawing; a child who does not use their non-dominant hand to hold the paper steady; line quality that is very uneven or shaky despite apparent effort.

7. Bilateral Integration and Midline Crossing

Bilateral integration is the ability to use both sides of the body in a coordinated, purposeful way, and it requires the two hemispheres of the brain to communicate efficiently through the corpus callosum. It is foundational to virtually every complex human movement: walking, swimming, writing, catching a ball, playing a musical instrument.

In the drawing task, we observe whether the child can produce lines that cross the midline of the page, the imaginary vertical line running through the centre. A child with poor midline crossing will avoid it: drawing on one side of the page and then turning the paper rather than allowing the hand to cross to the other side, or producing features on one side of a face that don’t match the other side.

We also observe whether the body parts in the drawing are symmetrical, whether the person has two eyes at the same height, two arms of approximately equal length, both ears. Consistent asymmetry in a drawing often reflects asymmetry in the child’s body schema — their internal neurological map of what a body looks like — rather than simply artistic imprecision.

Bilateral integration difficulties visible in drawing will also appear in swimming, read more in our post on difficulty coordinating arms and legs independently. These difficulties also show up in reading (difficulty with letters that cross or mirror the midline, like b, d, p, q), and in physical education (difficulty with activities requiring coordinated bilateral movement).

What Changing Drawings Tell Us: The Evidence of Neurological Progress

When TDT conducts a draw-a-person assessment at intake and then again after a period of neuroplasticity and reflex integration work, the drawings change. Not always dramatically — neurological development is gradual — but specifically and meaningfully, in ways that reflect exactly the areas that have been targeted in the program.

A child whose visual perception has improved will begin including body proportions that were previously absent. A child whose working memory has strengthened will include parts — hands, feet, ears — that were consistently missing in earlier drawings. A child whose executive function is developing will approach the task with more visible planning and produce a more organised, complete result. A child whose fine motor development has progressed will show cleaner line quality, better pencil control, and more accurate joining of lines.

These changes in drawing are not the goal of TDT’s programs, they are a by-product of the real goal, which is neurological reorganisation at the foundational levels of the Taylor & Trott Pyramid of Learning. But they are some of the most tangible, visual evidence of that reorganisation that we have. This is why Emily is genuinely delighted when she sees growth in a child’s drawings, because the drawing is telling her that the brain is changing.

Drawing development is one of the clearest visible indicators of neurological progress, which is why TDT uses it at both the beginning and the end of assessment periods. When families see the two drawings side by side, the evidence of change is often profoundly moving. This is what progress looks like before it becomes fully visible in the classroom.

A Real Before-and-After: What Nine Months of Progress Looks Like

The following case study illustrates what drawing development tells us about neurological change. Details are shared with consent, and the drawings are those of the same child nine months apart.

The First Drawing — Age 7 Years 4 Months

At initial assessment, a 7-year-4-month-old boy was asked to draw his best picture of a person. His drawing showed:

• No hair
• No hands
• No feet
• A simplistic face with no pupils and no teeth
• Buttons on the shirt, an unusual detail to include while omitting hands and feet, suggesting that the visual attention system was catching small familiar details while missing the larger structural elements

Based on the Goodenough developmental scoring, his drawing placed at a developmental age of 5 years 9 months, approximately 19 months below his chronological age. This gap is clinically significant. It tells us that the visual perception, working memory, and fine motor foundations that support this level of representational drawing are not yet organised at an age-appropriate level, and that the same foundations are very likely affecting his reading, writing, and learning in the classroom.

The Second Drawing, Nine Months Later

Nine months into his neuroplasticity and reflex integration program with Emily, the same child was asked to draw a person again.

This drawing included:

• Eyelashes
• Pupils in the eyes
• Teeth
• Hands, drawn without any prompting
• Feet
• Note: arms needed to be prompted, he had not yet included them independently, though he drew hands spontaneously once reminded

Based on Goodenough scoring, his drawing now placed at a developmental age of 6 years 9 months, a gain of twelve developmental months in nine calendar months of therapy, while his programs were still ongoing.

What does this mean? In nine months of targeted neuroplasticity and reflex integration work, the foundational neural connections that support visual representation, working memory for body parts, fine motor control, and perceptual organisation had strengthened measurably. The drawing did not get better because he practised drawing. It got better because his brain got better, and the drawing is showing us that.

This is the power of working from the bottom up. The drawing improvement is not the therapeutic goal. It is the evidence that the therapeutic goal — stronger foundational neural organisation — is being achieved. The improvements families will notice in the classroom, at home, and in daily life are built on exactly this kind of foundational change.

What to Watch for in Your Child’s Drawings

You do not need clinical training to observe meaningful things about your child’s drawing development. Here are some signs worth noting and discussing with TDT:

• Drawings of people that seem significantly simpler than those of same-age peers, particularly if body parts that most children their age include are consistently absent
• Very large heads relative to the body, or body parts drawn in unusual locations
• Consistent omission of the same features every time — no hands, no feet, no ears — regardless of reminding
• Significant difficulty holding the pencil, very tight grip, whole-hand grip, or switching hands during the drawing
• Turning the paper to avoid the hand crossing the middle of the page
• Signs of physical effort during drawing, held breath, tongue out, very tense posture, excessive wriggling
• Drawings that look like they have gone backwards compared to earlier drawings, suggesting a period of neurological reorganisation rather than regression

💡  Take photographs of your child’s drawings regularly — even just on your phone — and date them. A sequential record of drawing development over time is genuinely useful clinical information that helps therapists track neurological progress and identify the specific areas that are developing.

A drawing that seems to regress after a period of improvement is not always a bad sign. Neurological reorganisation can temporarily disrupt established patterns before new, better-organised ones emerge. If you notice this with your child, share it with Emily, context matters enormously in interpreting these changes.

How TDT Uses Drawing Assessment in Practice

The Draw-A-Person task is part of TDT’s comprehensive developmental assessment, one tool among many, used alongside reflex integration assessment, visual processing testing, auditory processing assessment, fine motor and gross motor observation, and detailed developmental history. Read more about TDT’s full assessment process in our post on how we learn and how TDT identifies the right starting point.

Drawing is used at intake and at regular intervals throughout a program to track progress. It is not the only measure of progress — families also report changes in behaviour, attention, reading, writing, emotional regulation, and daily living skills — but it is one of the most concrete, visual, and undeniable pieces of evidence available.

Emily explains drawing findings to families in plain language at the assessment review, what the developmental score means, what specific observations were made, and what they predict about the child’s experience of learning tasks. She also explains what to watch for in future drawings and what changes will signal that the foundational work is progressing.

Frequently Asked Questions

My child loves drawing but their drawings seem simple for their age. Should I be concerned?

It depends on the degree of simplicity and the child’s age. A moderate lag between chronological age and drawing developmental level is common and not necessarily cause for concern. A significant lag — as in the case study above, where a child’s drawing placed 19 months below their chronological age — is worth investigating. If you have a concern, a developmental drawing assessment as part of TDT’s broader evaluation will give you a clear picture of what the drawing is telling us about the child’s foundational development.

Can drawing ability be improved through drawing practice?

Some improvement, yes — but not the kind of fundamental change that reflects neurological development. A child who practises drawing every day will develop some improvement in their technique and their familiarity with the task. But the developmental progression from a tadpole figure to a fully proportioned person — the progression that the Goodenough scoring tracks — reflects the maturation of visual perception, working memory, and motor planning, not drawing practice. Those foundational capacities develop through the kind of neurological work TDT does, not through more drawing.

What if my child refuses to draw or says they cannot draw?

Reluctance or refusal to draw is itself clinically interesting information. Children who are aware that their drawings do not match what they intend — because their visual perception and motor planning are not yet aligned — often develop avoidance of drawing as a way of avoiding the frustration and embarrassment of the gap. This avoidance is not laziness or stubbornness. It is a self-protective response to a genuine difficulty. TDT handles this gently, using low-pressure, playful approaches to the assessment task and never making the child feel judged for the quality of their drawing.

How does drawing connect to reading and writing difficulties?

Very directly. The visual perception skills required to draw a person accurately — spatial relationships, form constancy, figure-ground discrimination — are the same skills required to distinguish between similar letters, hold words in visual memory for spelling, and track text accurately across a page. A child whose drawing shows significant visual perception difficulties is very likely experiencing visual processing challenges that are contributing to their reading and writing difficulties. Addressing the foundational visual processing through TDT’s programs benefits both the drawing and the literacy simultaneously.

Can TDT assess adults using the Draw-A-Person task?

Yes. The Goodenough assessment has adult norms, and the observations TDT makes about process — executive function, working memory, fine motor control, cognitive load — are equally relevant and meaningful for adult clients. Many adults who come to TDT for learning difficulties, executive function challenges, or visual processing difficulties are assessed with the Draw-A-Person task as part of their initial evaluation.

Want to know what your child’s drawings are telling us about their brain?

TDT’s comprehensive developmental assessment includes the Draw-A-Person evaluation alongside reflex integration testing, visual processing assessment, and more.

Book your free 30-minute phone consultation, available Mondays 3:30–4:30pm.

These Pictures were Drawn by the Same Child

Initially he has no hair, hands or feet. A simplistic face with no pupils or teeth, but with buttons on his shirt. The time of the drawing he was 7 years 4 months old. He scored – 5 years 9 months.

Just some 9 months later he produces a picture with eye lashes, pupils, teeth, hands and feet. Although he had to be reminded to draw arms. He drew the hands with no prompting. (He has not finished his therapies) He scored 6 years 9 months.