EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION REPORT - Web viewReading: (Subtest 1: Letter-Word ... Clinical Evaluation of...

U N I V E R S I T Y O F I L L I N O I S A T C H I C A G OEDUCATIONAL EVALUATION REPORT

Name: John SmithBirth Date: 05/02/2005Age: 10Grade: Completed 4thSchool: Rainbow SchoolPrimary Language: EnglishDates of Examination: 6/24/15, 7/2/15, 7/9/15Examiners: Elizabeth, Bluma, LindseySupervisor: Kary Zarate, M.EdClinic Director: Norma A. Lopez-Reyna, Ph.D.

REASON FOR ASSESSMENT

John was referred to the UIC Educational Assessment Clinic by his mother, Mrs.

Smith. She was concerned about his memory with regard to his academics and his daily

routines. Mrs. Smith was also concerned about John’s executive functioning, specifically

his organizational skills. Other concerns included his disinterest in reading and difficulty

with math and writing. From this assessment, she hoped to uncover the underlying causes

in his below average academic performance and find ways to support John toward being

more confident.

ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENTS

Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Cognitive Abilities (WJ-Cog)

Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (WJ-Ach) Selected Subtests:

Reading: (Subtest 1: Letter-Word Identification, Subtest 4: Passage

Comprehension, Subtest 7: Word Attack, Subtest 8: Oral Reading, Subtest 9:

Sentence Reading Fluency, Subtest 12: Reading Recall, Subtest 15: Word

Reading Fluency, Subtest 17: Reading Vocabulary);

Writing (Subtest 3: Spelling, Subtest 6: Writing Samples, Subtest 11:

Sentence Writing Fluency, Subtest 14: Editing, Subtest 16: Spelling of

Sounds);

UIC Assessment Clinic (312) 996-8137

1

Math (Subtest 2:Applied Problems, Subtest 5: Calculation, Subtest 10: Math

Facts Fluency, Subtest 13: Number Matrices);

Key Math 3-Diagnostic Assessment- Form A

Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-Fourth Edition (CELF-5)

Selected subtests: Word Classes, Formulated Sentences, Recalling Sentences,

Semantic Relationships, Following Directions, Sentence Assembly,

Understanding Spoken Paragraphs, Word Definitions,

The Slingerland Screening Tests for Identifying Children with Specific Language

Disability – Form C

Informal Reading Inventory: Flynt/Cooter Comprehensive Reading Inventory-2 nd

Edition

Conners Rating Scales-3 rd Edition : Long Version (Parent and Self-Report Forms)

School Motivation and Learning Strategies Inventory- Child Form (SMALSI)

Dynamic Math Assessment

DEVELOPMENTAL AND BACKGROUND HISTORY

An interview was conducted on June 18, 2015 with John’s mother, Mrs. Smith.

John was a ten year-old male who had just completed the fourth grade. He lived with his

mother, father, and younger sister in the Bronzeville neighborhood of Chicago. John’s

mother was working in education and his father had a career in technology as a chief

information officer. John was not receiving any additional in-school or out-of-school

academic services. He enjoyed a variety of activities including knitting, biking and

skateboarding, and helping his mother in the kitchen.

Birth/ Development History

Mrs. Smith reported a typical pregnancy with John and he was born at 41 weeks,

5 days and delivered by Cesarean section. He spent 3 days in the NICU after birth to be

observed for infection, but there were no significant problems. She said John reached all

his developmental milestones on time. John was left handed, but did some tasks with his

right hand.


2

Medical History

Mrs. Smith reported that between John's 5th and 6th month he began developing

upper respiratory issues. At 18 months, John was taken to the hospital and treated with

left-lung pneumonia. Throughout his infancy and toddler years John contracted a number

of ear infections and flu-like colds. According to Mrs. Smith, when John was 4 years old

he was diagnosed with a number of allergies including ragweed, pollen, mold, and

penicillin. Since this diagnosis John took Claritin regularly to control his daily allergies.

At age 7, hearing tests showed John had low-admittance hearing, and at age 9, tubes were

surgically inserted into his ears. Mrs. Smith reported that John was not adversely affected

by busy rooms, loud noises or transitions. John's current health was excellent, with mild

illnesses occurring only about once a year. John was very physical and athletic, and

participated in many sports

Language Development/Languages Spoken

Mrs. Smith reported that English was spoken at home and John had no noted

problems with language. He had achieved all language development milestones on time..

She said that John was talkative, and would readily ask for explanations when he

didn’t understand something. Mom reported that he began taking lessons in Spanish and

Mandarin at a young age, and was conversational in both. He played the viola as well.

Social-Emotional Development

Mrs. Smith reported that John was very social, with a core group of four friends

that he played with since toddlerhood, and that he mostly engaged in group play. She said

that he was very sensitive and emotionally aware of those around him and he generally

preferred interacting with children over adults. He was also emotionally immature for his

age and cried often; particularly when he had to make decisions. She thought this was

related to an inability to express his wants and needs. Mrs. Smith expressed the desire for

John to be more confident in himself with regard to expressing his wants and needs as

well as helping him matriculate through his educational experience.

Educational History

Mrs. Smith’s reported that John attended Mommy-and-Me classes from birth until

he entered preschool. John entered preschool at Chicago Jewish Day School in Chicago,

Illinois. During this time, Mrs. Smith reported observing that John was the youngest in


3

his class and that he was an early reader; he began reading at 5.5 years. His kindergarten

and 1st grade years were spent at Sunshine School in Chicago, Illinois. Mrs. Smith

reported that no academic issues were reported during this time. However, Mrs. Smith

believed that the culture of Sunshine School was too reliant on standardized testing and

the environment too intense for John. Therefore, 2 months into John's 2nd grade year, he

moved from Walt Disney School to Rainbow School in Chicago, Illinois. John has

remained at Rainbow School up to his recent completion of the 4th grade. Midway

through John's 3rd grade year at Rainbow School , Mrs. Smith’s believed John's

academic performance was not at grade level. During this time, Mrs. Smith sought

tutoring and intervention strategies through Kumon Math & Reading Centers of Chicago,

specifically for math. Mrs. Smith reported that these interventions had little effect on

John's school performance. She also said that at about 3rd grade, she began to notice that

John’s memories of events seemed immature and under-developed for his age. He

sometimes had a hard time remembering even routine things, such as taking his allergy

medication.

Typical Routines

John’s typical day began at 5:30 a.m. He was an early riser and would have

breakfast and spend his mornings on the computer. He woke his younger sister every

morning for school. He would attend school during the day and come home in the

afternoon to a variety of activities including Kung Fu as well as bike riding and

skateboarding. The Waldorf School had a low level of homework outside of the school

setting, so there was no regular homework routine in place for John as well as no

designated place for doing homework. John enjoyed helping his mother in the kitchen

and would assist in dinner preparations. Bedtime was after dinner, at 7:30 p.m.

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS

At the time of this assessment, John was on summer vacation and school

observations could not occur. However, an interview with John’s teacher, Ms. S, took

place on June 26, 2015 over the phone. Ms. S was John's 2nd through 4th grade teacher.

She reported that John was well liked by his peers. Additionally, she had no concerns

regarding fighting, teasing, or upsetting any of his classmates. John socialized with both

males and females in the class, but was more drawn to conversing with male peers.


4

According to Ms. S, John had a number of strengths and needs across the subjects

of reading, math, writing, and art. Ms. S stated that John was a naturally good speller and

a fast reader. She reported that John’s end of 4th grade assessments showed that he could

read orally at entry-level 6th grade. However, his scores were below a 4th grade level in

reading comprehension. Math scores from John's 4th grade year reflect academic

performance at least one year behind his current grade. During an end of year math

assessment John scored 9/40 on a comprehensive exam, which Ms. S reported to be one

of the lowest in the class.

Ms. S also noted that John was most enthusiastic about art, music, and writing

during the school day. However, his fine motor skills often made the tasks required for

these classes difficult for him. Ms. S mentioned that this could be due to the fact that

John wrote with his left hand, but played instruments and sports with his right hand.

Often John was seen trying new tasks with both hands before he became comfortable

with one. Mrs. Smith emphasized that John is very coordinated and is involved with

activities such as viola and sports, and that his fine motor skills are average for his age.

Ms. S believed that John was a visual learner. She incorporated accommodations

in the classroom to all students by providing pictures, lists, and guides for instruction

throughout the school day. She stated concern for John's auditory processing and

memory, specifically when following multi-step auditory directions.

Throughout testing at the UIC assessment clinic John was attentive, engaged, and

cooperative. He did not appear to use any learning strategies during testing; such as

finger counting or self-talk. On several occasions he struggled with waiting to hear all of

the directions of the activity and began providing responses while the administrator was

still speaking. He would make eye contact with the administrator when he was not sure of

an answer.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONFor purposes of interpretation of the norm-referenced test scores, the following scales

were used.


5

Scaled Scores ( =10, S=3)

………..4…..………….7………….…10………..…...13………..…….16……….. Significantly Below Average Above Significantly Below Average Average Average Above Average

Standard Scores ( =100, S=15)

………..70…..………….85…….……..100………….....115……..…….130……….. Significantly Below Average Above Significantly Below Average Average Average Above Average

T-Scores ( =50, S=10)

……30……..…….….40………….....…50……………......60..……….…….70……….

Significantly Below Average Above Significantly Below Average Average Average Above Average

COGNITIVE PROCESSING

The Woodcock Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities IV (WJ-Cog) is a

standardized norm-referenced assessment battery that contains 18 subtests that measure

numerous cognitive functions involved with the learning process. The subtests were

combined into clusters to interpret the test results that ranked John’s strengths and needs

through the use of standard score guidelines. On each subtest, the task gradually

increased in difficulty. John’s scores were compared to the norms for individuals in his

grade (4.9) and reported as standard scores.

Woodcock Johnson-IV Test of Cognitive Abilities (CHC Factor Clusters):

Comprehension Knowledge: assessed the breadth and depth of vocabulary knowledge, including the ability to reason using vocabulary and communicate one’s knowledge. John received a standard score of 71, which was below average.

Subtest Analysis of Performance Standard

Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 1: Oral VocabularyComprised of two tasks that measuring acquired word knowledge. 1A. Synonyms presented the student with a word and asked to provide another word that meant the same thing. 1B. Antonyms required the

John had some difficulty with this task, particularly understanding the expectations of the task. He correctly responded with “grass” for a synonym of lawn and “subtract” as an antonym for add. Often he was on topic, describing the answer without providing a specific one-word response. For example, when asked to provide a synonym for attempt, he inaccurately said, “do something”.

73 Below Average


6

student to state a word that meant the opposite of the presented word. Subtest 8: General Information Comprised of two tasks measuring the depth of general verbal knowledge. 8A. Where. Asked the student where things could be found. 8B. What. Asked the student what particular objects are used for.

John was able to provide answers for some questions; for example when asked, where would you usually find freckles, he successfully responded, “face”. However, often his answers were close but not specific enough to be correct; for example to where would you usually find hooves he responded incorrectly with “feet”, when the correct answer was horse and what would you usually do with a compass he responded incorrectly with “in your your hand”, when the correct answer was find direction. Also when asked, what would people usually do with an umbrella? John said, “go under it”, which was not specific enough as the correct answer was protect from rain.

75 Below Average

Fluid Reasoning: two subtests measured the ability to reason, form concepts, and solve problems using unfamiliar information or novel procedures. Both subtests required multi-step, comparison and problem solving. John earned a standard score of 66, which was significantly below average. An additional subtest was combined with the previous two subtests to create a Fluid Reasoning-Extended score; John received a standard score of 66, which was significantly below average.


Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 2: Number SeriesA measure of quantitative reasoning and inductive reasoning, the student is presented with a series of numbers with one number missing the series and directed to solve for the missing number.

John was directed to tell the administrator the number that belonged in the empty box. He began to struggle when the series of numbers increased from 4 to 5 and the number items increased. For example he incorrectly answered 33, 37, 41, __, with “32”.

80 Below Average

Subtest 9: Concept FormationA measure of inductive reasoning and executive processing. The student was presented with a series of shapes (circles or squares) that differed in color (red or yellow) or size (large or small). One or more of the shapes was

John struggled when he was required to identify the rule that placed a certain shape in the box. Throughout this task he required repeated corrective feedback and continued to struggle to understand the expectations of the task. For example; if the rule was that the shape in the box was just one, he described all of the information that he could, naming the shape, size, and color. On another item

62 Significantly Below

Average


7

placed in a box. The student was required to identify the rule or the reason why the figure was placed in the box. This was a learning task, which provided immediate feedback regarding the correctness of each response before a new item was presented.

where the answer was big, he described as much as he could; saying, “circle and square”.

Extended Cluster also includes Subtest 15Subtest 15: Analysis-SynthesisTo measure deductive reasoning, this test required the student to reason and draw conclusions. Instructions described how to work puzzles with colored squares by using the key presented on every page to fill in the missing parts of the puzzles. Again, a learning task that provided immediate feedback regarding the correctness of each response before a new item was presented.

Although John performed in the average range and was able to solve single-step tasks, he needed repeated directions. Additionally, when John was required to solve multi-step tasks he had more difficulty and appeared discouraged.

96 Average

Long Term Retrieval: measured the ability to store information and easily retrieve it at a later time. John obtained a standard score of 109, which was average.


Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 6: Story RecallMeasured meaningful memory and some aspects of oral language development. The student listened to a passage presented from the audio recording, then was asked to retell as many details from the story that he or she could remember.

When presented with passages of various lengths, John produced 7 out of 8 possible elements on 2 of the medium length passages he heard. For example, in a passage about children blowing candy bubbles in the park, John missed recalling only 1 of the 8 elements. On the lengthiest story recall, he was able to produce 10 out of 17 elements.

107 Average

Subtest 13: Visual-Auditory LearningMeasured associative memory, or the ability to learn, store, and retrieve a series of various images that symbolized words.

John was able to successfully read the following sentence using the symbols to represent words: “Bob and Jeff are riding on black horses. They saw the white house under the green trees. They are not going by the house.” He made 12 errors

107 Average


8

The examiner pointed to each picture as it was introduced, stated the word it symbolized, and orally repeated the word. The child was required to read each of the short stories by recalling the words each of the images represented. As the stories progressed more symbols were presented.

out of a possible 109 on this subtest.

Visual Processing: assessed the ability to perceive, analyze, synthesize, and think with visual patterns, including the ability to store and recall visual representations. John obtained a standard score of 93, which was in the average range.


Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 7: VisualizationMeasured the ability to visualize spatial relationships across two tasks. During 7A Spatial Relations, the student was required to identify two or three pieces of a puzzle that could be combined to form the whole piece, which was presented. During 7B Block Rotation, the student was required to identify the two block patterns that match the target pattern. As the items progressed the number of pieces required to form the shapes increased.

On two dimensional puzzles, John correctly identified up to three pieces that created the entire puzzle. However, he struggled on the more intricate, curvy puzzles with three pieces. On three dimensional puzzles, he was able to give answers very quickly and smiled as he successfully solved puzzles before directions were complete. Initially, John correctly identified the two rotations of the block pattern but struggled as the number of pieces required to form the shapes increased.

92 Average

Subtest 14: Picture RecognitionMeasured visual memory of images. For example, the student was presented with an image of a maple leaf and was asked to remember it; then when presented with the original image among new images and had to select the original image. Each test item was composed of 1-4 images to identify.

John performed best on items with very different patterns. For example, he correctly identified 3 images of adult and children faces. He began having difficulty when he was required to recall 3 or more images that were more intricate and similar in design; for example attempting to recall 4 similar hat designs in a field of 7 hats.

96 Average

Auditory Processing: measured her ability to encode, synthesize, and discriminate auditory stimuli. As a combined score, John obtained a standard score of 94, which was average.


Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 5: Phonological

5A. John was able to identify and name words that began with the instructed sound. However, when the instructions shifted to applying the sounds in the end

74 Below Average


9

ProcessingMeasured speed of lexical access across three tasks. 5A Word Access required the student to provide a word that has a specific phonemic element in a specific location. 5B Word Fluency required the student to name as many words as possible in 1-minute that begin with a specific sound (/d/ and /m/). 5C Substitution required the student to substitute part of a word to create a new word.

of a word, John did not correctly identify any word. For example, when the audio said tell me a word that ends with the /r/ sound. /r/, John's response was, "rat". John also had some difficulty applying sounds to the middle of words, the words he did list had the same letters in the beginning as they did in the middle. For example, when he was instructed tell me a word that has the /m/ sound in the middle of the word. /m/, John responded with “mimic”. The same was done for the /g/ sound with “gurgle”. 5B. John was given one minute to name as many words as possible that began with a specified sound. Within the given time, John correctly identified 6 words that began with the /m/ sound, and 6 words that began with the /d/ sound. Each time John was able to immediately list 3 words and then struggled to think of more. He often repeated words and sample items. 5C. In the beginning, John was able to substitute specific parts of words with given sounds to create new words. For example, he was told change /p/ in pan to /k/ and successfully said, "can". It was observed that he quickly lost focus and was seen yawning and rubbing his eyes. John struggled more when substitutions occurred in the middle or end of the word. For example, when he was instructed change the /p/ in sip to /t/ his response was, "tip".

Subtest 12: Nonword RepetitionMeasured phonological short-term memory. The task required the student to listen to a nonsense word and then repeat the word exactly. The words increase in difficulty as the number of syllables increases.

John was able to listen to nonsense words and repeat them aloud to the examiner. When presented with the words, John correctly and quickly restated words with 1 to 5 syllables, moving from "marg" to "promiventatious" without error. However, when the words became longer and contained more complex syllable blends John struggled. For example, John could not correctly repeat the words "inexculpiatory", "transinvationistical", or "vogalamicultry".

109 Average

Cognitive Processing Speed: measured the ability to quickly perform simple and complex tasks, under time constraints, while maintaining attention and concentration to tasks. John obtained a standard score of 100, which was average.


Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 4: Letter-Pattern MatchingSpecifically measured perceptual speed

John worked quickly and was able to work without any

98 Average


10

and visual information processing. In 3 minutes, the student located and circled two identical letters (beginning with single letters and progressing to triple) in each row of six options.

behavioral prompts. He worked without skipping any lines or rows. After the 3 minutes were up John stated that he, "didn't like" this subtest.

Subtest 17: Pair CancellationProvided information about processing, concentration, and the ability to perform a simple task in a specified amount of time. The student was presented with repeated pictures of a soccer ball, a puppy, and a coffee cup in 21 rows and was given 3 minutes to find and circle all combinations of the soccer ball followed by the puppy appeared.

John worked at a steady pace and was able to work without any behavioral prompts. He was observed working from left to right identifying identical patterns as he moved across the page. He smiled throughout the time he was given to complete the task.

102 Average

Short-Term Working Memory: measured the student’s working memory, using decontextualized, random information. John obtained a standard score of 91, which was in the average range. An additional subtest was combined with the previous two subtests to create a Short-Term Working Memory-Extended score; John received a standard score of 96, which was average.


Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 3: Verbal AttentionThis test assessed the ability to hold information (a mixed series of objects and numbers) in short-term memory, and then instructed to repeat only certain items from the list just heard. Items increased in difficulty by adding multiple objects and numbers (i.e., horse, 8, 2, sock).

John needed multiple repetitions for directions on this subtest. He struggled when the sequences grew to five and six items. For example, when he heard “Duck…3…6…pig….8” And was asked “Tell me the number before pig.” John said “8”

85 Low average

Subtest 10: Numbers ReversedPrimarily measured short-term memory span but could also be a measure of working memory. The task required holding several numbers (ranging from a series of 2 to 5 numbers) in immediate memory and orally repeating them in reverse order.

John was able to reverse numbers in sequences of two and three, but struggled to reverse numbers in a sequence of four. For example, given 9,5,7,2, he inaccurately said “9, 5, 2 and 7.”

100 Average

Extended cluster also includes subtest 16.Subtest 16: Object-Number SequenceThis test assessed the ability to hold information (a mixed series of objects and numbers) in short-term memory, divide it into two groups (objects first, then numbers in order), and shift attentional resources to say the two new

John was able accurately manipulate 5 items in a series, when presented with “4, orange, 1, bear,7,” correctly, by saying ”Orange, bear, 4,1,7.” But he struggled with the series of 6 items. For the sequence “7, snake, soup, 2,9, glove,”

105 Average


11

ordered sequences. The items began by presenting one object and one number (i.e., shoe, 6) that needed to be recalled and repeated and then items increased in difficulty by adding multiple objects and numbers (i.e., horse, 8, 2, sock).

John said “Cow, glove, soup, 1,6,2.”

Woodcock Johnson-III Test of Cognitive Abilities (Clinical Clusters):

The following five cluster score areas are clinical clusters that provide cognitive

processing information that is more directly linked to school-based eligibility criteria and

may be helpful when developing instructional plans and supports. Some of the subtests

utilized in forming these clusters have been previously discussed in the clusters listed

above.

Perceptual Speed: provided information about the ability to rapidly perform simple clerical tasks that use symbols, such as matching letters or numbers. Perceptual Speed is related to orthographic processing, an important ability for decoding and encoding. John received a combined standard score of 101, which was average.


Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 4: Letter-Pattern Matching Previously discussed. 98 AverageSubtest 11: Number-Pattern MatchingMeasured the speed at which an individual can make visual symbol discriminations. The student is asked to locate and draw a line through the two identical numbers in a row of six numbers. The difficulty increases as numbers increase from single-digits to triple-digits.

John worked quickly and was able to focus well to identify pairs of numbers in a row, and cross them out. He had 43 out of a possible 90 correct in the 3 minute time limit, which was within the average range.

104 Average

Quantitative Reasoning: provided information regarding the ability to reason inductively and deductively with numbers, mathematical relations, and operators. John received a combined cluster standard score of 85, which was low average.


Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 2: Number Series Previously discussed. 80 Below Average

Subtest 15: Analysis- Previously discussed 96 Average


12

Synthesis

Supplemental Subtest:


Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 18: Memory for WordsMeasured short-term auditory memory. The student was asked to repeat lists of unrelated words in the correct sequence.

John was able to remember and repeat up to three words at a time. For example, when the audio said ride...clean...wish, John successfully and confidently said "ride, clean, wish" aloud. However, when the audio began listing sequences of four words, John could not recall the series of words exactly how they were presented to him. John would confuse the chronological order and/or substitute a given word for a new one. For instance, when given the words it...yellow...all...off, John replied with "hit, yellow, it, off". In this example, John placed the word it into the middle of the series and inserted the word "hit" in place of the word all. Also, for one attempt, John completely omitted a word from the series. This happened when he was given the series where...of...in...would, and John replied with "where, in, would".

78 Below Average

Cognitive Processing Summary:

John was a hard worker who could remain on task for long periods of time. His

long-term memory skills were strongest when receiving auditory information. He had a

relatively strong ability to recall information that he had listened to, such as a story or a

list of items. When visuals such as pictures or symbols were paired with auditory

information he was able to recall that information. Across tasks he was often descriptive,

but not specific enough to be correct, demonstrating word find issues. He regularly

struggled with transitioning to new or complex directions, typically requiring multiple

practice samples with a new task before understanding the expectations of that task. This

was particularly challenging for him while holding information in his short-term memory.

Also, utilizing vocabulary and general background knowledge to answer questions was

difficult for John. Phonological awareness was another area of concern; he struggled to

identify sounds in the middle and ends of words and to quickly recall words from his

memory that began with certain sounds. Problem solving presented itself as an area of


13

need, specifically his inductive reasoning skills. He struggled to follow multistep

directions and extract necessary information to solve problems. Overall, it was apparent

that he could recall details but struggled with synthesizing and manipulating information.

Language

The Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-5 th Edition (CELF-5)

consisted of the administration of a variety of subtests that assessed both expressive (oral)

and receptive (comprehension) language, through semantics (word meanings),

morphology and syntax (word and sentence structure), and memory (recall and retrieval

of spoken language). John’s performance on these subtests was recorded, scored, and

then interpreted according to his age, 10. The index scores derived within the CELF-5

provide information about a student’s general performance abilities in the areas of core

language, expressive language, and receptive language.

Core Language Score : The Core Language score is typically used to make decisions about the presence or absence of a language disorder. For the Core Language Cluster, John received a standard score of 89 and a percentile rank of 23, which was average.

Subtest Analysis of Performance Scaled Score( =10, S=3)

Interpretation

Word Classes (WC)Measured the ability to understand relationships between words based on semantic class features, function, or place or time of occurrence. The child was asked to identify two words that were related in a series of 3 to 4 words.

John was able to correctly identify two related words, letters or numbers when shown groups of three or four images. For example, shown images for “C, 3, ,M, and check,” He was able to correctly identify “C” and “M” as related. As the related words became more challenging, and images were no longer presented, John had more difficulty. For example, in the group ”Silent, quiet, gentle and tired,.” John thought “silent” and “tired” were related. The correct answer was silent” and quiet.

9 Average

Formulated Sentences (FS)Measured the ability to formulate complete, semantically and grammatically correct spoken sentences of increasing length and complexity (i.e., simple, compound, and complex sentences), using given words (e.g., car, if, because), and contextual constraints

When presented with an image and a related word, and asked to formulate a sentence, John struggled; initially, he seemed to have difficulty with understanding the task. For example, for the first item, when shown an image of three children on a stage and asked to use the word “best” to explain the picture, He incorrectly stated “They all got best rewards.” As the test progressed, he demonstrated a better understanding of the task, and was able to produce appropriate sentences. For example, when given the

6 Below average


14

imposed by illustrations. target word “because” John said “There’s a lot of traffic, because there is a lot of cars.” However, his sentences were often unclear: his thoughts were not synthesized. For example, when given the target word “unless,” he said “Unless I’m done finishing my homework, I can go play with my friends.”

Recalling Sentences (RS)Measured the ability to listen to spoken sentences of increasing length and complexity, and repeat the sentences without changing word meaning and content, word structure (morphology), or sentence structure (syntax).

John was able to listen to spoken sentences of increasing length and complexity, and repeat them. For example, he accurately repeated, “The student who won the award at the art show was very excited.” He was not able to repeat “The students collected and repaired the toys and sold them at the fair.” Instead he said “The kids collected and sold toys at the fair.”

10 Average

Semantic Relationships (SR)Measured the ability to interpret sentences that make comparisons, identify location or directions, specify time relationships, include serial order, or are expressed in a passive voice by choosing two options out of a series of four related to spoken sentence.

In this subtest, John was able to understand the required task of comparing four items and identifying two that satisfied the given question. For example when asked “The dog sat under the table next to the cat. The food was in a dish on the table. The food was,” John was able to identify the correct locations “above the cat,” and “on the table.” However, when given the statement, “A quarter past three is,” John was not able to identify both correct responses, saying “exactly 3:15” and “after 3:25.” The correct responses were exactly 3:15 and before 3:35.

8 Average

Receptive Language Index : Measured listening skills and auditory comprehension. John received a standard score of 91 and a percentile rank of 27, which were average.

Subtest Analysis of Performance Scaled

Score (=10, S=3)

Interpretation

Word Classes (WC) Discussed previously 9 AverageFollowing Directions (FD)Measured the ability to interpret spoken directions of increasing length and complexity, follow the order of familiar shapes with varying characteristics, and identify from among several choices the pictured object that was mentioned.

In this task of interpreting spoken directions of increasing length and complexity, John was able to correctly respond to the request, ”Before pointing to the last square, point to the first circle and the first X.” However, as the task complexity increased, John had more difficulty. For example, he did not respond correctly when asked “Before you point to the square on the left side of the circle, point to the triangle and the X.”

9 Average

Semantic Relationships Discussed previously 8 Average


15

Expressive Language Index : Measured the ability to produce language. John received a standard score of 85 and a percentile rank of 16, which were low average.


Score (=10, S=3)

Interpretation

Formulated Sentences (FS) Discussed previously 6 Below Average

Recalling Sentences (RS) Discussed previously 10 Average Sentence Assembly (SA)Measured the ability to formulate grammatically acceptable and semantically meaningful sentences by manipulating and transforming given words and groups. The child was shown a set of words or phrases in mixed order and asked to create two sentences from these.

In this task of manipulating and transforming given word groups, John was able to provide the semantically correct responses in the first few items. For example, given the phrases, “the man, the dog, followed by, and was,” John was able to provide the two correct sentences required; “The man was followed by the dog,” and “The dog was followed by the man.” However he soon began to struggle; when given the phrases “She got, she bought, the job, the car, and after,” he incorrectly formed the sentences, “She bought the job,” and “After the job she got she got the car.”

7 Low Average

Language Content Index: Measured the depth of vocabulary and ability to use words. John received a standard score of 93 and a percentile rank of 32, which were average.


Score (=10, S=3)

Interpretation

Word Classes (WC) Discussed previously 9 Average

Understanding Spoken Paragraphs (USP)Measured the ability to sustain attention and focus while listening to spoken paragraphs of increasing length and complexity while creating meaning from oral narratives. The child was asked to listen to a spoken paragraph and use critical thinking strategies to interpret beyond the given information, make inferences and predications, and recall main idea, facts and details.

John was able to sustain attention and answer questions about the content given in spoken paragraphs. He was able to demonstrate his memory for facts and his ability to think critically. He struggled with providing the main idea in two of the three paragraphs that he heard. For example, when asked “What is this story about?” John incorrectly stated “A new house.” The correct answer was “ A boy watching his principal’s house being built.”

9 Average

Word Definitions (WD)Measured the ability to analyze words for their meaning and define words by relationship. The child was asked to give a detailed

In this task of providing definitions, and classes of, or concepts related to, words, John demonstrated his understanding of words such as “award, trophy and decade.” He

9 Average


16

definition for words. could not provide clear definitions of words such as “souvenir,” defining it as “A toy, or something from a state or country.” or “committee,” which he defined as “Solving problems.”

Language Memory Index: Measured the ability to remember language. John received a standard score of 89 and a percentile rank of 23, which were average.

Subtest Analysis of Performance

Scaled Score ( =10, S=3)

Interpretation

Following Directions (FD) Discussed previously

9 Average

Formulated Sentences (FS) Discussed previously 6 Below AverageRecalling Sentences (RS) Discussed previously 10 Average

Language Summary:

Across language tasks, John was co-operative, seemed eager to do his best work,

and was able to stay on given tasks for extended periods. Overall, he performed mostly

within the average range on this group of task. He could retain fairly detailed

information, but had a difficult time synthesizing and inferring information. His greatest

relative strength was his ability to recall and repeat information that required no mental

manipulation beyond holding it in short term memory and then providing it when

prompted. He performed best when required to hear, remember, and then answer factual

questions about what he heard; when presented with inferential questions, he had more

difficulty. John struggled when a new task required him to formulate his own ideas or

create meaningful sentences. Specifically, he performed below average when asked to

use information to complete a succinct thought.

Reading

The Woodcock Johnson-IV Tests of Achievement (WJ-Ach) is a standardized

norm-referenced measure of isolated reading skills such as decoding, reading speed, and

reading comprehension. The student’s performance was compared to the performance of

a nationally representative sample of students in the same grade, producing a standard

score. Five subtests on the WJ-Ach were combined to create two overall cluster scores.

Reading: measured overall reading achievement including reading decoding and reading comprehension. John received a Reading Cluster standard score of 92, which was average.

Subtest Analysis of Performance Standard Interpretation


17

Score( =100, S=15)

Subtest 1: Letter-Word IdentificationMeasured word identification skills, requiring the student to read letters and words.

John was able to fluently and correctly read a variety of words, such as knead, accustomed, and stamina. He had a difficult time reading more complex, multisyllabic vocabulary, such as scepter, municipality, and idiosyncrasy. These items were scored incorrectly as he did not read them fluently, but he did attempt to sound them out.

98 Average

Subtest 4: Passage ComprehensionMeasured the ability to read and comprehend a sentence or short passage and then identify a missing word that made contextual sense.

John was able to correctly identify missing words for sentences that had corresponding images; such as when shown a picture of a bird and given the sentence The bird ____ flying, John correctly said “is”. However, when given sentences without visual support, John began to have difficulty; for example, Do you have a slide in your back yard? If not, you can find one at a _____., with which John incorrectly responded “swing”.

84 Below Average

Broad Reading: measured reading decoding, fluency, and reading comprehension. John received a Broad Reading Cluster standard score of 95, which was average.

Subtest Analysis of Performance Standard Score Interpretation

Subtest 1: Letter-Word Identification

Previously discussed 98 Average

Subtest 4: Passage Comprehension

Previously discussed 84 Below Average

Subtest 9: Sentence Reading FluencyMeasured the speed and accuracy of reading and understanding simple sentences. The student was given 3-minutes to answer YES/NO to simple questions such as: A bug has wings.

John quickly and accurately answered 49 questions in three minutes. He accurately circled “no” when he read A boat can talk to a man and correctly circled “yes” when he read A fan may produce a breeze, which was an average performance.

99 Average

Basic Reading Skills: measured reading decoding, sight vocabulary, phonics, and structural analysis. John received a Basic Reading Skills Cluster standard score of 101, which was average.



18

Subtest 1: Letter-Word Identification


Subtest 7: Word AttackMeasured the application of phonics and structural analysis skills to pronounce unfamiliar printed words. The items required the student to read aloud letter combinations that were phonically consistent but not actual words in the English language. For example, /sp/ and tiff.

John was able to correctly read and pronounce a variety of nonsense words fluently including wugs and jox. He had difficulty pronouncing nonsense words with multiple syllables, such as intestationing and sylibemeter which he did not read fluently and were scored incorrectly, although he did attempt to sound them out.

106 Average

Reading Comprehension: through the administration of Subtest 4 and 12, measured reading comprehension, reasoning, and to a lesser extent, long-term retrieval abilities. John received a Reading Comprehension Cluster standard score of 89, which was average. Additionally, Subtest 17 was administered to determine the Reading Comprehension-Extended cluster score (which included all three subtests below) for which John received a standard score of 89, which was average.


Subtest 4: Passage Comprehension

Previously discussed 84 Below Average

Subtest 12: Reading RecallMeasured the ability to read a short story and immediately retell the details of the story. The student was directed to read the story and then retell it while the examiner marked the number of elements and target vocabulary recalled.

John was able to retell more elements at the beginning of the story than at the end. For example, he correctly recalled four elements in the first sentence of the story, in which the elements were sunny, morning, August, and Barb; On a sunny morning in August, Barb went out on her sailboat. At the end of the story, John struggled to retell the elements. For example, he correctly recalled only one element in the final sentence of the story, “shore”, in which there were three target elements; one, hour, and shore; One hour later, she was safely on shore.

100 Average

Subtest 17: Reading VocabularyMeasured the ability to read words and then provide synonyms or

John correctly provided synonyms and antonyms for words such as daddy, which he correctly responded to with “dad”, and easy, which he correctly responded to with “hard”. When asked to provide a synonym for restrain, he incorrectly responded with “more”. Similarly, when asked to provide an antonym for

90 Average


19

antonyms. follow, he incorrectly responded with “don’t”. Uncharacteristically, he provided no response to several items.

Reading Fluency: measured aspects of fluency including prosody, automaticity, and accuracy. John received a Reading Fluency cluster standard score of 99, which was average.


Subtest 8: Oral ReadingMeasured how well the student reads words in context. Given a short passage, the student was asked to read aloud and the oral reading errors were recorded.

John had few errors in the reading sections with shorter sentence structure and common vocabulary. For example, in the following sentence he had one repetition error; “The worker bees and drones are smaller smaller than the queen.” John struggled to correctly pronounce words in sentences with a longer sentence structure and advanced vocabulary. In the following sentence he omitted two words (are and that), mispronounced three words (migratory*, and, and concentrate*), and repeated one word (different); “Many beekeepers are migratory* so they can take the bees to different different locations an concentrate* the insects in areas that need pollination.”

98 Average

Subtest 9: Sentence Reading Fluency


Reading Rate: measured automaticity with reading at the single-word and sentence levels. John received a Reading Rate cluster standard score of 97, which was average.


Subtest 9: Sentence Reading Fluency


Subtest 15: Word Reading FluencyMeasured the speed and accuracy of reading and interpreting words at the word-level. The student was given 3-minutes to mark the two words in a row of four words that go together. For example, the student was shown: dog shoe car puppy; and expected to mark dog and puppy.

John correctly identified words that went together in lists such as fire, tiger, boot, lion, correctly marking “tiger” and “lion” as well as apple, ring, hat, banana, correctly marking “apple” and “banana”. He incorrectly marked “bus” and “sat” in the list car, bus, sat, cut.

95 Average


20

The Flynt/Cooter Comprehensive Reading Inventory for the Classroom

(CRI) was administered to determine the levels of reading John could decode and

comprehend with and without assistance within the context of reading passages. An

informal reading inventory (IRI) is a standardized criterion-referenced measure that

compares the reading skills of the student according to expected grade level abilities,

producing grade level performances. During this IRI, Sentences for Initial Passage

selection were administered (lists of 3 sentences at each grade level that John read) as

well as Leveled Reading Passages (short stories accompanied by comprehension

questions).

The examiner administered the Sentences for Initial Passage Selection beginning

at Level 1 The primary function of these sentence lists was to indicate the level at which

the graded passages should be administered to John. The highest level at which John

read the sentences with one or zero errors determined the starting point for administering

the reading passages. Through the administration of the 5 grade level sets of sentences,

John read the sentences as follows (words read incorrectly are italicized, words inserted

are in parenthesis): 1 (no errors) 2 (1 error) 3 (no errors)He wanted to fly. I was walking to town. The forest was something to see.

The family got together. She cried about going home. I was enjoying sleeping when my Mom called.

The boy was jumping. I was pulled out of (a) hole. I had to go to bed early last night.

4 (2 errors) 5*I dislike being the youngest. Athletic shoes come in all kinds of colors.I’m always getting into trouble Serious players manage to practice a lot.They insisted on watching the show daily. A cheap pair of shoes doesn’t last very long.

* John read level 5, because the section was on the same page as the other levels; it was not part of the actual administration. Although he read level 5 without error, level 3 was used as the starting point because he made two errors in level 4.

When administered the CRI graded sentences, John made no errors at the first

grade level. He made one error at the second grade level, inserting a word. In the third

grade level he made no errors. Level four was the level at which administration stopped


21

as he made two errors in this section. The starting point for the reading passages was

Level 3 in which he read the sentences with no errors.

The reading passages were taken from Form A (Narrative stories) of this CRI,

which typically tell a fictional story. There was one picture at the top of each passage.

John was first provided with a sentence that established some background knowledge

related to the passage then asked to read the passages silently. Once finished reading, he

was first asked to retell the story and then answered comprehension questions that were

not addressed during his retell. Finally, he was asked to read the passage again orally in

order to record his word reading accuracy. Therefore, his silent reading level represented

his reading comprehension or his ability to understand the text while his oral reading

level represented his word reading accuracy (fluency).

Authentic Reading Ability on the CRI Reading PassagesTask Analysis

Oral Reading FluencyWord Reading (decoding) Level Accuracy

Oral Reading fluency is the speed and accuracy of reading words in a passage aloud; both aspects of reading can impact how well an individual comprehends what is read. The instructional reading level is the level of reading materials that the student can read in the classroom and the independent reading level is the grade level material he should be reading independently at home or in the classroom. John’s independent word reading level was level four, which was his grade level. He did not have an instructional word reading level, as he went straight from independent reading level (four) to frustration level (five).

The accuracy of reading words can impact an individual’s ability to read and comprehend with success. John had only two errors in the 100-word reading sample at his independent level (four). The errors were one omission and one mispronunciation. At the next level, his frustration level (five), he had a total of eight errors; four omissions, three substitutions, and one mispronunciation.

Reading ComprehensionComprehension level Accuracy

Reading comprehension is measured by the student’s ability to retell a story and answer specific questions about the passage. The CRI required the student to read narrative. The student’s reading instructional comprehension level (silent reading level) or ability to comprehend texts that are just a bit challenging (instructional comprehension level) is the level he

After silently reading the passages, the examiner asked the student to retell the story and then answer eight comprehension questions about the passage’s main idea, detail, sequence, vocabulary, cause and effect, and inference. At his independent reading comprehension level, he was able to correctly recall all the elements of the story, with and without


22

should be reading when provided some support. John’s independent reading comprehension level was level four, which was his grade level. He did not have an instructional reading comprehension level, as he went straight from independent reading level (four) to frustration level (five).

prompting, accept one element, which was an evaluative element; What would be some words, other than “proud”, that would describe how Bobby felt on the first day of school?. At his frustration level, he recalled only three elements correctly, with prompting. These three elements were related to the setting and the problems in the story. He could not recall details for five elements, even with prompting. It should be noted that throughout this level he was able to recall a variety of details from the text, for example the names of the shoes; yet he was not able to recall themes and inferential elements related to the story.

Comprehensive Reading Inventory (CRI)Authentic Reading Levels

Narrative TextsSILENT

Reading ComprehensionORAL

Word Reading Fluency

Independent 4 4

Instructional NA NA

Frustration 5 5

Reading Summary:

John remained on task throughout the entire reading assessment. His performance

demonstrated that he was in the average range for all but one area of reading and that he

was reading and understanding text at his grade level; grade 4. He was able to

comprehend a variety of questions related to story setting, characterization, problem

resolution, and literal questions. When reading authentic text, such as a story, out loud,

his performance reflected his grade level abilities. He read the text fluently, with few

errors, at an appropriate rate. He had a relatively strong ability to apply phonics rules to

pronounce nonsense words. John struggled to fill in the blank of a sentence or passage

with a word that made sense when he was not given a picture or word bank. Overall, it

was apparent that his reading abilities were not an area of great concern, based on his

performance.

Writing


23

The Woodcock Johnson-III Tests of Achievement (WJ-Ach) is a standardized

norm-referenced measure of isolated writing skills such as spelling, writing speed,

grammar, and written expression. The student’s performance was compared to the

performance of a nationally representative sample of students in the same grade,

producing a standard score. Six subtests on the WJ-Ach were combined to create three

overall writing cluster scores.

Written Language: provided an overall measure of writing achievement, including spelling of single words and quality of expression. For this cluster John received a 99, which was average.


Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 3: SpellingMeasured the ability to write orally presented words correctly.

This task was a standard spelling test, where John heard words said aloud and had to write them. He was able to quickly and confidently spell such words as “league, skiing” and “vacation.” However he spelled “gymnasium” incorrectly as “janasum,” and “enthusiastic” incorrectly as “inthusiastic.”

94 Average

Subtest 6: Writing SamplesMeasured the ability to answer questions by writing sentences that gave specifically requested information.

In this task of writing sentences given a picture and a target word, or just a target word, most of John’s sentences were adequate, and not very embellished. Given the word “rainbow,” he wrote, “A rainbow has a lot of colors.”

94 Average

Supplemental subtests to provide further information on these skills.Subtest 16: Spelling of SoundsMeasured John’s phonological and orthographic coding skills through spelling.

This task required John to listen to nonsense words, repeat them aloud, and then write them. This was an area of relative strength for him. He was able to repeat and write the words “quib and cridge.” He was able to say, but not able to correctly write, the nonsense word “strotted;” he wrote “stroted.”

113 High average


24

Broad Written Language: provided another overall measure of writing achievement, including spelling of single words, fluency of production, quality of expression, and cognitive processing speed. For this cluster John received a standard score of 94, which was average.


Standard Score

( =100, S=15)Interpretation

Subtest 3: Spelling Discussed previously 104 AverageSubtest 6: Writing Samples Discussed previously 94 AverageSubtest 11: Sentence Writing FluencyMeasured the ability to write complete, reasonable sentences within a 5-minute time limit. When presented with three words and a picture, The student wrote short sentences about the picture using the three words that were given.

In this subtest, John wrote adequate, but not elaborate, sentences, given three target words and a picture. For example, given the words, “Boy, happy, and is,” and a picture of a boy, he wrote, ”The boy is happy.” However, given the target words “Fish, catch and can,”and a picture of a cat reaching into a fishbowl, he incorrectly wrote “The fish can catch.” His writing speed was also relatively slow.

80 Below Average

Basic Writing Skills: provided a measure of basic writing skills in both isolated and contextually based formats including spelling of single words; and identifying and correcting errors in punctuation, capitalization, spelling, and word usage. John received a standard score of 99, which was average.


Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 3: Spelling Discussed previously 104 AverageSubtest 14: EditingMeasured the ability to identify and

John was able to look at given sentences, and identify

93 Average


25

correct errors in a written passage. errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization and word usage. For example, given the sentences, Her dress had costed fifty dollars. It was the only blue one at the store.” He identified the error and provided the correct word, ”cost.” However, given the sentence “Fred is mad that you havent written to him in a long, long time,” he did not correctly identify the error, which was the missing apostrophe in “haven’t.”

Written Expression: provided a complete measure of the ability to express oneself in writing including meaningful written expression and fluency, and cognitive processing speed. John received a 87, which was average.


Standard Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 6: Writing Samples Discussed previously 94 AverageSubtest 11: Sentence Writing Fluency Discussed previously 80 Below average

Writing Summary:

John was able to stay on task throughout the writing assessments he was given.

Across tasks, his performance demonstrated that he was in the average range in most

areas. His ability to listen to and then spell nonsense words phonetically was relatively

strong. He demonstrated confidence and speed in this area, as well as in the spelling

assessment. John had more difficulty with producing original sentences, which is a multi-

step process. When required to use given images and words to develop his own ideas, he

had more difficulty holding the information in his head and then manipulating it to form

descriptive sentences. Overall, John demonstrated his writing ability to be in the average

range.

Math

The Woodcock Johnson-IV Tests of Achievement (WJ-Ach). The WJ-Ach is a

standardized norm-referenced measure that combined individual math subtest scores to determine

overall performance in the areas of Broad Math, Math Calculation, and Math Reasoning. The


26

student’s score was compared to a nationally representative sample of students in his same grade

and reported as standard scores.

Broad Mathematics: Measured overall math achievement including problem solving, computational skills, number facility, automaticity, and cognitive processing speed. John received a standard score of 83, which was below average.


Standard Score

( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

Subtest 2: Applied ProblemsRequired the child to solve math word problems mentally or by using pencil and paper.

John was able to perform most problems that were accompanied by visual pictures. One concept that John struggled with, even with pictures present, was counting money. For instance, when given a picture of a nickel and five pennies, and asked to count how much money was shown, John had no response. After being prompted to just try he responded with “8”. Another question asked if… A candy bar costs fifty cents. How many quarters would you need to buy it? John responded with “5”, when the correct answer is 2. Once the visual representations were taken away and replaced with word problems, John began to struggle making correct calculations. For example, when he was given the problem Carrie has thirty-two comic books. She read eighteen of them. How many comic books does she still have left to read? John’s answer was “16” when the correct answer is 14. Overall, 6 out of the 7 questions John answered incorrectly were problems that were not accompanied by visuals. During this time John did not use the provided paper and pencil to work out the problems.

74 Below Average

Subtest 5: CalculationMeasured the ability to perform mathematical computations in a written workbook.

John was able to solve single and double-digit addition/subtraction problems that did not require borrowing. He could also solve double-digit multiplication problems that required carrying. John could intermittently solve one-step long divisions problems. Shown below are two examples of his long division skills. In the image on the left, John incorrectly solved the problem 10÷5 with “5” when the correct answer is 2.In the next problem, John correctly solved 24÷8 with “3”.

However, John did not attempt to solve long division problems with multi-step solutions. Also, John had difficulty solving problems involving fractions. He would not reduce the fraction 2/4 into ½ , and in another instance erased a correct factional answer and left it blank.

85 Low Average

Subtest 10: Math Facts

John worked at an appropriate speed and correctly answered 54 of the 59 problems he attempted. Most of John’s incorrect

94 Average


27

FluencyMeasured the ability to solve simple addition, subtraction, division, and multiplication problems under a time constraint.

answers were attributed to him identifying the wrong math symbol. For example, when given 7+1=___, John wrote “6”.

Math Calculation Skills: Measured math computational skills (adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing) and his ability to automatically solve basic math facts, and cognitive processing speed. John received a standard score of 89, which was average.

Subtest Analysis of Performance Standard Score( =100, S=15) Interpretation

Subtest 5: Calculation Discussed previously 85 Low AverageSubtest 10: Math Facts Fluency Discussed previously 94 Average

Math Problem Solving: A measure of overall ability to solve problems and apply information including reasoning, problem solving, analysis, and fluid reasoning. John received a standard score of 72, which was below average.

Subtest Analysis of Performance Standard Score( =100, S=15) Interpretation

Subtest 10: Applied Problems Discussed Previously 74 Below AverageSubtest 13: Number Matrices Measured reasoning by requiring the child to solve for the missing number in a number grid. The student was shown a grid with a pattern of numbers and directly to solve for the missing number.

John worked quickly but inaccurately on this task. Often, giving answers that only satisfied one requirement of the problem. For example, given the following matrix

2 35

John incorrectly answered “4” when the answer should have been 6. John seemed to be adding one vertically, instead of considering the entire matrix. Furthermore, given the following matrix

2 46

John incorrectly answered “5” when the answer should have been 8 or 12.

77 Below Average

The KeyMath-3 Form A is a comprehensive standardized norm-referenced measure of

mathematical concepts and skills. There were 10 tests administered to John in three mathematical


28

clusters: Basic Concepts, Operations, and Applications. His performance was recorded, scored,

and interpreted according to his grade (4th grade, Spring).

Basic Concepts: Assessed basic procedural and computation skills with essential math concepts that correspond to the five NCTM (National Council on Teaching Mathematics) content standards. His overall standard score was 78, which was below average.


Scaled Score( =10, S=3)

Interpretation

Subtest 1: NumerationExamined overall number sense related to early number awareness, place value, fractions, decimals and percentages.

John was able to successfully name the position of an object in a row of six objects, sequence a set of four one- and two-digit numbers, and count up by tens from the number forty-two. However, when presented grade-level mathematic questions, John quickly began to struggle. On a number of questions John presented frustrated body language by grabbing his head, sighing loudly, and pausing for long periods of time to answer. However, when asked how he felt at the end of section, John said it was “easy” and that he felt “confident” that he did well. Mental addition was specifically taxing for John. One example of this was seen when John was shown 4 dots and asked, How many more dots are needed to make ten? John responded with “5”. In another question John was asked to solve the problem 5,000+40+17=____, and John’s answer was 5,417 when the answer should have been 5,057. Twice John was asked to look at stacks of cubes and identify the number of cubes there were in all, both times he answered incorrectly. When presented math problems focusing on fractions John could not answer in fractional form. For example, when presented with this picture and asked, What fraction of the rectangle is yellow?

Instead of saying 1/6, John responded with “square”.

4 Below Average

Subtest 2:AlgebraMeasured knowledge of early algebraic concepts (i.e., patterns) and algebraic uses of numbers and geometry.

John demonstrated his abilities to successfully group similar items, place pictures in their logical order, and fill in missing numbers to single-digit addition problems. However, when asked to identify patterns or solve two-step problems John struggled. When asked to create an equation when shown a picture of 6 blue dots separated by a pencil with 5 blue dots on one side and one blue dot on the other side. When the correct answer was 5+1=6, John replied with “5+5=10”. John also struggled to identify and complete pattern sequences. For example, when given this picture and asked, If there are five triangles, how many circles will there be?

6 Below Average


29

John first responded with “I’m not sure” but after prompting to try he gave the answer “3”, when it should have been 10.

Subtest 3: GeometryMeasured the ability to analyze, describe, compare, and classify shapes based on spatial relationships, symmetry, angles, and lines.

John was able to successfully identify shapes, opposites, objects that have been flipped or turned, and objects reflections without ever needing to turn or manipulate the pictures in any way. As the questions became more complex, John struggled to answer questions that required him to analyze more than one piece of information at a time. For example, when given this picture and told, Mr. Circle is different from his cousin in several ways… Now, look at Mr. Triangle and his cousins. Point to the cousin that is different from Mr. Triangle in all the same ways that Mr. Circle is different from his cousin...

John pointed to the first stick figure. He could identify the different bow-ties, but could not recognize the difference in the stick figures hair, toes, or ears.

7 Low Average

Subtest 4: MeasurementExplored measurement skills such as comparing objects, understanding standard units, time and money.

John could easily sequence a series pictures by chronological order, length, weight, and height. However, he struggled a great deal on questions pertaining to money. He incorrectly answered four of the five questions presented to him that involved counting money. For example, when given a picture of one nickel and three pennies, and asked How much money is this? John responded with “10¢”. The question that immediately followed was similar. It showed a picture of one dime, two nickels, and four pennies. When John was asked, How much is this? He paused for a long amount of time, and ultimately refused to give an answer.

6 Below Average

Subtest 5: Data Analysis & ProbabilityMeasured the ability to collect, display and interpret data. The items also

John was able to read and interpret information in graphs and charts, at first, relatively easily. Mainly, when the questions asked to identify one specific aspect of the data, John rarely struggled. For instance, when given this graph, John could correctly identify that 5 children have 2 pets.

7 Low Average


30

covered concepts such as chance and probability.

However, as the questions became more complex and had less visual support John began to struggle. John struggled the most when the question required him to use more than one facet of the information to solve the problem. For example, given the following information,

Girls BoysRoom A 10 15Room B 16 12Total 26 27

John could not identify the total number of students in Room A. John also had some difficulty making inferences and correctly explaining what the information in the problems represent.

Operations: Measured written and mental computation skills with regard to addition, subtraction, multiplication and division.



Interpretation

Subtest 6: Mental Computation & EstimationMeasured the ability to quickly and accurately mentally compute answers to math problems ranging from basic computation to fractions and percentages.

Immediately in this section, John required a great deal of thinking time between when the question was asked and when he responded with an answer. He was able to successfully perform most two-number addition and subtraction problems up to double digits. However struggled with math problems involving three digits or had more than two numbers in the equation. For example, when asked to solved 10+5-1, John stated the answer was “15”.

6 Below Average

Applications: Explored the ability to apply conceptual knowledge and operational skills (add, subtract, multiple, & divide) to solve math problems. John received a standard score of 73, which was below average.



Interpretation

Subtest 9: Foundations of Problem SolvingAssessed “readiness”

John was able to show his knowledge for some basic problem solving strategies such as selecting the correct operation or grouping objects together. However, when pressed to explain his reasoning, John struggled to

4 Below Average


31

for applied problem solving by requiring the student to identify the necessary elements, operations and strategies required to solve problems.

explain his logic and why he choose that process to solve the problem. For instance, when given a set of three squares next to a set of four squares and asked, What could you do to make each group have the same number of squares?, John responded with “take one away” and would not provide further detail when prompted. His reasoning was logical, but the information he provided was not detailed enough to truly answer the question. John also struggled to connect stories with mathematical equations. In one example, John was prompted to Finish my story so that it matches seven minus four equals three. The story began with the prompt Seven children were on the dock and… After a significant pause John answered “and 3 grown ups were on the dock”. The story was did not match the prompted equation.

Subtest 10: Applied Problem SolvingMeasured the ability to interpret problems in a given context and apply the appropriate mathematical skills and concepts to solve the problem. The student was encouraged to use paper and pencil and a calculator.

John was able to correctly apply a number of problem solving strategies including reordering a given pattern to create a new pattern, grouping like objects, listing the most possible ways to make a given number using addition, follow instructions on a map, and identifying appropriate shapes when given clues. However, when given problems that required numerical answers, John had more difficulty answering, often only paying attention to one facet of the question. For instance, when given the problem Five children are riding bicycles. Some are boys and some are girls. There are more boys than girls. How many girls are there? John responded with 4. He answered the portion of the question that says there are more boys than girls, but he did not consider the fact that there were only 5 children in all.

*John was not offered a calculator, pencil, or paper during this time. However, it is noted that when previously offered a pencil and paper, John did not acknowledge them. Also, at a later time, John revealed that he did not know how to use a calculator and was observed as very frustrated when trying to work one.

6 Below Average

Dynamic Math Assessment:

The dynamic math assessment created for John was a structured lesson that focused on

how to properly use a highlighter to break down math word problems. Teaching John how to use

a highlighter to solve math word problems was a strategy chosen specifically because it measures

a student’s ability to learn a new strategy, break down multi-step word problems, identify key

details, and make decisions about what the problem is asking. A step-by-step visual guide was

provided for John to follow along with the strategy and instruction. The instructional technique

followed an “I do, we do, you do” model where first the instructor modeled the technique (I do),

then instruction was scaffolded and practiced together (we do), and last John was given a series of

math word problems to attempt individually (you do). A workbook was created that included the


32

step-by-step guide and sample work problems that were modified questions from the Woodcock

Johnson Achievement Applied Math subtest. The dynamic assessment took place over a forty-

five minute time frame and was the last assessment administered. Below I have shown a brief

overview of the step-by-step process covered.

Step 1: Read the problem to yourself

Step 2: Identify the KEY WORDS

Step 3: Make a plan

Step 4: Solve the problem

Step 5: Check your answer

During the dynamic assessment a number of very insightful observations were made

regarding John’s behavior and math abilities. While instruction took place, John had difficulty

attending to the task and maintaining focus. He rarely looked at the workbook and seemed

inattentive and distracted. When John was left alone to work independently in the workbook he

became frustrated within minutes of attempting the first problem. He successfully highlighted the

key pieces of information needed to solve the problem; however could not carry out the operation

needed (subtraction) to solve the problem, even though he was able to subtract at this level when

subtraction skills were assessed in isolation. After it was visible that he was frustrated with this

task, he was offered a calculator to assist him in his calculations, but he was unable to work the

calculator and became even more frustrated. John was seen putting his face in his hands, his

breathing became rapid, and his normally excellent posture became hunched. He was only able to

attempt one problem in 10 minutes.

It was apparent that John lacked math strategies. When asked if he knew any good

strategies to help him with math he responded with “not really”. He had to be prompted multiple

times to use a pencil and paper to show his work, and a portion of the lesson focused on

reviewing how to regroup during addition and subtraction problems.

Math Summary:

Overall, John had difficulties throughout all math assessments. He was able to correctly

recall simple math facts, solve one-step problems, and utilize visual supports to solve math

problems. John’s greatest relative strength was his command of basic addition, subtraction,

multiplication, and division facts. When the task required one-step operations, John exhibited

speed and confidence. John performed best when visual representations were present, and


33

excelled in tasks like reordering a given pattern to create a new pattern, grouping objects,

sequencing events, and identifying shapes.

One concept John consistently struggled with was completing multi-step tasks. When

presented with math problems that required more than one step to solve, he often had difficulty

producing solutions that answered the whole question. Furthermore, he struggled to explain his

logic and why he choose that process to solve the problem, showing that he had difficulty holding

on to the information and explaining it at the same time.

John had a very difficult time recognizing and solving numbers at the abstract level. John

had significantly more difficulty answering problems that required numerical answers, than in

math problems that provided picture representations to support it. Often, John struggled to

connect math stories with the abstract numbers embedded in them.

Moreover, John’s body language was often very tense when asked to perform math skills.

He was observed grabbing his head, sighing loudly, and pausing for long periods of time to

answer. Not long after John displayed his frustrated behaviors he would quickly lose attention

and overall focus on the task. However, when asked how he felt at the end of section, John said it

was “easy” and that he felt “confident” that he did well.

Processing in Classroom Tasks

The Slingerland Screening Tests for Identifying Children with Specific

Language Disability- Form C is a criterion-referenced test that was administered in

order to assess processing abilities in tasks that were common to typical classroom

activities. The purpose of the Slingerland Screening Tests is “to identify those students in

a group who show potential language learning disabilities as well as those with evidence

of current specific language learning disabilities, or dyslexia” as well as to identify

students’ probable visual, auditory and kinesthetic strengths and weaknesses as well as

examines the integration between these modalities.

FORM C

Subtest Description Analysis of Performance AccuracyVISUAL TASKS

Subtest 1:Copying: Distance Copying

Measured visual perception in association with a kinesthetic-motor response. Given a 10-minute time limit, John

John struggled a great deal with this task. At first, he looked up every 2-3 words to copy down the information from the wall, however after the first two lines John had to look up more

29/35 correct

83% accuracy


34

copied a short story hanging on the wall, with little emphasis on memory.

frequently. He had 9 self-corrections, where he would begin to write a word and misspell or blend words. Out of the total 5 errors, 3 of them were from omitting letters within words. For example, John spelled the word Children as “Childre”. Another omitting error occurred when John did not punctuate at the end of a sentence. The final error was attributed to poor formation because he failed to capitalize at the beginning of a new sentence. 17 letters reflected poor formation, mostly because they did not sit properly on the line. John completed this task in 5 minutes and 2 seconds, which is within an appropriate amount of time.

Subtest 2:Copying: Near Point Copying

Measured visual perception in association with a kinesthetic-motor response. Given 5 minutes, John was required to copy words from models presented on his testing booklet, with little emphasis on memory.

On average, John looked up 3 times per word to copy the words to the line below. He self-corrected his work one time, changing [wnin] to wrinkled. He had two errors in this section. One error was because he inserted a space in the word trainman: “train man”. John completed this task in 2 minutes and 8 seconds, which was within the appropriate amount of time.

10/12 correct

83% accuracy

Subtest 3: V-P-D-MVisual Perception, Discrimination & Memory: Recognition Task

This matching test required visual perception of symbol and letter sequences as well as memory. It presented 6 lists of words to John in his test booklet and required him to match the first word in the set with the same word in the list below.

John excelled at this task. He worked quickly and accurately throughout the task. He had 0 errors and 0 self-corrections. For example, when shown the word neighbor for 10 seconds, he was able to flip the book over and accurately circle the word “neighbor” out of the 4 choices given.

14/14 correct

100% accuracy

Subtest 4:V-P Visual Perception Matching: Recognition Task

Visual perception and memory are required to match one item to another item that must be visually discriminated from among several choices. John was briefly shown a card containing a word, group of letters or numbers for 5 seconds. After 10 seconds, John was instructed to flip his

John excelled at this task. He worked quickly and accurately throughout the task. He had 0 errors and 0 self-corrections. On the hardest word given, squirm, he was able to accurately underline the identical word “squirm” in a series of 4 multiple choice answers.

8/8 correct

100% accuracy


35

test booklet over and underline what he just saw (a recognition task).

Subtest 5:V-P-M-KVisual Perception & Memory linked to a Written Response: Recall Task

Evaluated John’s visual functioning, memory and motor performance. John was exposed to various stimuli on cards for 5 seconds, which consisted of words, letter and number groups, geometric forms, and a phrase. After a 10 second pause, John was instructed to flip his test booklet over and draw/write what he just saw (a recall task).

John was able to accurately recall and reproduce words, shapes, and phrases easily and did not have any errors in this aspect. However, when asked to recall a set of numbers, John incorrectly answered both of the two tasks. For example, when given the visual 67-519, John wrote “57-519”.

8/10 correct

80% accuracy

AUDITORY TASKSSubtest 6: A-P-M-KAuditory Perception & Memory linked to a Written Response: Recall Task

Measured John’s ability to memorize a phrase or number group by only hearing them orally spoken. These were presented and after 10 seconds, John was instructed to turn his test booklet over and write exactly what he just heard (a recall task).

John could quickly and accurately remember series of letters and phrases. For example, when read the series “f-r-a-u”, John was able to correctly replicate the letters into his workbook. However, John struggled to accurately recall number series. He received an error when he was read 8-3-4-2, and instead wrote “8,3,7,2”.

35/37 correct

95% accuracy

Subtest 7: Phoneme-Grapheme Association with a Written Response

Measured John’s auditory perception and discrimination between words that sounded very much alike. This test required John to distinguish between initial and final consonant sounds between 2 words.

John could accurately recognize the sounds at the beginning of words. However, he had a more difficult time identifying the sounds at the end of words. 3 errors occurred because John could not identify the sounds located at the end of a word. For example, when given the word dwelt, John identified “l” as the last sound in the word.

15/18 correct

83% accuracy

Subtest 8: A-P-DAuditory Perception & Discrimination: Recognition Task

Evaluated John’s auditory perception and memory. In this test, John was required to listen to a dictated word or series of letters or numbers, remember them for a brief period, and then locate that exact word or series among four or five

John excelled at this task. He worked quickly and accurately throughout the task. He had 0 errors and 0 self-corrections.

18/18 correct

100% accuracy


36

similar choices (a recognition task).

Slingerland Summary:

Overall, the results revealed a variety of strengths and needs for John. He showed

a strong ability to match and sequence information presented to him. Furthermore, John

had a strong memory for letters, words, and phrases that were provided to him either

visually or orally. However, John struggled to remember sequences of numbers

regardless of visual or oral presentation. Furthermore, John had difficulties with copying;

these tasks had the most self-corrections and took the most time to complete. Finally,

John has a number of difficulties with letter formation. Often, he struggled to keep his

letters on the line, and letters such as “r”, “h”, and “g” that connect a stem to a curve were

left often disconnected.

The School Motivation and Learning Strategies Inventory (SMALSI) is a

standardized norm-referenced self-report inventory designed to assess 10 primary

constructs associated with academic motivation and learning and study strategies, 7 of

which focus on student strengths and 3 of which focus on student liabilities. The

student’s scores were compared to a nationally representative sample of students of the

same age and reported as T-scores.

The following guide will assist in interpretation of the SMALSI T-scores:

T-Scores:

………………..30……………...40……….…...50……………..60……………70….……Strength

Scales

Inadequately

Developed

Below

Average

Average Very Well

Developed

Extremely Well

Developed

Liability Scales

Minimally

Problematic

Less

Problematic

No More

Problematic

Moderately

Problematic

Extremely

Problematic

SMALSI- School Motivation and Learning Strategies InventoryA norm-referenced self-report questionnaire completed by the student.

Category T-Score( =50, S=10)

Interpretation


37

Student Strength ScalesLow scores indicate areas of concern as the student reports lacking these skills or strategies.

STUDY Study Strategies: selecting important information, relating new to previously learned information, memory strategies for encoding

55 Average

NOTE Note-taking/Listening Skills: discriminating important material when taking notes, organizing notes, efficiency in note taking.

59 Average

READ Reading/Comprehension Strategies: previewing, monitoring, and reviewing texts, including self-testing, to ensure understanding.

63 Very Well Developed

WRITEWriting/Research Skills: researching topics in a variety of ways, organizing writing projects, monitoring and self-checking for errors

53 Average

TEST Test-Taking Strategies: increasing efficiency in test taking, including eliminating unlikely answers and strategic guessing.

58 Average

TIM/ORG Time Management: effective use of time to complete assignments, understanding of time needed for academic tasks.Organizational Techniques: organizing class and study materials, structuring assignments including homework and other projects.

58 Average

Student Liability ScalesHigh scores indicate areas of concern as the student reports high levels in that area.

LOMOT Low Academic Motivation: lack of intrinsic motivation to engage and succeed in academic tasks. 48 No More Problematic

TANX Test Anxiety: student’s experience of debilitating symptoms of test anxiety, lowered performance on tests due to excessive worry.

58 No More Problematic

CONFID Concentration/Attention Difficulties: difficulty attending to lectures and other academic tasks, monitoring and adjusting attention to performance, concentrating and avoiding distractions.


SMALSI Summary:

During this self-report, John did not have any outlying areas of concern for this

learning strategy index. He believed that he had a wide variety of learning strategies and

was well equipped to learn in school. John responded with “almost always” to the

following statement; before reading something, I skim it, looking at headings and key

words. Similarly he responded with “often” to this statement about writing skills; I

proofread my writing two or three times before turning it in. He also demonstrated

academic motivation by responding “never” to the following statement; I think school is

not really important in life.


38

The area of Test Anxiety, which measured the student’s experience of debilitating

symptoms of test anxiety as well as lowered performance on tests due to excessive worry,

presented some conflicting information. John responded with “almost always” to the

following statements; When I take tests, I feel like I can’t breathe., When my teacher

gives me a test, my mind goes blank., and I get nervous when I’m getting a test back from

the teacher. Similarly he responded with “often” to these following statements; I get very

nervous when I take a test and I worry a lot before a test. The conflicting information was

John’s responses to the statements about confidence in this same area. To the statement I

am confident about taking tests, John responded “almost always”. Likewise he responded

with “often” to the statement, I am good at taking tests.

Overall, John’s responses to the SMALSI demonstrated that believed he

possessed a variety of skills and positive learning strategies.

AFFECTThe Conners Rating Scales-3 rd Edition: Long Version was completed by John,

his father, and his teacher. Each individual answered a variety of questions that addressed

John’s affect and behavior as exhibited within the educational and home settings. The

results of these questionnaires revealed concerns in the following area:

Note: Scores that are in bold in the chart are in either in the “Elevated” or “Very Elevated”

Categories.

Conners Rating Scales-3 rd Edition: Long Version A standardized norm-referenced measure of attention and behavior.

High scores indicate areas of concern.Category Father Teacher John

Inattention 47Average

65Elevated

46Average

Hyperactivity-Impulsivity <40 57 57Learning Problems 61

Elevated73

Elevated 46

Executive Functioning57

72Elevated N/A

Aggression 44 56 49Peer/ Family Relations

4380

Elevated 45


39

DSM-IV-TR: ADHD Inattentive49

65Elevated 54

DSM-IV-TR: ADHD Hyperactive-Impulsive <40 55 55DSM-IV-TR: Conduct Disorder 45 56 44DSM-IV-TR: Oppositional Defiant Disorder

4167

Elevated 50

Conners 3 Global Index: Total44

72Elevated N/A

*These behaviors were not observed in the clinic or reported by John’s parents.


40


41

Categories in which John seemed to be exhibiting behaviors that fell within the Elevated or Very Elevated range

Category Common Characteristics of High Scores in the Category

Example of Items in this Category

Inattention May have poor concentration/attention or difficulty keeping his/her mind on work. May make careless mistakes. May be easily distracted. May give up easily or be easily bored. May avoid schoolwork. May have difficulty starting and/or finishing tasks.

John’s teacher responded “Very often” to the statement “Gives up easily on difficult tasks.

Learning Problems Academic struggles (reading, spelling, and/or math). May have difficulty learning and/or remembering concepts. May need extra explanations or help.

John’s teacher responded “Very much true” to the statement “Cannot grasp arithmetic.”John’s father responded “Occasionally” to the statement “Needs extra explanation of instructions.”

Executive Functioning May have difficulty starting or finishing projects. May complete projects at the last minute. May have poor planning, prioritizing, or organizational skills.

John’s teacher responded “Very often” to the statement “Cannot decide which things are most important.”

Peer Relations May have difficulty with friendships, poor social skills, and limited social connections. May appear to be unaccepted by the group.

John’s teacher responded “Occasionally” to the statement “Has no friends.”

ADHD Inattentive Often fails to give close attention to details, had difficulty sustaining attention in tasks or play activity. Is easily distracted by extraneous stimuli. Often avoids tasks that require sustained mental effort.

John’s teacher responded “Often” to the statement “Fails to complete schoolwork or tasks (even when he understands and is trying to cooperate).”

Oppositional DefiantDisorder

May be argumentative. May defy requests from adults. May have poor control of anger and lose temper. *

John’s teacher responded “Often” to the statement “Blames others for his mistakes and misbehaviors.”

Connors 3 Global Index

High score indicates that the student is experiencing some level of psychological difficulty, whether it is being expressed behaviorally, academically, socially or emotionally.

John’s teacher responded “Often” to the statement “Inattentive, easily distracted.”

Affect summary:

John’s self- report on affect indicated that he had no areas of elevated concern

about himself. His responses indicated that he was generally happy and had high self-

esteem. He also reported sometimes forgetting things he learned, and getting distracted

by things happening around him. He responded “Never” to statements like, “I have

trouble following directions.” “It’s hard for me to pay attention to details.” And “I am

behind in my schoolwork.” He responded “Very often” to statements such as “I don’t

like doing things that make me think hard.”

John’s father’s responses indicated no concern about John’s behavior or

emotional health. He indicated elevated concern regarding John’s learning skills: he

responded that John occasionally had difficulty with spelling, reading, memorizing facts

and needing extra explanation of instructions.

John’s teacher for the past two school years had greater concerns in various areas.

She responded that John “very often” forgot things he had already learned, could not

grasp arithmetic, and was one of the last to be picked for teams and games, as he was not

very outgoing with his peers. She indicated that he was often inattentive to his work, had

difficulty with organization, and was forgetful in daily activities.

Overall, John was a happy child who exhibited some lack of self-awareness of his

own strengths and weaknesses. His father’s report also indicated no concerns with social

abilities, and only minor concerns about learning. His teacher, however, had concerns

about his attention, overall learning performance and his social ability in school.

SUMMARY

John was a pleasant boy who had just completed his fourth grade year of school.

He liked to ride bikes and skate board and participated in a variety of after school

activities including Kung Fu. John was evaluated at the UIC Educational Assessment

clinic due to his mother’s concerns about his memory with regard to his academics and

his daily routines. His mother was also concerned about his executive functioning,

specifically his organizational skills; as well as his disinterest in reading and his

academics, particularly math skills and writing.


42

John struggled with recognizing and solving number problems at the abstract

level. He had difficulty solving math problems without visual support and could not

connect math stories to the numbers within them. When John became frustrated while

working on math problems, he quickly became inattentive, losing focus on the task at

hand. When asked to explain his thinking, John had difficulty finding the words to

explain the process behind his work. This can be attributed to his difficulty in completing

multi-step tasks. Similarly, John struggled with creating original sentences when writing,

which could also be attributed to his difficulties with multi-step tasks. Based on this

evaluation, John fits the profile of a student with a math learning disability.

Strengths

John remained on tasks for long periods of time and was a hard worker. In the

area of cognitive processing he displayed a variety of relative strengths including his

ability to recall information that was paired with visual pictures or symbols and auditory

information. He had a relatively strong ability to recall information, such as a story or list

of words, which were read to him.

In reading, John demonstrated a variety of comprehension skills at the fourth

grade level including answering literal questions and questions related to story setting,

characterization, and problem resolution. He read grade level text fluently, with few

errors, and at an appropriate rate. John had a relatively strong ability to pronounce

nonsense words, applying phonics rules he already knew.

In the area of writing, John was able to stay on task throughout the writing

assessments and his performance was in the average range in most areas. His ability to

listen to and then spell nonsense words phonetically was relatively strong. He

demonstrated confidence and speed in this area, as well as in the spelling assessment.

In overall language ability, John’s greatest strength was his ability to recall and

repeat information. He performed best when required to hear, remember, and then answer

factual or literal questions about what he heard.

John was observed in the clinic being cooperative, polite and socially

appropriate. He was able to work for long periods of time and seemed eager to


43

demonstrate his abilities. John and his father both indicated that he was generally happy

and well adjusted, with no concerns regarding behavior or social ability.

Needs

John often attempted to answer test items, but had difficulty being descriptive

enough to be correct, demonstrating word find issues. Using general background

knowledge or utilizing vocabulary to answer questions was difficult for John. Regularly

he struggled with transitioning to new or complex directions, requiring multiple practice

samples. He had difficulties putting appropriate words into passages without visual cues

or a word bank. He also struggled to extract the necessary information to solve problems,

as well as following multi-step directions.

John faced significant challenges across most math and number related

assessments. He was able to demonstrate a strong ability to complete one-step calculation

problems and excelled when visuals were present. However, John had a difficult time

carrying math problems beyond one-step, often only answering questions partially or

guessing. Also, math problems without visual support were significantly more

challenging. He had difficulty extracting the information required to solve the problem

correctly. John also struggled with the concepts of money and fractions. If math

containing these concepts were presented to John he would often try to skip them. When

prompted to try to solve these types of problems, John seldom answered correctly. When

presented with a sequence of numbers, John could not remember the accurate sequence

moments later; this was true for both orally and visually presented sequences. During

math assessments, John’s body language was more tense or defeated than seen in other

academic areas.

In writing, John struggled with some letter formation (i.e. handwriting). He would

regularly write off the line or not connect letter parts. Furthermore, copying from the wall

or another piece of paper was time consuming and laborious for John. He had to self-

correct numerous times and still misspelled words that were visually provided to him.

John also struggled with producing original sentences, which is a multi-step process.

When required to use given images and words to develop his own ideas, he had difficulty

holding the information in his mind and then manipulating it to form descriptive


44

sentences. Often his sentences were very basic and not as developed as would be

expected for his grade level.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations are divided into three sections: (1) Home (2)

School and (3) Student. All were designed to assist John with his areas of need and to

enhance his strengths.

HOME

General:

1. Schedule an appointment with John’s local public school to discuss the

assessment results as well as eligibility for an individualized education

program (IEP) and accommodations for math and writing. See the links

below for parent support on the IEP process:

http://www.isbe.net/spec-ed/html/parent_rights.htm

https://frcd.org/individualized-education-program-iep/

2. Set up a meeting with John’s current school to discuss how the

objectives of his IEP can be implemented.

3. Consider re-implementing tutoring services to help John with his math

skills, specifically related to number sense. See the links below:

http://www.achievementcenters.com

http://www.purplemath.com/chicago_math_tutors.php

4. Consider non-profit organizations to assist John with his writing

difficulties. 826chi.org offers after school tutoring, workshops, and in

classroom support for writing and to strengthen student’s creative

writing skills. See link below:

http://826chi.org

5. Reading: Increase John’s interests in reading by sharing your reading

experiences and engaging John in topics that interest him. . See the links

below to help increase John’s reading interest at home:


45

http://826chi.org/

http://www.purplemath.com/chicago_math_tutors.php

http://www.achievementcenters.com/

https://frcd.org/individualized-education-program-iep/

http://www.isbe.net/spec-ed/html/parent_rights.htm

http://school.familyeducation.com/top-10-ways/improve-reading-

skills/38329.html

http://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/7-pleasurable-ways-to-improve-

your-reading-ability/

6. To help John be more productive during homework time, create a

space with very few distractions. Breaking Dividing homework into

smaller, more manageable steps is also helpful. See link for free

printable homework checklists:

http://www.freeprintablebehaviorcharts.com/homework_charts.htm

7. Use modeling-think-alouds to help John express his thoughts when

writing as well as expressing his thinking behind math tasks. See the

links below for support on how to implement this strategy:

http://www.readingrockets.org/strategies/think_alouds

https://www.teachervision.com/skill-builder/problem-solving/

48546.html

Math:

1. In order to help John build his number sense skills, access free math

curriculum online through Engage NY, and utilize practice exercises related to

this specific area. See link below:

https://www.engageny.org/common-core-curriculum

2. Play math games on the computer to increase John’s problem solving and

number sense. Practicing number concepts could also help to reduce anxiety at

school. See the links below for a variety of online math games:

http://www.arcademics.com/games/

http://interactivesites.weebly.com/math.html

http://www.mathplayground.com/

3. Utilize online math tutorials specific to John’s areas of need through Khan

Academy. See link:

https://www.khanacademy.org/math/cc-fourth-grade-math


46

https://www.khanacademy.org/math/cc-fourth-grade-math




https://www.engageny.org/common-core-curriculum

https://www.teachervision.com/skill-builder/problem-solving/48546.html

https://www.teachervision.com/skill-builder/problem-solving/48546.html

http://www.readingrockets.org/strategies/think_alouds

http://www.freeprintablebehaviorcharts.com/homework_charts.htm

http://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/7-pleasurable-ways-to-improve-your-reading-ability/

http://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/7-pleasurable-ways-to-improve-your-reading-ability/

http://school.familyeducation.com/top-10-ways/improve-reading-skills/38329.html

http://school.familyeducation.com/top-10-ways/improve-reading-skills/38329.html

4. Utilize a calculator for basic math facts. Using a calculator when working on

basic math facts may help John stay focused on using reasoning and problem

solving skills when attempting more advanced math problems.

5. Utilize fun videos and sample problems on BrainPOP Math to help John in his

areas of need. * Reach out to John’s school for membership information. See

link below:

https://www.brainpop.com/math/

6. Incorporate natural math skills, such as time and money while at the grocery

store or when going on trips. For example: Have John purchase his own

snacks at the grocery store with cash and practice making change.

Writing:

1. Practice sentence development by creating comic book strips. The below

website would allow John to create his own comic book strip, developing his

own ideas and thoughts as well as images for each panel.

http://www.makebeliefscomix.com/Comix/

2. Create a safe home environment for John to share his writing with his family

members. Highlight and praise the positive aspects of John’s writing to help

boost his self-confidence before providing supportive feedback. Encourage

writing tasks at home to help John develop his ideas and thoughts. Have John

keep a journal or engage in writing a story together with his family about

shared activities such as a vacation.

3. Download the sentence builder app to assist John with sentence and thought

formation. Cost $5.99. See link below:

http://www.readingrockets.org/content/sentencebuilder

4. Utilize online tutorial videos and practice samples to help John develop his

writing skills including main idea development as well as mood and tone.

*Reach out to John’s school for membership information. See link below:

https://www.brainpop.com/english/writing/

SCHOOL


47

https://www.brainpop.com/english/writing/

http://www.readingrockets.org/content/sentencebuilder

http://www.makebeliefscomix.com/Comix/

https://www.brainpop.com/math/

The following are a set of recommendations suitable for John’s specific needs,

especially in the areas of math. Although he may already be receiving some of these,

they are listed here because they would be helpful.

General:

1. In the above, it was recommended that the parents initiate contact with a local

public school to assess the possibility of creating an Individualized Education

Program (IEP) plan for John. If a plan is created, teachers and administration at

Rainbow School should be prepared to meet with the family to discuss how to

implement the IEP and accommodate John’s needs.

2. After possible accommodations have been implemented for one year, we

recommend a re-evaluation to determine his progress and further investigate the

possibility of a learning disability as his current achievement profile is

comparable to that of a person with a mathematics disability.

3. Consider playing more games in the classroom that improve John’s executive

functioning skills. Card games, musical instruments, brainteasers, and games that

require fast responses are all games that target executive functioning. For more

examples read Harvard University’s activities guide for “Enhancing and

Practicing Executive Function Skills with Children from Infancy to Adolescence”.

The document is free to download at:

http://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/tools_and_guides/enhancing_and_pr

acticing_executive_function_skills_with_children/

4. Recommend or assign books that build on John’s interests, so as to get him more

active and engaged in reading while at school. Books that involve skateboarding,

cooking, or middle school dramas are highly recommended. A few age-

appropriate books that cover these topics are the “Diary of a Wimpy Kid” series

by Carrie R. Wheadon, Ronald Dahl’s “Even More Revolting Recipes”, and

“Dropping in with Andy Mac: The Life of a Pro Skateboarder” by Andy

MacDonald. For more suggestions, Goodreads has a comprehensive list of books

for 5th graders that range in a variety of topics. You can find the list here:

https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/5th-grade


48

https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/5th-grade

(Book, $27.35)http://www.amazon.com/Teaching-Mathematics-Students-Difficulties-Special-Needs/dp/1593853068/ref=pd_sim_14_7?ie=UTF8&refRID=1VSY5Y5053PVKA3NEYW6

Math:

1. Having at least one teacher handbook could be immensely beneficial to helping

guide your instruction and accommodations in the classroom. A book that is

highly recommended by the UIC Clinic is “Teaching Mathematics to Middle

School Students with Learning Disabilities” by Marjorie Montague and Asha K.

Jitendra. This book provides lesson plans, accommodations, and instructional

tools that can be utilized in any classroom to target students like John who

significantly struggle with math.

2. Explicitly teach John strategies to pull out key words and informationin word

problems such as using a highligher. Through strategies such as this, John will

learn to better break down the multi-step math problems with which he currently

struggles. Attached in the appendix is the guide John was provided during his

dynamic math assessment.

3. Help John visualize his math problems through drawing. John was previously

interested in drawing and doodling, and visual representations were shown to

help him solve math equations better. John may be more likely to attempt

problem solving strategies if he feels engaged and is having fun doing so. Here is

a step-by-step video teaching you how to talk John through this process:

https://learnzillion.com/lesson_plans/4755-solve-word-problems-by-drawing-

picture-models#fndtn-lesson. Also, attached in the appendix is an example of

how you can help model this strategy.

4. Pair verbal instructions and questions with written instructions/cues. This way

John does not have to memorize or struggle with the directions, and he can focus

his attention on solving the problems at hand.


49

https://learnzillion.com/lesson_plans/4755-solve-word-problems-by-drawing-picture-models#fndtn-lesson

https://learnzillion.com/lesson_plans/4755-solve-word-problems-by-drawing-picture-models#fndtn-lesson

5. Teach within a concrete-to-representational-to-abstract (CRA) sequence of

instruction to ensure John gains an in-depth understanding of math concepts. The

three stages can be divided into the doing, seeing, and symbolic levels of solving

math problems. First provide manipulatives, then supply pictures, and finally

introduce the concept using only the number symbols. Here is a link to a useful

article explaining the CRA Instructional Approach in more depth.

http://www.broward.k12.fl.us/studentsupport/ese/PDF/CRAApproachinMath.pdf

Writing:

1. Supply John with a fun graphic organizer or checklist to help him organize his

paragraph formation, ensure proper grammar, and provide tips for writing a good

writing sample. By having a visual checklist, John can better self-regulate his

work. Fun examples of writing organizers are the “Oreo” organizer for persuasive

writing and the “Better Answers Writing Strategy” organizer for answering short

questions. Both are available on Google Images for free and a number of other

excellent organizers can be found on Pinterest!

2. Ask John to read his writing aloud to encourage proofreading. Since reading is not

an area of concern for John, this could help him think about his writing

objectively and improve his overall composition skills.

3. To help John improve the detail and complexity of his sentences consider

providing sentence frames for specific assignments, and encourage (or even

require) John to use them in his oral and written responses. Attached in the

appendix are some examples of sentence frames that can be used to structure and

assist John during written assignments.

JOHN:

General:


50

http://www.broward.k12.fl.us/studentsupport/ese/PDF/CRAApproachinMath.pdf

1. John, it was such a pleasure to work with you this summer! Now you can start

thinking about strategies for doing your schoolwork and homework to really do

excellent work in fifth grade! You can ask your parents to help you set up a quiet,

organized work area, where you can do homework and things like reading on your

own, without getting distracted.

Make sure you get an assignment notebook for next year so you can

write down everything you need to do for homework.

Ask your parents to help you set up a big calendar so you can keep

track of steps you need to complete for longer school projects.

2. Another good idea is to have strategies for reading. You can ask yourself questions

before, during, and after you read a story or paragraph. For example, before you start

reading a story you can ask yourself questions such as:

“What clues does the title give me about this story?”

“Why am I reading this?”

“What predictions can I make about this story?”

While you are reading you can take a break and ask yourself questions like:

“What do I understand from what I just read?”

“What were the main ideas?”

“Do I need to reread in order to understand?”

After you are done reading you can keep asking yourself questions, like:

“What is the meaning of what I just read?”

“Why did the author end the chapter/story the way he did?”

“Were my predictions true?”

Having a plan like this for reading will really help you think about and analyze what you

read, so you get the most out of it! In the appendix of this report is a graphic organizer to

help you remember some questions to ask yourself while you’re reading.

Writing


51

1. Reading and writing go together. As you read and think about what you’ve read,

you can get ideas for your own writing. Your parents will probably be giving you

a journal to write in; or you can use any new notebook. A good habit to get into is

to write something every day, if you can, for about 15 minutes. Write about

anything that interests you; for example, about an experience you had, a problem

you faced, or a way that you felt.

2. A good plan for writing is to think of a topic that interests you and then try to

write three different ideas about it. You can also imitate stories or movies and try

writing your own versions. Don’t worry too much about punctuation in your

journal, just get your ideas down. For more ideas about what to write about check

out: www.scholastic.com/teachers/story-starters/

3. Another fun thing to do is to find a pen-pal. You can write to someone you know,

such as friends or family. You can also find a pen-pal at pen-pal sites, like:

www.penpalworld.com.

Have your parents help you if you get a pen-pal from the internet. Make sure you

edit your letters after you write them, so that your pen-pal gets what you’re telling

them!

Math

1. Your parents will probably show you some math game websites and worksheets for

you to work on your math skills. Again, having strategies for doing them will really

help you. In math, it’s very important to practice a lot, to make sure you really know

how to do a certain kind of problem, and will remember it. Try to do as many

problems as you can in the area you’re learning. Even if it seems hard at first, you

will get good if you practice! Remember, when you’re doing story problems, use the

strategy Lindsey taught you to highlight the numbers that you will use in your

equation.

Here are some of those websites again:





52




http://www.penpalworld.com/

http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/story-starters/

2. Another good idea is to teach the math you’re learning to someone else. If you can

teach something, then you really know it well! Math is a subject that always pushes

you to build on facts and concepts you already know, so you can learn the next step

and then the next step. So practice, ask questions and keep reviewing what you learn.

Report Prepared By:

Liz Hadden Lindsey McNamara Bluma JeremiasLiz Hadden (BS) Lindsey McNamara (M.S.) Bluma Jeremias (B.A.)

Graduate Student Intern Graduate Student Intern Graduate Student Intern

__________________________________ ____________________________

Kary Zarate, M.Ed Norma A. Lopez-Reyna, Ph.D.

Instructor, UIC Assessment Clinic Director, UIC Assessment Clinic


53

APPENDIX

Recommended strategies Page number

Guide to Solving Math Word Problems 55

Solving Math Problems through Drawing 56

Sentence Frames:

Making Predictions Frame

I-Message Frame

57

57

Appendix of Scores

Woodcock-Johnson IV Test of Cognitive Abilities 57

Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement 59

Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals- 5th Edition 60

Comprehensive Reading Inventory 61

KeyMath™-3 Diagnostic Assessment 61

Slingerland Screening Tests 61

School Motivation and Learning Strategies Inventory 63

Conners Rating Scales-3rd Edition 64


54

Steps to Solving Math Word Problems(Follow these steps every time you see a word problem.)

Step 1: Read the problem to yourself· Slow down and make sure you understand what the question is

asking· Start looking for key words

Step 2: Identify the KEY WORDS· Highlight the words that tell you what operation to use· Are the key words telling you to Add? Subtract? Multiply? Divide?· Here are some examples of key words…Add Subtract Multiply DivideAll together Less then Times, groups Out of/ Part ofMore difference Product Ratio/Percent

Step 3: Make a plan· Decide which operation to use· Gather all the information you need- highlight the numbers you

need to solve the problem

Step 4: Solve the problem· Carry out the plan you made to solve the problem· Be sure to show your work

Step 5: Check your answer· Ask yourself, “Does this make sense?”· Do the problem again if you find a mistake


55

Name: ______________________________

Problem Solving: Chickens and Cows

Skill: Drawing a picture to solve problems

Problem: There are some chickens and cows in the field. There are 14 legs and 6 heads. How many chickens are there? How many cows are there?

Step 1: Circle the math words. Step 2: Ask yourself: Do I understand the problem? Step 3: Solve the problem using words and pictures below.

Step 4: My answer is ____________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ (Make sure you include why your answer makes sense on step 4!)


56

Making Predictions Frame Guessing what will happen next based on information or illustrations in the

story.

1. Because the character ____, I predict s/he will _____.

Because the main character ran away from home, I predict that he will…

2. At first I thought ______, but now I believe _______.

3. I think _____ will _____ because _____ usually ____.

4. Since ________, I can assume that _____ will _____.Since it’s been raining all week, I can assume that the game will be cancelled.

I-Message Frame I feel ______________ when you _____________.

(Say your feeling) (Describe the action)

I want you to _______________.

(Explain what you want).

EXAMPLE:“I feel angry when you take my stuff without asking. I wantyou to ask to borrow it from now on.”

“I feel frustrated when you rush me in class. I want you to let me go at my own pace.”


57

APPENDIX OF SCORES

John Smith, 10 years old, 4th grade

Woodcock-Johnson IV Test of Cognitive Abilities (WJ-IV Cog)A norm-referenced measure of cognitive processing abilities.

Test Number Test Name Standard Score


1 Oral Vocabulary 73 Below Average2 Number Series 80 Below Average3 Verbal Attention 85 Low Average4 Letter-Pattern Matching 98 Average5 Phonological Processing 74 Below Average6 Story Recall 107 Average7 Visualization 92 Average8 General Information 75 Below Average

9Concept Formation 62 Significantly Below

Average10 Numbers Reversed 100 Average11 Number-Pattern Matching 104 Average12 Nonword Repetition 109 Average13 Visual-Auditory Learning 107 Average14 Picture Recognition 96 Average15 Analysis-Synthesis 96 Average16 Object-Number Sequencing 105 Average17 Pair Cancellation 102 Average18 Memory for Words 78 Below Average

CLUSTER SCORESCOMPREHENSION-KNOWLEDGE Subtests 1, 8 71 Below AverageFLUID REASONING EXTENDED Subtests 2, 9, 15 74 Below AverageSHORT-TERM WORKING MEMORY EXTENDED Subtests 3, 10, 16

96 Average

COGNITIVE PROCESSING SPEED Subtests 4, 17, 11 100 AverageAUDITORY PROCESSING Subtests 5, 12 94 AverageLONG-TERM RETRIEVAL Subtests 6, 13 109 AverageVISUAL PROCESSING Subtests 7, 14 93 AveragePERCEPTUAL SPEED Subtests 4, 11 101 AverageQUANTITATIVE REASONING Subtests 2, 15 85 Low AverageNUMBER FACILITY Subtests 10, 11 103 AverageCOGNITIVE EFFICIENCY Subtests 4, 10, 3, 11 98 Average


58

Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (WJ-IV Ach), Form AREADING

A norm-referenced measure of isolated academic skills.Test

Number CLUSTER/Subtest Name Standard Score( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

ReadingREADING Subtests 1, 4 92 AverageBROAD READING Subtests 1, 4, 9 95 AverageBASIC READING SKILLS Subtests 1, 7 101 AverageREADING COMPREHENSION-EXTENDED Subtests 4, 12, 17

89 AverageREADING FLUENCY Subtests 8, 9 99 AverageREADING RATE Subtests 9, 15 97 Average1 Letter – Word Identification 98 Average4 Passage Comprehension 84 Below Average7 Word Attack 106 Average8 Oral Reading 98 Average9 Sentence Reading Fluency 99 Average12 Reading Recall 100 Average15 Word Reading Fluency 95 Average17 Reading Vocabulary 90 Average

Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (WJ-IV Ach), Form AWRITING

A norm-referenced measure of isolated academic skills.

Test Number CLUSTER/Subtest Name

StandardScore

( =100, S=15)

PercentileRank Interpretation

WritingWRITTEN LANGUAGE Subtests 3, 6 99 71 AverageBROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE Subtests 3, 6, 11

94 56 AverageBASIC WRITING SKILLS Subtests 3, 14 99 84 AverageWRITTEN EXPRESSION Subtests 6, 11 87 32 Average3 Spelling 104 94 Average6 Writing Samples 94 64 Average11 Sentence Writing Fluency 80 18 Below average14 Editing 93 66 Average

Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (WJ-IV Ach), Form A


59

MATHA norm-referenced measure of isolated academic skills.

Test Number CLUSTER/Subtest Name

StandardScore


MathBROAD MATHEMATICS Subtests 2, 5, 10 83 Below AverageMATH CALCULATION SKILLS Subtests 5, 10 89 AverageMATH PROBLEM SOLVING Subtests2, 13 72 Below Average2 Applied Problems 74 Below Average5 Calculation 85 Low Average10 Math Facts Fluency 94 Average13 Number Matrices 77 Below Average

Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals- 5 th Edition (CELF – 5)A norm-referenced measure of receptive & expressive language skills.

Test Name Scaled Score( =10, S=3)

Interpretation

Recalling Sentences 10 Average

Formulated Sentences 6 Below average

Word Classes 9 Average

Following Directions 9 Average

Understanding Spoken Paragraphs 9 Average

Word Definitions 9 Average

Sentence Assembly 7 Low average

Semantic Relationships 8 Average

CORE & INDEX SCORES(Standard Score =100, S=15)

ScoreStandard

ScorePercentile

RankInterpretation

CORE LANGUAGE SCORESubtests WC, FS, RS, SR

89 23 Average

RECEPTIVE LANGUAGE INDEXSubtests WC, FD, SR

91 27 Average

EXPRESSIVE LANGUAGE INDEXSubtests FS, RS, SA

85 16 Low average

LANGUAGE CONTENT INDEXSubtests WC, USP, WD

93 32 Average

LANGUAGE MEMORY INDEXSubtests FD, FS, RS

89 23 Average


60

Comprehensive Reading Inventory (CRI)Authentic Reading Levels

Narrative TextsSILENT

Reading ComprehensionORAL

Word Reading Fluency

Independent 4 4

Instructional NA NA

Frustration 5 5

KeyMath™-3 Diagnostic Assessment, Form A (KeyMath)A norm-referenced measure of math skills.

Test numbe

r Subtest/ CLUSTER

ScaledScore( =10, S=3)

Standard Score

( =100, S=15)

Interpretation

1 Numeration 4 --- Below Average2 Algebra 6 --- Below Average3 Geometry 7 --- Low Average4 Measurement 6 --- Below Average5 Data Analysis and Probability 7 --- Low Average BASIC CONCEPTS CLUSTER Subtests 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 --- 78 Below Average

6 Mental Computation & Estimation 6 --- Below AverageOPERATIONS CLUSTER Subtests 6, 7, 8 --- N/A N/A

9 Foundations of Problem Solving 4 --- Below Average10 Applied Problem Solving 6 --- Below AverageAPPLICATIONS CLUSTER Subtests 9, 10 --- 73 Below Average

Slingerland Screening Tests for Identifying Children with Specific Language Disability – Form C

Test Number Test Name Number

Correct Total Accuracy

VISUAL TASKS

1 Copying: Distance Copying 29 35 83% correct

2 Copying: Near Point Copying 10 12 83% correct

3 V-P-D-M 14 14 100%


61

Visual Perception, Discrimination & Memory: Recognition Task correct

4 V-P Visual Perception Matching: Recognition Task

8 8 100% correct

5V-P-M-KVisual Perception & Memory linked to a Written Response: Recall Task

8 10 80% correct

AUDITORY TASKS

6

A-P-M-KAuditory Perception & Memory linked to a Written Response: Recall Task

- Letters- Numbers- Spelling

4229

4330

100% correct67% correct97% correct

7

Phoneme-Grapheme Association with a Written Response

- beginning sounds- ending sounds

105

108

100% correct63% correct

8 A-P-DAuditory Perception & Discrimination: Recognition Task

18 18 100% correct

Slingerland–Form C Error AnalysisTest

Number Insertions Recall Omissions Reversals Letter Formation Transpositions

1 4 12 1 1345 26 1 17 289

TOTAL 0 3 7 0 2 1

SMALSI- School Motivation and Learning Strategies InventoryA norm-referenced self-report questionnaire completed by the student.


62

Category T-Score( =50, S=10)

Interpretation

Student Strength ScalesLow scores indicate areas of concern as the student reports lacking these skills or strategies.

STUDY Study Strategies: selecting important information, relating new to previously learned information, memory strategies for encoding

55 Average

NOTE Note-taking/Listening Skills: discriminating important material when taking notes, organizing notes, efficiency in note taking.

59 Average

READ Reading/Comprehension Strategies: previewing, monitoring, and reviewing texts, including self-testing, to ensure understanding.

63 Very Well Developed

WRITEWriting/Research Skills: researching topics in a variety of ways, organizing writing projects, monitoring and self-checking for errors

53 Average

TEST Test-Taking Strategies: increasing efficiency in test taking, including eliminating unlikely answers and strategic guessing.

58 Average

TIM/ORG Time Management: effective use of time to complete assignments, understanding of time needed for academic tasks.Organizational Techniques: organizing class and study materials, structuring assignments including homework and other projects.

58 Average

Student Liability ScalesHigh scores indicate areas of concern as the student reports high levels in that area.

LOMOT Low Academic Motivation: lack of intrinsic motivation to engage and succeed in academic tasks. 48 No More Problematic

TANX Test Anxiety: student’s experience of debilitating symptoms of test anxiety, lowered performance on tests due to excessive worry.


CONFID Concentration/Attention Difficulties: difficulty attending to lectures and other academic tasks, monitoring and adjusting attention to performance, concentrating and avoiding distractions.


Conners Rating Scales-3 rd Edition: Long Version A standardized norm-referenced measure of attention and behavior.

High scores indicate areas of concern.Category Father Teacher John


63

Inattention 47Average

65Elevated

46Average

Hyperactivity-Impulsivity <40 57 57Learning Problems 61

Elevated73

Elevated 46

Executive Functioning57

72Elevated N/A

Aggression 44 56 49Peer/ Family Relations

4380

Elevated 45

DSM-IV-TR: ADHD Inattentive49

65Elevated 54

DSM-IV-TR: ADHD Hyperactive-Impulsive <40 55 55DSM-IV-TR: Conduct Disorder 45 56 44DSM-IV-TR: Oppositional Defiant Disorder

4167

Elevated 50

Conners 3 Global Index: Total44

72Elevated N/A


64

EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION REPORT - Web viewReading: (Subtest 1: Letter-Word ... Clinical Evaluation of...

Documents

Transcript of EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION REPORT - Web viewReading: (Subtest 1: Letter-Word ... Clinical Evaluation of...