PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT - · PDF filePSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT Confidential Client: ......

Wally's Psych Shop, 123 12312, Edmonton, AB, CA, T5J 1E2 | 800-555-1212 | [email protected]

PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

Confidential

Client: Joe Client School: Wally's Psych Shop

Gender: Male Age: 16 years, 9 months

Date of Birth: January 1, 1999 Grade:

Assessment Date: October 1, 2015 Report Date: December 22, 2015

REASON FOR REFERRAL

*+...Generated section and/or custom content pending...+*

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Please note that all pertinent information regarding medical examinations, psychological assessments, and developmental

background may not have been available when this assessment was undertaken.

Review of Cumulative School File:

Information from School Staff:

Information from Legal Guardian:

TESTS ADMINISTERED

Cognitive-Intellectual Tests:

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV)

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Fifth Edition (WISC-V)

Academic Achievement Tests:

Wechsler Individual Achievement Test - Third Edition (WIAT-III)

Wide Range Achievement Test - Fourth Edition (WRAT-4)

Tests for Attention and Concentration:

Conners' Continuous Performance Test - Second Edition (CPT II)

Brief Test of Attention (BTA)

Executive Functioning Tests:

Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST)

Confidential Psychological Report - Mr. Joe Client

Learning and Memory Tests:

California Verbal Learning Test - Second Edition (CVLT-II)

Rey Complex Figure Test (RCFT)

Emotional and Behavior Rating Scales:

Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale - Second Edition (RADS-2)

Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale - Second Edition (RCMAS-2)

Vineland-II Adaptive Behavior Scales - Second Edition (Vineland-II)

Diagnostic Tests:

Depression Checklist, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - Fifth Edition (DSM-V)

INTERPRETING THE RESULTS

Results from the psychological test measures can be interpreted with the following guidelines:

The scores in this report are converted from Standard Scores, Scaled Scores, T-Scores and Z-Scores into

percentiles and descriptions. Percentiles indicate how the individual performed as compared to a group

of individuals with similar characteristics (e.g. age, education, race, etc.). For example, a result in the

50th percentile signifies that 50% of individuals similar to the client have obtained a score equal or

lower than his/hers. This result would be in the average range. A score at the 95th percentile signifies

that 95% of individuals similar to the client have obtained a score equal or lower than his/hers. This

result would be in the very high range. Most tests use the interpretive descriptions listed in the chart

below. Some test developers have adopted their own test interpretive descriptions and ranges. In either

case, important descriptions will appear bold and italic in the body of the text.

Standard Score Scaled Score T-Score Z-Score Percentile Description

130 + 16 + 70 + 2.0 + 98.0 + extremely high

120 to 129 14 to 16 63 to 69 1.3 to 1.9 91 to 97 very high

110 to 119 12 to 14 57 to 62 0.7 to 1.2 75 to 90 high average

90 to 109 8 to 12 43 to 56 -0.7 to 0.6 25 to 74 average

80 to 89 6 to 8 37 to 42 -1.3 to -0.6 9 to 24 low average

70 to 79 4 to 6 30 to 36 -2.0 to -1.4 2 to 8 very low

< 70 < 4 < 30 < -2.0 < 2.0 extremely low

OBSERVATIONS

Please note that behavioral observations reported in this section are in reference only to this one-on-one testing session. This

environment is intended to obtain the best possible performance from Mr. Client and may not be fully reflective of his behavior

in other settings.

Mr. Client presented as a well-groomed and casually-dressed individual, appearing his stated age. During

the assessment, Mr. Client was pleasant and cooperative and rapport was easily established. His mood

and affect were for the most part engaging and appropriate to the testing context, although he

displayed moments of anxiety and anger. This may have affected his performance on some tasks. When

confronted with challenges he was not easily frustrated and he showed persistence for most tasks.


Subjectively, Mr. Client appeared to have some degree of impairment in his attention and concentration

and regulation of impulsivity. His basic thought processes, memory, speech, fine motor movements,

gross motor movements, vision and hearing appeared intact and within normal limits for the purposes

of this assessment. Mr. Client seemed to put forth a good effort. It is believed that the results of this

assessment represent a valid indication of his abilities at this time.

Language Functioning Observations:

Core language functioning as assessed by observations was as follows. Mr. Client's prosody (rhythm,

rate, intonation, tone) of speech showed some limitations in that he spoke at a pressured and faster

rate and louder than the norm. There was no evidence of vocal tics, mumbling, stuttering, lisping or

other articulation difficulties. The content of his speech contained no signs of circumlocution,

paraphasia, tangential speech or derailment. He provided adequate details to support his verbal

communications. Overall, Mr. Client demonstrated the ability to articulate his thoughts and express

himself during the clinical interview.

TEST RESULTS

Cognitive-Intellectual Tests:

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - 4th Edition

Mr. Client completed the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV). This is one of the

most widely used and researched intelligence scales for adults. This instrument is comprised of a

possible 15 subtests that together yield a Full-Scale IQ score (FSIQ). The WAIS-IV can also provide a

Global Ability Index (GAI), a Cognitive Proficiency Index (CPI) and four factor indexes: the Verbal

Comprehension Index (VCI), Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI), Working Memory Index (WMI) and

Processing Speed Index (PSI).

Mr. Client's full-scale IQ score (FSIQ) is not the best indication of his overall intellectual functioning

because there was too much variability in his results on the four index scores that comprise the FSIQ.

However, because Mr. Client's results on the Verbal Comprehension and Perceptual Reasoning Indexes

were comparable, his overall cognitive abilities may be estimated by the General Ability Index. Mr. Client

earned a GAI that placed him in the average range (55th percentile) as compared to other Canadian

adults his age. A score at the 55th percentile signifies that 55% of adults his age scored equal or below

his result.

Mr. Client earned a Cognitive Proficiency Index score (CPI) that placed him in the low average range

(12th percentile). The CPI is an estimate of Mr. Client's proficiency at learning new information with the

use of quick visual speed and good mental control. Strong proficiency aids in the acquisition of new

learning because it reduces cognitive demands and liberates resources for tasks requiring deeper

thinking. There is a significant difference between Mr. Client's scores on the GAI and CPI in a pattern

sometimes seen in individuals with learning disabilities, traumatic brain injuries or other cognitive or

neurological conditions. The magnitude of difference between his results on these two indexes is

somewhat rare, as it is seen in less than 10% of the population.


The four indexes of the WAIS-IV provide for further analysis of Mr. Client's intellectual abilities. His

highest performance came on the Perceptual Reasoning Index. The Perceptual Reasoning Index is a

reflection of one's spatial organization, fluid reasoning, visual processing and general problem-solving

for tasks that do not involve language or words. Mr. Client's perceptual reasoning abilities were assessed

by tasks that required him to recreate pictured designs using blocks (63rd percentile), choose the

missing piece of an incomplete visual matrix (63rd percentile), select puzzle pieces that would combine

to reconstruct a puzzle (50th percentile), select weights to keep a scale balanced (37th percentile) and

identify the important missing part in a picture (75th percentile). His overall results on the PRI placed

him at the 63rd percentile, or in the average range. Although not considered a normative strength, Mr.

Client's perceptual reasoning is considered stronger than his abilities in other areas and may be

regarded as a noteworthy personal asset. In a real world context, perceptual reasoning skills are those

required in "hands-on" tasks and occupations and Mr. Client's results suggest he would have average

skills in this type of work.

Mr. Client's second highest score came on the Verbal Comprehension Index. The Verbal Comprehension

Index is a measure of one's acquired knowledge and general understanding of language, language

concepts and the ability to reason with language. Mr. Client's verbal comprehension abilities were

assessed by tasks that required him to define words (37th percentile), find concrete and abstract

similarities between words (50th percentile), demonstrate a fund of general factual information (63rd

percentile) and verbally elaborate social reasoning (50th percentile). His overall results on the VCI placed

him at the 50th percentile, or in the average range. Although not considered a normative strength, Mr.

Client's verbal comprehension is considered stronger than his abilities in other areas and may be

regarded as a noteworthy personal asset. From a real world perspective, verbal comprehension abilities

are typically associated with academic success and his score therefore predicts that Mr. Client would

have an average scholastic experience barring any learning disability or other cognitive, neurological or

psychological impairment.

Mr. Client's next highest score came on the Processing Speed Index. The Processing Speed Index is a

reflection of one's ability to perform simple, clerical-type tasks quickly and accurately. Mr. Client's

processing speed abilities were assessed by tasks that required him to identify the presence or absence

of a target shape in a row of shapes (5th percentile), quickly find and copy symbols from a key (16th

percentile) and scan and mark target shapes in a structured array (25th percentile). His overall results on

the PSI placed him at the 14th percentile, or in the low average range. Although not a personal

weakness, Mr. Client's processing speed is considered a weakness in comparison to other individuals his

age in the normative population and it may limit aspects of his daily functioning. There is a significant

difference between Mr. Client's scores on the PRI and PSI in a pattern sometimes seen in individuals

with learning disabilities and/or psychological or neurological conditions that impact psychomotor speed

and/or processing. The magnitude of difference between his results on these two dimensions is

somewhat rare, as it is seen in less than 10% of the population. From a real world perspective, these

results indicate that Mr. Client works at a slightly slower pace than the norm and a school or work

environment would need to understand and accommodate this pattern of thinking. He would work well


in a setting where there is routine and clear expectations of performance, and where he can learn at his

own pace.

Mr. Client's lowest scores were demonstrated on the Working Memory Index. The Working Memory

Index is a reflection of one's ability to apprehend and hold information in mind while simultaneously

manipulating the information to produce a result. It requires a good non-distractible attention span for

success. Mr. Client's working memory abilities were assessed by tasks that required him to repeat

numbers forwards, backwards and in numerical order (16th percentile), rearrange a group of letters and

numbers into sequence (25th percentile) and perform mathematical operations without the aid of paper

and pencil (9th percentile). His overall results on the WMI placed him at the 9th percentile, or in the low

average range. Mr. Client's working memory is considered a weakness in comparison to other

individuals his age in the normative population. In addition, his ability in this area is lower than his

abilities in other areas. Therefore, it is likely Mr. Client's working memory is a limitation in his daily

functioning. There is a significant difference between Mr. Client's scores on the VCI and WMI in a

pattern sometimes seen in individuals with learning disabilities and/or psychological or neurological

conditions that impact attention and concentration. The magnitude of difference between his results on

these two dimensions is rare, as it is seen in less than 5% of the population. Given that his scores on this

index are below the norm, Mr. Client may benefit from learning strategies to aid his working memory.

In summary, Mr. Client's intellectual abilities are better explained by the General Ability Index than the

full-scale IQ score because there was significant variability in his performance on the various subtests

and indexes. The GAI estimates his cognitive abilities are somewhere in the average range. As such,

given the optimum environment to capitalize on strengths and mitigate weaknesses, Mr. Client is likely

to function at the average level on most tasks. His scores also reflect a discrepancy between the core

areas of general intelligence (verbal and nonverbal reasoning skills) and the core areas of mental

processing (working memory and processing speed) in a pattern sometimes evidenced in individuals

with a learning disorder, brain injury or other cognitive or neurological disorder. Although not

considered normative strengths, Mr. Client's verbal comprehension and perceptual reasoning are

considered stronger than his abilities in other areas and may be regarded as noteworthy personal assets

to his daily functioning. Although not a personal weakness for him, Mr. Client's processing speed is

considered a significant weakness in comparison to other individuals his age. Mr. Client's working

memory is considered a significant weakness in comparison to other individuals his age and the rest of

his own profile and is likely a limitation in his daily functioning.

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – 5th Edition

Mr. Client completed the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – 5th Edition (WISC-V). This is one of

the most widely used and researched intelligence scales for children and youth. This instrument is

comprised of a possible 21 subtests and yields a Full-Scale IQ score along with 13 other composite Index

scores that provide insight into an individual's cognitive strengths and weaknesses compared to other

individuals his/her age and compared to the rest of his/her own cognitive profile.


Full-Scale Intellectual Abilities

The Full-Scale IQ score (FSIQ) is the most reliable score and is considered most representative of general

intellectual functioning. Mr. Client achieved a FSIQ that placed him in the average range (27th

percentile) as compared to other Canadian youth his age. It is highly likely (95% chance) that Mr. Client's

true FSIQ is somewhere within the range of the 25th and 32nd percentile. A score at the 27th percentile

signifies that 27% of youth his age scored equal or below his result.

Primary Index Analyses

The five primary index scores provide for in-depth analysis of Mr. Client's intellectual abilities. His

highest performance came on the Visual Spatial Index. The Visual Spatial Index measures the ability to

evaluate visual details and understand visual spatial relationships to construct geometric designs. Mr.

Client's visual spatial reasoning system was assessed by tasks that required him to recreate pictured

designs using blocks (63rd percentile) and use three pieces to reconstruct a completed puzzle (50th

percentile). Mr. Client's overall results on the VSI placed him at the 55th percentile, or in the average

range. These scores reflect generally average capacity to apply spatial reasoning and analyze visual

details. From a real world perspective, visual spatial abilities are typically associated with "hands-on"

work tasks and these findings therefore predict Mr. Client would have average experiences in these

types of tasks. Mr. Client's visual spatial ability is considered a significant strength in comparison to the

rest of his own profile. In fact, the magnitude of this strength is so large that it is not commonly achieved

by other individuals his age. Therefore, Mr. Client's visual spatial ability is likely a noteworthy personal

asset in his daily functioning.

Mr. Client's next highest performance came on the Verbal Comprehension Index. The Verbal

Comprehension Index measures the ability to access and apply acquired word knowledge. Mr. Client's

verbal reasoning system was assessed by tasks that required him to find concrete and abstract

similarities between words (50th percentile), name pictures and define words (37th percentile),

demonstrate a fund of general factual information (63rd percentile) and verbally elaborate general

principles and social reasoning (50th percentile). Mr. Client's overall results on the VCI placed him at the

50th percentile, or in the average range. These scores reflect generally average word knowledge and

ability to reason and solve verbal problems. From a real world perspective, verbal comprehension

abilities are typically associated with academic success and these findings therefore predict Mr. Client

would have an average scholastic experience barring any learning disability or other cognitive,

neurological, or psychological impairment. Mr. Client's verbal comprehension is considered a significant

strength in comparison to the rest of his own profile. In fact, the magnitude of this strength is so large

that it is not commonly achieved by other individuals his age. Therefore, Mr. Client's verbal

comprehension is likely a noteworthy personal asset in his daily functioning.

Mr. Client's next highest performance came on the Fluid Reasoning Index. The Fluid Reasoning Index

measures the ability to detect conceptual relationships among visual objects to identify and apply rules.

Mr. Client's fluid reasoning skills were assessed by tasks that required him to select options to complete

a matrix (75th percentile), select weights to keep a scale balanced (25th percentile), select pictures to

form a group with common characteristics (75th percentile) and mentally solve arithmetic problems


within a time limit (9th percentile). Mr. Client's overall results on the FRI placed him at the 37th

percentile, or in the average range. The variability among Mr. Client's performances on the two core

tasks of the FRI was unusually large however, indicating his fluid reasoning abilities are not best

summarized by the FRI score. The direction of this variability implies a relative strength in inductive

reasoning relative to quantitative reasoning. From a real world perspective, fluid abilities are typically

associated with ambiguous work tasks that require abstract thinking to find the best solutions, and

these findings therefore predict Mr. Client would have variable experiences generating these types of

solutions depending on the cognitive demands of the task at hand.

Mr. Client's next highest performance came on the Processing Speed Index. The Processing Speed Index

measures speed and accuracy of visual identification and decision-making implementation. Mr. Client's

processing speed skills were assessed by tasks that required him to use a key to quickly and accurately

copy symbols (16th percentile), search groups for targets within a time limit (5th percentile) and quickly

scan and mark target objects (25th percentile). Mr. Client's overall results on the PSI placed him at the

10th percentile, or in the low average range. Low PSI scores may occur due to visual discrimination

problems, distractibility, slow decision-making, motor difficulties, or generally slow cognitive speed.

From a real world perspective, these findings indicate Mr. Client works at a slightly slower pace than the

norm and a school or work environment would need to understand and accommodate this pattern of

thinking. Mr. Client would work well in a setting where there are routine tasks, clear expectations for

performance, and where he can learn at his own pace. Mr. Client's processing speed is considered a

significant weakness both in comparison to his peers and the rest of his own profile. In fact, the

magnitude of this weakness is so large that it is not commonly found in other individuals his age.

Therefore, Mr. Client's processing speed is regarded as a high priority concern and suggests he may have

an impairment or disorder affecting this area of basic cognitive functioning.

Mr. Client's lowest scores were demonstrated on the Working Memory Index. The Working Memory

Index measures the ability to register, maintain, and manipulate visual and auditory information in

conscious awareness. Mr. Client's working memory skills were assessed by tasks that required him to

recall numbers in forward, reverse or ascending order (16th percentile), select memorized objects in

sequential order (5th percentile) and recall numbers and letters in a specified order (25th percentile).

Mr. Client's overall results on the WMI placed him at the 7th percentile, or in the very low range. Low

WMI scores may occur due to distractibility, visual or auditory discrimination problems, difficulty

maintaining information in conscious awareness, low storage capacity, or general low cognitive

functioning. Given that his scores on this index are below the norm, Mr. Client may benefit from

learning strategies to aid his working memory. Mr. Client's working memory is considered a significant

weakness both in comparison to his peers and the rest of his own profile. In fact, the magnitude of this

weakness is so large that it is not commonly found in other individuals his age. Therefore, Mr. Client's

working memory is regarded as a high priority concern and suggests he may have an impairment or

disorder affecting this area of basic cognitive functioning.

Specific comparisons of relative strengths and weaknesses of the primary indexes can further illuminate

Mr. Client's cognitive profile. The magnitude of difference between these personal (not normative)


strengths and weaknesses may be either rarely or commonly observed in the sample population at his

ability level. In this case, Mr. Client showed the following relative strengths and weaknesses:

Strength Weakness Commonness*

solving of complex problems mental manipulation of information Extremely Rare

solving of complex problems speed and accuracy of decision-making Extremely Rare

* Extremely Rare (<=2% of population at Mr. Client's ability level) Rare (<=5% of population at Mr. Client's ability level) Uncommon (<=15% of population at Mr. Client's ability level) Common (>15% of population at Mr. Client's ability level)

Ancillary and Complementary Index Analyses

The Ancillary and Complementary Indices of the WISC-V provide insight into specific and tailored referral

questions regarding Mr. Client's abilities.

The General Ability Index (GAI) provides an estimate of general intellectual functioning that is less

reliant on working memory and processing speed. It is particularly helpful in determining the intellectual

abilities of youth with neurodevelopmental disorders such as learning disorders, ADHD, language

disorders, or autism spectrum disorders, as these individuals may have a deflated FSIQ score due to

working memory and processing speed limitations. It may also be helpful in interpreting the profile of

gifted students who tend to have higher GAI scores relative to FSIQ and CPI scores. Mr. Client's overall

results on the GAI placed him at the 53rd percentile, or in the average range. Mr. Client's scores reflect

predominantly average abstract conceptual reasoning, visual-perceptual and spatial reasoning, and

verbal problem solving. In this case, Mr. Client's GAI score is significantly higher than his CPI score in a

pattern often found in those diagnosed with a neurodevelopmental or learning disorder.

The Nonverbal Index (NVI) is derived from "language reduced" subtests across various cognitive

domains that do not require any verbal responses. It can be particularly useful in providing a measure of

general intellectual ability for youth with special circumstances (e.g., English language learners or

children who are deaf or hard of hearing) or clinical needs (e.g., autism spectrum disorder with language

impairment, or other language disorder). Mr. Client's overall results on the NVI placed him at the 50th

percentile, or in the average range. Mr. Client's scores reflect predominantly average general

intellectual functioning for visually presented material.

The Naming Speed Index (NSI) is a broad indicator of automaticity of basic naming ability drawn from

tasks requiring the rapid naming of colors, objects, letters, numbers, and the quantity of objects in a

box. Its primary use is the assessment of youth with suspected learning disabilities, and is not to be

considered a measure of intellectual ability. Mr. Client's naming speed automaticity was assessed by two

core tasks. The first task assesses literary automaticity and the possibility of learning disorders in reading

and/or written expression (63rd percentile), whereas the second task assesses quantitative automaticity

and the possibility of a learning disorder in mathematics (19th percentile). Mr. Client's overall results on

the NSI placed him at the 50th percentile, or in the average range. The variability among Mr. Client's


performances on the two core tasks of the NSI was unusually large however, indicating his naming

speed abilities are not best summarized by the NSI score. The direction of this variability implies Mr.

Client's naming facility abilities are stronger in tasks that utilize stimuli associated with literacy skills than

for those tasks with stimuli associated with mathematics. In this regard, tailoring the presentation of

stimuli to utilize his strengths and practice in areas of weakness would be beneficial for Mr. Client.

The Symbol Translation Index (STI) is a broad indicator of visual-verbal associative memory drawn from

tasks requiring immediate, delayed and recognition memory. Its primary use is the assessment of youth

with suspected learning disorders or declarative memory impairment, and is not to be considered a

measure of intellectual ability. Mr. Client's visual-verbal memory was assessed by three core tasks. The

first task assesses immediate memory (63rd percentile), the second task assesses delayed memory (4th

percentile), and the third task assesses recognition memory (21st percentile). Mr. Client's overall results

on the STI placed him at the 30th percentile, or in the average range. The variability among Mr. Client's

performances on the three core tasks of the STI was unusually large however, indicating his memory

shows strengths and weaknesses and is not best summarized by the STI score. The direction of this

variability implies Mr. Client's immediate recall is superior to his delayed recall and delayed recognition.

This suggests he is forgetting more information than expected, based on initial learning, even when

presented with information to cue his long-term memory. It is important to note that Mr. Client's

delayed recognition is also superior to his delayed recall, implying that presenting information to cue his

long-term memory is still helpful. As his results on this index are variable, experimentation with different

memory strategies would be beneficial for Mr. Client.

The Storage and Retrieval Index (SRI) provides a broad estimate of long-term storage and retrieval

accuracy and fluency for reading, mathematics, and writing and is particularly helpful in the

investigation of learning disorders and other clinical conditions. Mr. Client's overall results on the SRI

placed him at the 25th percentile, or in the average range. Mr. Client's scores reflect predominantly

average capacity for new learning and average speed of access to existing verbal knowledge stores. In

this case, Mr. Client's SRI score does not reflect the pattern often found in those diagnosed with a

neurodevelopmental or learning disorder.

The Quantitative Reasoning Index (QRI) is an indicator of quantitative reasoning skills and assists in

more accurately predicting reading and mathematics achievement scores, academic success and

educational attainment, success in gifted programs, and professional examination performance. Mr.

Client's overall results on the QRI placed him at the 16th percentile, or in the low average range. Low

QRI scores may occur due to difficulties with mental math operations, difficulties understanding and

applying quantitative relationships, low working memory, or general difficulties with abstract conceptual

reasoning. In this case, Mr. Client's low QRI score reflects a pattern often found in those diagnosed with

a learning disorder in mathematics.

The Cognitive Proficiency Index (CPI) provides an estimate of the efficiency with which information is

processed. Good cognitive proficiency can reduce cognitive demands and liberate mental resources to

facilitate problem solving and deeper thinking. The CPI estimates the degree to which the use of quick

visual speed and good mental control aids the acquisition of new learning. As such, this index may be


helpful in interpreting the profile of youth with neurodevelopmental disorders such as learning

disorders, ADHD, language disorders, or autism spectrum disorders, as these individuals may have a

lower CPI score relative to FSIQ and GAI scores. Mr. Client's overall results on the CPI placed him at the

9th percentile, or in the low average range. Mr. Client's low CPI scores may occur for many reasons

including visual or auditory processing deficits, inattention, distractibility, visuomotor difficulties, limited

working memory storage or mental manipulation capacity, or general low cognitive ability. In this case,

Mr. Client's CPI score is significantly lower than his GAI score in a pattern often found in those diagnosed

with a neurodevelopmental or learning disorder.

The Auditory Working Memory Index (AWMI) is an indicator of auditory working memory skills and the

utilization of a phonological loop to temporarily store, rehearse and manipulate auditory information.

Mr. Client's overall results on the AWMI placed him at the 1st percentile, or in the extremely low range.

Low AWMI scores may occur due to auditory processing difficulties, inattention, distractibility, low

auditory working memory storage or manipulation, or general low working memory ability. Mr. Client's

scores on this index reflect his marked difficulties registering and manipulating verbally-presented

material.

Specific comparisons of relative strengths and weaknesses of ancillary and complementary scores can

further illuminate Mr. Client's cognitive profile. The magnitude of difference between these personal

(not normative) strengths and weaknesses may be either rarely or commonly observed in the sample

population at his ability level. In this case, Mr. Client showed the following relative strengths and

weaknesses:

Strength Weakness Commonness* Interpretive Possibilities

higher-order

cognitive

abilities

cognitive

processing

efficiency

Extremely

Rare

reading disorder, ADHD – Inattentive Type (not

Combined type), mild intellectual disability,

traumatic brain injury, motor impairment

visual working

memory

auditory

working

memory

Uncommon memory deficits for verbally-presented material


Academic Achievement Tests:

Wechsler Individual Achievement Test - 3rd Edition

Mr. Client was administered the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test - 3rd Edition (WIAT-III). This

instrument is designed to measure academic achievement of students from pre-kindergarten through

grade 12. It is often used to inform decisions regarding educational services and instructional objectives,

as well as aid in the diagnosis of specific learning disabilities. The WIAT-III consists of a possible 16

subtests that contribute to composite scores evaluating listening and speaking, reading, writing, and


mathematics skills. The scores provide insight into an individual's academic achievement strengths and

weaknesses compared to other individuals his/her age and/or grade level, and compared to the rest of

his/her own academic achievement profile. In this case, Mr. Client's scores were compared to other

youth his age.

Total Achievement

The Total Achievement Composite score represents a student's collective academic ability across the

listening and speaking, reading, writing, and mathematics domains. Mr. Client's Total Achievement

Score placed him in the average range (32nd percentile) as compared to other Canadian youth his age.

It is highly likely (95% chance) that Mr. Client's true Total Achievement is somewhere within the range of

the 27th and 39th percentile. A score at the 32nd percentile signifies that 32% of youth his age scored

equal or below his result.

Writing

Mr. Client's highest performance came on tests measuring writing. The Written Expression Composite

score measures a student's proficiency at age-appropriate writing of letters, words, sentences and

essays. Mr. Client's writing abilities were assessed by tasks that required him to spell letter sounds and

single words (66th percentile), combine two or three sentences into one (53rd percentile), formulate

sentences utilizing target words (66th percentile) and write spontaneous compositions within a time

limit (essay composition 34th percentile; grammar and mechanics 53rd percentile). Mr. Client's overall

results in writing placed him in the average range (61st percentile).

As these writing scores reflect proficiency with writing, these findings therefore predict Mr. Client would

have predominantly average academic achievement in similar tasks involving writing.

Reading

Mr. Client's next highest performance came on tests measuring reading. The Total Reading Composite

score measures a student's proficiency with basic reading of words, their understanding of what they

have read, and their level of ease and facility with reading. Mr. Client's reading abilities were assessed

by tasks that required him to read words of increasing difficulty (45th percentile), read nonsense words

of increasing difficulty (39th percentile), silently read and then answer comprehension questions about

various types of written text (63rd percentile) and quickly and accurately read passages aloud (overall

fluency 21st percentile; rate 19th percentile; accuracy 63rd percentile). In this case, Mr. Client's scores

measuring basic reading of words without context placed him in the average range (66th percentile),

and his scores measuring comprehension, and ease and facility with reading, placed him in the low

average range (21st percentile). Mr. Client's overall results in reading placed him in the average range

(50th percentile).

The variability among Mr. Client's performances on these tasks was unusually large, indicating his

reading abilities are not uniform. The direction of this variability indicates that Mr. Client's reading

comprehension is stronger than his speed and accuracy of reading. These findings therefore predict Mr.

Client would have variable experiences with academic achievement in similar tasks involving reading.


Listening and Speaking

Mr. Client's next highest performance came on tests measuring listening and speaking. The Oral

Language Composite score measures a student's ability to listen to and comprehend spoken language,

as well as their ability to express themselves using spoken language. Mr. Client's oral language abilities

were assessed by tasks that required him to point to pictures that best illustrate the meaning of spoken

words (77th percentile), orally respond to comprehension questions (68th percentile), say a word that

best defines a picture (10th percentile), name as many things as possible in a given category within a

time limit (7th percentile; note a below grade item set was used) and repeat increasingly complex

sentences verbatim (9th percentile). Mr. Client's overall results in listening and speaking placed him in

the average range (37th percentile).

The variability among Mr. Client's performances on these tasks was unusually large, indicating his oral

language abilities are not uniform. The direction of this variability indicates that Mr. Client's listening

skills (75th percentile) are greater than his speaking skills (14th percentile). As oral language abilities

reflect proficiency with verbal communication, these findings therefore predict Mr. Client would have

variable academic achievement in similar tasks involving verbal communication.

Mathematics

Mr. Client's lowest scores were demonstrated on tests measuring mathematics. Mr. Client completed

tasks that measure a student's proficiency with math problem solving and numerical operations, as well

as their level of ease and facility with math. These tasks required him to solve age-appropriate math

word problems encompassing basic concepts, everyday applications, geometry, and algebra (9th

percentile), demonstrate age-appropriate math skills involving basic operations, integers, geometry,

algebra, and calculus (3rd percentile), solve written addition problems within a time limit (4th

percentile), solve written subtraction problems within a time limit (6th percentile) and solve written

multiplication problems within a time limit (1st percentile). In this case, Mr. Client's scores measuring

Math Problem Solving placed him in the very low range (5th percentile), and his scores measuring Math

Fluency, placed him in the very low range (3rd percentile).

The variability among Mr. Client's performances on these tasks was unusually large, indicating his

mathematical abilities are not uniform. The direction of this variability indicates that Mr. Client's math

skills with word problems are stronger than his math skills outside of word problems. Nonetheless it is

clear that Mr. Client struggles with mathematics as his scores in this area were below the norm. Low

mathematics scores indicate less proficiency with mathematics, and these findings therefore predict Mr.

Client would have difficulties with academic achievement in similar tasks involving mathematics.

Domain Comparisons

Specific comparisons of relative strengths and weaknesses of academic domains can further illuminate

Mr. Client's academic profile. The magnitude of difference between these personal (not normative)

strengths and weaknesses may be either rarely or commonly observed in the sample population at his

ability level. In this case, Mr. Client showed the following relative strengths and weaknesses:



basic reading and decoding of

words out of context

contextual reading and ease and facility with

reading

Uncommon



overall writing ability Uncommon



math problem solving and numerical operations Rare



ease and facility with basic addition, subtraction

and multiplication

Extremely

Rare

overall writing ability contextual reading and ease and facility with

reading

Uncommon

overall writing ability math problem solving and numerical operations Rare

overall writing ability ease and facility with basic addition, subtraction

and multiplication

Extremely

Rare


Skills Analysis

A skills analysis is a qualitative evaluation of a student's performance across various skill sets. It

determines patterns of errors that can be utilized in targeted intervention planning. A skills analysis of

Mr. Client's performance highlighted the following areas for improvement:

Math Problem Solving Areas for Improvement

Feature Skill

Basic Concepts comparing numerals; ordering numerals; addition and subtraction of objects

Everyday

Applications

completing number patterns; identifying place value

Geometry finding angles and sides distances; finding circumference

Algebra converting fractions to decimals; solving simultaneous equations; solving

combination problems; mean median mode; finding slope and y-intercept

Numerical Operations Areas for Improvement

Feature Skill

Basic Math

Operations

subtraction with 2-digit numbers; subtraction with 3-digit numbers; multiplication

with 2-digit numbers; multiplication with 3-digit numbers; long division; adding

negative integers

Algebra addition of fractions; solving 2-step equations; solving simultaneous equations;

finding functions; factoring

Geometry numerical value of pi


Advanced Math differentiation; integration

Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses Analysis

Mr. Client's pattern of cognitive and academic strengths and weaknesses can help determine if he is

meeting criteria for a Specific Learning Disorder (SLD). The phrase "unexpected academic

underachievement" is often cited as a defining characteristic of a Specific Learning Disorder because it

means an individual's underachievement in reading, written expression and/or mathematics is

surprising, given that there are no other intellectual, physical, mental or neurological conditions or

situational factors that would better account for the academic underachievement. The aim of a pattern

of strengths and weaknesses analysis is to determine if a specific underlying cognitive processing

weakness is possibly contributing to the academic underachievement.

In this case, Mr. Client shows significant cognitive processing weaknesses in his working memory (7th

percentile) and processing speed (10th percentile) in comparison to his cognitive processing strengths in

his visual spatial ability (55th percentile) and verbal comprehension ability (50th percentile) as measured

on the WISC-V. He is also showing significant weaknesses in academic achievement in his mathematical

ability (5th percentile) and fluency with mathematics (3rd percentile) in comparison to these cognitive

processing strengths. Mr. Client's pattern of strengths and weaknesses reflects a pattern often found in

individuals who have underlying cognitive weaknesses in working memory and processing speed

contributing to academic underachievement in mathematical ability and fluency with mathematics.

Ability-Achievement Discrepancy Analysis

Discrepancies between Mr. Client's cognitive abilities and academic achievement can also help

determine if he is meeting criteria for a Specific Learning Disorder. The aim of the ability-achievement

discrepancy analysis is to determine if Mr. Client's academic achievement is commensurate with

predicted expectations given his cognitive abilities. The magnitude of difference between the predicted

and actual academic achievement can be extremely rare (<=1% of the population), rare (<=% of the

population), uncommon (<=15% of the population), or common (>15% of the population) for individual's

at his ability level.

In this case, Mr. Client is showing significant academic weaknesses in his math problem solving ability

(rare), mathematical ability outside of word problems (extremely rare), ability to add quickly and

accurately (rare), ability to subtract quickly and accurately (rare) and ability to multiply quickly and

accurately (extremely rare) in comparison to his general intellectual functioning outside of working

memory and processing speed as measured on the WISC-V.

Specific Learning Disability Hypotheses

If corroborating evidence from other sources (i.e., other psychological, developmental, medical, family,

and/or educational history) is in agreement, these findings support Specific Learning Disorder

hypotheses with impairments in mathematics (with subskill impairments in number sense,

memorization of arithmetic facts, accurate or fluent calculation and accurate math reasoning). Mr.

Client's current learning difficulties are rated as moderate and fit the pattern for Dyscalculia.


Wide Range Achievement Test - 4th Edition

Mr. Client completed the Wide Range Achievement Test - 4th Edition (WRAT-4). The WRAT-4 measures

the basic academic skills necessary for effective learning, communication and thinking. It contains

subtests including: Word Reading, Sentence Comprehension, Spelling and Math Computation. The Word

Reading and Sentence Comprehension subtests also combine to form a Reading Composite score. The

WRAT-4 provides insight into an individual's academic achievement strengths and weaknesses

compared to other individuals his/her age and/or grade level, and compared to the rest of his/her own

academic achievement profile. In this case, Mr. Client's scores were compared to other youth in his

grade (tested in the fall).

The Reading Composite score is a highly reliable, comprehensive measure of reading achievement. Mr.

Client achieved a Reading Composite that placed him in the average range (34th percentile) as

compared to other youth in his grade (tested in the fall). It is highly likely (95% chance) that Mr. Client's

true Reading Composite is somewhere within the range of the 32nd and 39th percentile. A score at the

34th percentile signifies that 34% of youth from the normative sample scored equal or below his result.

When examining individual subtests, Mr. Client's highest performance came on the Word Reading

Subtest. The Word Reading Subtest measures letter and word decoding through letter identification and

word recognition. Mr. Client's results in word reading placed him at the 39th percentile, or in the

average range.

Mr. Client's next highest performance came on the Sentence Comprehension Subtest. The Sentence

Comprehension Subtest measures an individual's ability to gain meaning from words and to

comprehend ideas and information contained in sentences. Mr. Client's results in sentence

comprehension placed him at the 27th percentile, or in the average range.

Mr. Client's next highest performance came on the Spelling Subtest. The Spelling Subtest measures an

individual's ability to encode sounds into written form through the use of a dictated spelling format

containing both letters and words. Mr. Client's results in spelling placed him at the 21st percentile, or in

the low average range.

Mr. Client's lowest scores were demonstrated on the Math Computation Subtest. The Math

Computation Subtest measures an individual's ability to perform basic mathematics computations

through counting, identifying numbers, solving simple oral problems and calculating written

mathematics problems. Mr. Client's results in math computation placed him at the 5th percentile, or in

the very low range.

Specific comparisons of relative strengths and weaknesses of subtest scores can further illuminate Mr.

Client's academic achievement profile. The magnitude of difference between these personal (not

normative) strengths and weaknesses may be either rarely or commonly observed in the sample

population of students in his grade (tested in the fall). In this case, Mr. Client showed the following

relative strengths and weaknesses in his academics:



Word Reading Spelling Uncommon

Word Reading Math Computation Extremely Rare

Sentence Comprehension Math Computation Rare

Spelling Math Computation Somewhat Rare

* Extremely Rare (Approximately 1% of the sample population) Rare (Approximately 5% of the sample population) Somewhat Rare (Approximately 10% of the sample population) Uncommon (Approximately 15% of the sample population) Common (Approximately >15% of the sample population)

Tests for Attention and Concentration:

Conners' Continuous Performance Test - 2nd Edition

Mr. Client completed the Conners' Continuous Performance Test - 2nd Edition (CPT-II), a computerized

assessment of one's attention capacity. This instrument measures reaction times, the consistency of

reaction times, modulation of impulsive responding, and vigilance (sustained attention) in the detection

of flashing targets on a computer screen. Overall, the profile obtained by Mr. Client resembles an

attention-disordered profile (87% match) more closely than a non-clinical profile. Mr. Client had an

atypical response style with more concern for speed than accuracy. His profile reflected some

limitations in quickly and effectively perceiving and processing stimuli as he had difficulty discriminating

targets from non-targets. There were some signs of inattention as evidenced by a high number of

omission errors, a high number of commission errors, a slow response rate and inconsistent and

sporadic responding. There were also some signs of impulsivity as evidenced by a greater number of

perseveration errors than his peers. He had some difficulties with sustained attention in that his

responses became slower and less consistent as the test progressed. Mr. Client's reaction times slowed

and response consistency decreased during longer inter-stimulus intervals. This finding often relates to

difficulty in adjusting to task demands and relates to activation/arousal needs. It will be important for

Mr. Client to consider optimal stimulation levels when he needs to concentrate. In general, Mr. Client's

performance showed poor attention capacity, lack of impulse control and problems with vigilance that

could be indicative of an underlying attention-deficit or neurological disorder.

Brief Test of Attention

On a neuropsychological measure of attention, the Brief Test of Attention (BTA), Mr. Client was asked to

keep track of the number of letters or numbers he heard amidst distraction. Here, he performed in the

low average range (10th - 24th percentile), indicating mild difficulties paying attention and tuning out

distractions.


Executive Functioning Tests:

Wisconsin Card Sorting Test

Mr. Client completed a task of executive functioning that involved trial and error problem-solving in a

test where he was provided limited feedback. The purpose of this test was to evaluate Mr. Client's

higher order cognition and gauge his ability to reason, think flexibly and modulate impulsive responding.

His overall results showed mild impairments in executive functioning (16th percentile). It is possible Mr.

Client is somewhat challenged when attempting to generate possible solutions to ambiguous problems

and switch between changing task demands.

Learning and Memory Tests:

California Verbal Learning Test - 2nd Edition

The California Verbal Learning Test – Second Edition (CVLT-II) is a standardized instrument used to

evaluate auditory memory. The CLVT-II uses a number of verbal list-learning tasks to examine an

individual's ability to encode, maintain and recall orally presented information. It also provides insight

into specific strategies respondents use to retrieve information. The CVLT-II uses recognition, free-recall,

and cued-recall response formats.

Mr. Client's overall results on the first five trials were in the average range (50th percentile). Mr. Client's

recall of words immediately before and after a distracter list was within normal limits. After longer

delayed intervals, his ability to retain information showed slight deficits, denoting some mild difficulties

in retention and retrieval of information. It is noteworthy that Mr. Client's results improved significantly

between the first two trials, a finding that can sometimes indicate initial testing anxiety, overwhelm, or

surprise at the length of the word list. Further analysis of the order of his responses indicated he tended

to use a less-efficient forward serial learning style as opposed to the more efficient semantic learning

style that is often utilized by individuals with greater working memory capacity. Significantly, Mr. Client

had a greater than average number of repetitions and intrusions (adding words to the list that were

never presented), which can reflect disorganization of thought and memory impairment. Mr. Client's

performance when provided with a yes/no recognition task was perfect. Overall these results reflect

some difficulties with long-term memory and the organization of memory, but predominantly average

auditory memory capability.

Rey Complex Figure Test

In order to assess his visual-spatial ability and visual-spatial memory, Mr. Client was asked to complete

the Rey Complex Figure Test (RCFT). The RCFT provides an objective and standardized approach to

scoring drawings. The drawings are created by an individual while directly observing and copying a

complex figure (visual-spatial ability) and from memory after a short delay (short-term visual-spatial

memory) and long delay (long-term visual-spatial memory).

Results indicate that Mr. Client's visual-spatial abilities while directly observing and copying the original

drawing showed less proficiency than his age-related peers in perceptually organizing visually-presented

information. He completed the drawing within an average amount of time. After a short delay, Mr.


Client's short-term visual-spatial memory was tested when he was asked to reproduce the complex

figure again, this time without the original drawing in front of him. His ability to recall the information

was found to be in the average range (50th percentile). Following a 20-minute delay, Mr. Client's long-

term visual-spatial memory was tested when he was asked to draw the complex figure again. In this

trial, Mr. Client was able to perceptually organize and remember the figure at the extremely low range

(2nd percentile). Finally, his last task was to recognize from a series of figures those that were part of

the original drawing. Here, Mr. Client's visual-perceptual recognition was found to be slightly below the

norm, in the low average range (21st percentile).

Emotional and Behavior Rating Scales:

Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale - 2nd Edition

Mr. Client completed the Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale – 2nd Edition (RADS-2). The RADS-2 is a

30-item self-report inventory assessing the clinical severity of depressive symptomatology in

adolescents. The RADS-2 provides an indication of four factors of depression: Dysphoric Mood,

Anhedonia/Negative Affect, Negative Self-Evaluation, and Somatic Complaints, that together yield a

Total Depression Score. In addition, critical items are examined because of their ability to discriminate

between clinically depressed and non-depressed adolescents.

Mr. Client's Depression Total Score placed him in the mild clinical depression range (91st percentile).

Although this provides a global understanding of the severity of his symptoms, it is important to

investigate each of the four factors independently.

The Dysphoric Mood subscale describes a negative emotional state associated with feelings of

subjective misery and distress. It taps symptoms of sadness, crying behaviour, loneliness, irritability,

worry and self-pity. Here Mr. Client scored in the moderate clinical depression range (94th percentile).

The Anhedonia/Negative Affect subscale describes a lack of interest and reduced engagement in

pleasurable activities as well as generalized negative feelings related to oneself. It taps symptoms of

disinterest in having fun, and disinterest in engaging in pleasant activities, talking and eating meals with

others. Here Mr. Client scored in the mild clinical depression range (87th percentile).

The Negative Self-Evaluation subscale describes a broadly defined sense of negative feelings about

oneself that may be expressed in feelings of helplessness or associated with suicidal thoughts and

behaviours. It taps symptoms of low self-worth, self-denigration, and thoughts of self-harm. Here Mr.

Client scored in the severe clinical depression range (98th percentile).

The Somatic Complaints subscale describes classic somatic components of depression as well as

irritability and boredom. Although high scores on this scale may be associated with physical illness, they

may also indicate endogenous depression. Items on this subscale tap symptoms including boredom,

irritability, stomachaches, feeling ill, fatigue and sleep disturbance. Here Mr. Client scored in the normal

range (50th percentile).


It is important to note that Mr. Client endorsed critical items that discriminate between clinically

depressed and non-depressed adolescents, including: social withdrawal, self-reproach and helplessness.

Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale - 2nd Edition

Mr. Client completed the Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale – 2nd Edition (RCMAS-2). The

RCMAS-2 is a 49-item self-report inventory assessing the level and nature of anxiety in children from 6

to 19 years old. The RCMAS-2 provides an indication of three factors of anxiety: Physiological Anxiety,

Worry and Social Anxiety that together yield a Total Anxiety Score. An indication of the validity of the

responses is also provided through the Inconsistent Responding Index and Defensiveness scale.

In this case, Mr. Client's score on the Inconsistent Responding Index indicates a pattern of inconsistency

that implies the rest of his profile should be interpreted with caution. A pattern of inconsistent

responding may be related to temporary distractions that occurred during examination, noncompliance,

carelessness, vision problems, or lack of understanding of item content. His score on the Defensiveness

scale shows a level of defensiveness that is within normal limits.

Mr. Client's Total Anxiety scale indicates he is experiencing a level of anxiety that is moderately

problematic (94th percentile). Although the Total Anxiety scale provides a global understanding of Mr.

Client's overall anxiety, it is important to investigate each of the three factors of anxiety independently.

Mr. Client reported his highest levels of anxiety on the Social Anxiety scale. The Social Anxiety scale

describes anxiety in social and performance situations, such as fear of being laughed at by others, fear of

doing things the wrong way, or living up to the expectations of others. Mr. Client self-reported social

anxiety that is extremely problematic (99th percentile).

Next highest in severity were symptoms tapping the Worry scale. The Worry scale addresses a variety of

vague and ill-defined obsessive concerns and internalized anxiety, such as worry about something bad

happening, nervousness and fears about being hurt or socially isolated. Mr. Client self-reported

symptoms of worry that are moderately problematic (94th percentile).

Lastly, Mr. Client reported his experience of anxiety on the Physiological Anxiety scale. The Physiological

Anxiety scale addresses somatic (bodily) concerns that often accompany anxiety, including nausea,

sleep difficulties, headaches and fatigue. Mr. Client self-reported physiological anxiety that is no more

problematic than for most students (16th percentile).

Of particular note, Mr. Client endorsed a preponderance of items that ask about performance anxiety.

Children and adolescents who endorse these items may experience paralyzing social anxiety that

prevents singing, acting, or speaking before a group. They may also experience test performance anxiety

that can affect test outcomes. As such, Mr. Client may benefit from specific interventions aimed at

lowering performance anxiety.

Vineland-II Adaptive Behavior Scales

Mr. Client's teacher completed the Vineland-II Adaptive Behavior Scales – 2nd Edition (Vineland-II) in

order to gain a sense of Mr. Client's adaptive functioning. On this measure, adaptive behavior is defined


as the performance of daily activities required for personal and social sufficiency. In this context,

adaptive behavior is age-dependent and judged by others. In contrast to cognition, which is considered

relatively stable over time, the behaviors evaluated on this measure are considered modifiable and

represent a student's typical performance, not ability. The Vineland-II is comprised of a possible 11

Subdomain Scores and four Domain Index Scores (Communication, Daily Living Skills, Socialization, and

Motor Skills) that together yield an Adaptive Behavior Composite Score. In addition, the Vineland-II

examines an individual's strengths and weaknesses compared to other individuals his/her age and

compared to the rest of his/her own adaptive behavior profile.

The Adaptive Behavior Composite score (ABC) is the most reliable score of the Vineland-II and is

considered most representative of an individual's general level of adaptive functioning. Mr. Client

achieved an ABC that placed him in the adequate range (32nd percentile) as compared to other youth

his age. It is highly likely (95% chance) that Mr. Client's true ABC is somewhere within the range of the

27th and 37th percentile. A score at the 32nd percentile signifies that 32% of youth his age scored equal

or below his result.

The primary index scores provide for in-depth analysis of Mr. Client's adaptive functioning. His most

adaptive behaviors came on the Communication Index. The Communication Index measures how a

student listens and pays attention, and uses words to speak and write. Mr. Client's teacher judged his

receptive communication (listening, paying attention and understanding of others) to be in the

moderately low range; his expressive communication (what he says, how he uses words and sentences

to gather and provide information) to be in the moderately low range; and his written communication

(what he understands about how letters make words, and what he reads and writes) to be in the low

range. It is important to note that Mr. Client's expressive communication is a personal strength for him

in this domain. In particular, his expressive communication is considered significantly stronger than his

written communication to a degree not commonly occurring in youth his age. Mr. Client's overall results

on the Communication Index placed him in the adequate range (45th percentile).

Mr. Client's next highest performance came on the Daily Living Skills Index. The Daily Living Skills Index

measures a student's daily habits and hygiene. Mr. Client's teacher judged his personal skills (eating,

dressing and practicing personal hygiene) to be in the moderately low range; his academic skills (what he

understands about time, money and math) to be in the low range; and his school community skills (how

he follows school and classroom rules and routines, focuses attention, and approaches learning) to be in

the low range. Mr. Client's overall results on the Daily Living Skills Index placed him in the adequate

range (37th percentile).

Mr. Client's next highest performance came on the Motor Index. The Motor Index assesses both gross

and fine motor skills. Mr. Client's teacher judged his gross motor skills (how he uses arms and legs for

movement and coordination) to be in the moderately low range; and his fine motor skills (how he uses

hands and fingers to manipulate objects) to be in the low range. It is important to note that Mr. Client's

gross motor skills are a personal strength for him in comparison to his fine motor skills to a degree not

commonly occurring in youth his age. Mr. Client's overall results on the Motor Skills Index placed him in

the adequate range (30th percentile).


Mr. Client's lowest scores were demonstrated on the Socialization Index. The Socialization Index

measures how a student interacts with others, uses play and leisure time, and demonstrates

responsibility and sensitivity to others. Mr. Client's teacher judged his interpersonal relationship skills

(how he interacts with others) to be in the low range; his play and leisure time skills (how he utilizes his

free time) to be in the moderately low range; and his coping skills (his demonstration of responsibility

and sensitivity to others) to be in the low range. It is important to note that Mr. Client's play and leisure

time skills are a personal strength for him in this domain. In fact, his play and leisure time skills are

considered significantly stronger than both his interpersonal relationship and coping skills to a degree

not commonly occurring in youth his age. Mr. Client's overall results on the Socialization Index placed

him in the moderately low range (14th percentile). Mr. Client's ability to socialize is considered a

significant weakness in comparison to other individuals his age in the normative population. In addition,

his ability in this area is significantly lower than his abilities in other areas. Therefore, it is likely Mr.

Client's ability to socialize is a limitation in his daily functioning.

Specific comparisons of significant relative strengths and weaknesses of the primary indexes and across

domain subdomain scores may be of particular interest for those working with Mr. Client, as these

comparisons may further illuminate Mr. Client's adaptive behavior profile, warrant further exploration,

and/or serve as points of intervention. The magnitude of difference between these personal (not

normative) strengths and weaknesses may be either rarely or commonly observed in the sample

population of youth his age. In this case, Mr. Client showed the following relative strengths and

weaknesses:


Communication Skills Socialization Skills Extremely Rare

Daily Living Skills Socialization Skills Rare

Motor Skills Socialization Skills Somewhat Rare

Expressive Communication Skills Interpersonal Relationship Skills Extremely Rare

Expressive Communication Skills Coping Skills Rare

Personal Skills Interpersonal Relationship Skills Somewhat Rare

Personal Skills Fine Motor Skills Common

* Extremely Rare (about 1% of the sample population in Mr. Client's age range) Rare (about 5% of the sample population in Mr. Client's age range) Somewhat Rare (about 10% of the sample population in Mr. Client's age range) Common (at least 16% or more of the sample population in Mr. Client's age range)

Diagnostic Tests:

Depression Checklist, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - 5th Edition (Depression,

DSM-5)

In order to assess his symptoms of depression, Mr. Client was asked to complete a checklist based on

the criteria for depression as listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders – 5th

Edition (DSM-5). An individual is suspected to be experiencing a Major Depressive Episode when at least


five of a possible nine symptoms are present during the same 2-week period, and at least one of the

symptoms is either depressed or irritable mood, or loss of interest or pleasure in activities. Mr. Client

endorsed the following six of nine symptoms: depressed or irritable mood; loss of interest or pleasure in

activities; fatigue; feelings of worthlessness or guilt; difficulties concentrating; and, thoughts of death or

suicidal ideation. Based on these endorsed symptoms, it is suspected that Mr. Client is experiencing a

Major Depressive Episode at this time.

DIAGNOSTIC PROBABILITIES

*...Generated section pending...*

SUMMARY AND COMMENTS

*...Generated section pending...*

RECOMMENDATIONS

*+...Generated section and/or custom content pending...+*

Due to the developing nature of people’s skills and abilities, the results contained in this report are

meant for current use only. Any reference to these results in the future should be made with this in

mind. If I can be of any further assistance, please contact me at 800-555-1212.

Sincerely,

__________________________

Wally Smith, PhD., R.Psych

Clinical Psychologist

PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT - · PDF filePSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT Confidential Client: ......

Documents

Transcript of PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT - · PDF filePSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT Confidential Client: ......