EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION REPORT



University of Illinois at ChicagoEDUCATIONAL 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 ASSESSMENTJohn 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 INSTRUMENTSWoodcock-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); Math (Subtest 2:Applied Problems, Subtest 5: Calculation, Subtest 10: Math Facts Fluency, Subtest 13: Number Matrices);Key Math 3-Diagnostic Assessment- Form AClinical 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 CInformal Reading Inventory: Flynt/Cooter Comprehensive Reading Inventory-2nd EditionConners Rating Scales-3rd Edition: Long Version (Parent and Self-Report Forms)School Motivation and Learning Strategies Inventory- Child Form (SMALSI)Dynamic Math AssessmentDEVELOPMENTAL AND BACKGROUND HISTORYAn 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.Medical HistoryMrs. 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 sportsLanguage Development/Languages SpokenMrs. 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 DevelopmentMrs. 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 HistoryMrs. 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 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 RoutinesJohn’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 OBSERVATIONSAt 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. 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.Scaled Scores (=10, S=3)………..4…..………….7………….…10………..…...13………..…….16……….. Significantly Below Average Above Significantly Below Average Average Average Above AverageStandard Scores (=100, S=15)………..70…..………….85…….……..100………….....115……..…….130……….. Significantly Below Average Above Significantly Below Average Average AverageAbove AverageT-Scores (=50, S=10)……30……..…….….40………….....…50……………......60..……….…….70……….Significantly Below Average Above Significantly Below Average Average Average Above AverageCOGNITIVE PROCESSINGThe 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 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 student to state a word that meant the opposite of the presented word. 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”.73Below AverageSubtest 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.75Below AverageFluid 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 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”. 80Below AverageSubtest 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 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. 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 where the answer was big, he described as much as he could; saying, “circle and square”.62Significantly Below AverageExtended 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. 96AverageLong 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 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.107AverageSubtest 13: Visual-Auditory LearningMeasured associative memory, or the ability to learn, store, and retrieve a series of various images that symbolized words. 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.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 out of a possible 109 on this subtest.107AverageVisual 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 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.92AverageSubtest 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. 96AverageAuditory 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 5: Phonological 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.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 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". 74Below AverageSubtest 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".109AverageCognitive 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 4: Letter-Pattern MatchingSpecifically measured perceptual speed 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. John worked quickly and was able to work without any 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. 98AverageSubtest 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. 102AverageShort-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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 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”85Low averageSubtest 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.”100AverageExtended 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 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 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,” John said “Cow, glove, soup, 1,6,2.”105AverageWoodcock 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 4: Letter-Pattern MatchingPreviously discussed.98AverageSubtest 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.104AverageQuantitative 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 2: Number SeriesPreviously discussed.80Below AverageSubtest 15: Analysis-SynthesisPreviously discussed96AverageSupplemental Subtest: SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 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". 78Below AverageCognitive 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 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. LanguageThe Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-5th 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Scaled Score(=10, S=3)InterpretationWord 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.9AverageFormulated 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 imposed by illustrations.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 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.”6Below averageRecalling 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.”10AverageSemantic 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 3:35.8AverageReceptive Language Index: Measured listening skills and auditory comprehension. John received a standard score of 91 and a percentile rank of 27, which were average.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Scaled Score (=10, S=3)InterpretationWord Classes (WC)Discussed previously 9AverageFollowing 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.” 9Average Semantic RelationshipsDiscussed previously8AverageExpressive 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Scaled Score (=10, S=3)Interpretation Formulated Sentences (FS)Discussed previously6Below Average Recalling Sentences (RS)Discussed previously 10Average 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.”7Low AverageLanguage 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Scaled Score (=10, S=3)InterpretationWord Classes (WC)Discussed previously 9AverageUnderstanding 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.” 9Average 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 definition for words. 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 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.” 9AverageLanguage Memory Index: Measured the ability to remember language. John received a standard score of 89 and a percentile rank of 23, which were average.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Scaled Score (=10, S=3)InterpretationFollowing Directions (FD)Discussed previously9AverageFormulated Sentences (FS)Discussed previously6Below AverageRecalling Sentences (RS)Discussed previously10AverageLanguage 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.ReadingThe 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 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. 98AverageSubtest 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”. 84Below AverageBroad Reading: measured reading decoding, fluency, and reading comprehension. John received a Broad Reading Cluster standard score of 95, which was average.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard ScoreInterpretationSubtest 1: Letter-Word IdentificationPreviously discussed 98AverageSubtest 4: Passage ComprehensionPreviously discussed84Below AverageSubtest 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. 99AverageBasic 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard ScoreInterpretationSubtest 1: Letter-Word IdentificationPreviously discussed 98AverageSubtest 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. 106AverageReading 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard ScoreInterpretationSubtest 4: Passage ComprehensionPreviously discussed 84Below AverageSubtest 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. 100AverageSubtest 17: Reading VocabularyMeasured the ability to read words and then provide synonyms or antonyms.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 follow, he incorrectly responded with “don’t”. Uncharacteristically, he provided no response to several items. 90AverageReading Fluency: measured aspects of fluency including prosody, automaticity, and accuracy. John received a Reading Fluency cluster standard score of 99, which was average.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard ScoreInterpretationSubtest 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.” 98AverageSubtest 9: Sentence Reading FluencyPreviously discussed99Average 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard ScoreInterpretationSubtest 9: Sentence Reading FluencyPreviously discussed 99AverageSubtest 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. 95AverageThe 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 troubleSerious 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 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 AnalysisOral Reading FluencyWord Reading (decoding) LevelAccuracyOral 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 levelAccuracyReading 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 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).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 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 prehensive Reading Inventory (CRI)Authentic Reading LevelsNarrative TextsSILENT Reading ComprehensionORAL Word Reading FluencyIndependent 44InstructionalNANAFrustration55Reading 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 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 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.”94AverageSubtest 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.”94AverageSupplemental 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.”113High averageBroad 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 3: SpellingDiscussed previously104AverageSubtest 6: Writing SamplesDiscussed previously94AverageSubtest 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.80Below AverageBasic 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 3: SpellingDiscussed previously104AverageSubtest 14: EditingMeasured the ability to identify and correct errors in a written passage. John was able to look at given sentences, and identify 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.” 93AverageWritten 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 6: Writing SamplesDiscussed previously94AverageSubtest 11: Sentence Writing FluencyDiscussed previously80Below averageWriting 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.MathThe 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 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 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. 74Below AverageSubtest 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”. 2044065-5111751075055-499110However, 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 ? , and in another instance erased a correct factional answer and left it blank. 85Low AverageSubtest 10: Math Facts FluencyMeasured the ability to solve simple addition, subtraction, division, and multiplication problems under a time constraint.John worked at an appropriate speed and correctly answered 54 of the 59 problems he attempted. Most of John’s incorrect answers were attributed to him identifying the wrong math symbol. For example, when given 7+1=___, John wrote “6”. 94AverageMath 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. SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 5: CalculationDiscussed previously85Low AverageSubtest 10: Math Facts FluencyDiscussed previously94AverageMath 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Standard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationSubtest 10: Applied ProblemsDiscussed Previously74Below AverageSubtest 13: Number Matrices 76898595250Measured 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. 21590062865John worked quickly but inaccurately on this task. Often, giving answers that only satisfied one requirement of the problem. For example, given the following matrix235John 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 246John incorrectly answered “5” when the answer should have been 8 or 12. 77Below AverageThe 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 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Scaled Score(=10, S=3)InterpretationSubtest 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”. 4Below AverageSubtest 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?647704445John first responded with “I’m not sure” but after prompting to try he gave the answer “3”, when it should have been 10. 6Below AverageSubtest 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. 7Low AverageSubtest 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. 6Below AverageSubtest 5: Data Analysis & ProbabilityMeasured the ability to collect, display and interpret data. The items also covered concepts such as chance and probability.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. 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, GirlsBoysRoom A1015Room B1612Total2627John 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. 7Low AverageOperations: Measured written and mental computation skills with regard to addition, subtraction, multiplication and division.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Scaled Score(=10, S=3)InterpretationSubtest 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”. 6Below AverageApplications: 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.SubtestAnalysis of Performance Scaled Score(=10, S=3)InterpretationSubtest 9: Foundations of Problem SolvingAssessed “readiness” for applied problem solving by requiring the student to identify the necessary elements, operations and strategies required to solve problems.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 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. 4Below AverageSubtest 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.6Below AverageDynamic 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 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 yourselfStep 2: Identify the KEY WORDSStep 3: Make a planStep 4: Solve the problemStep 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 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 TasksThe 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 CSubtestDescriptionAnalysis of PerformanceAccuracyVISUAL TASKSSubtest 1:Copying: Distance CopyingMeasured visual perception in association with a kinesthetic-motor response. Given a 10-minute time limit, John copied a short story hanging on the wall, with little emphasis on memory. 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 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. 29/35 correct83% accuracySubtest 2:Copying: Near Point CopyingMeasured 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 correct83% accuracySubtest 3: V-P-D-MVisual Perception, Discrimination & Memory: Recognition TaskThis 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 correct100% accuracySubtest 4:V-P Visual Perception Matching: Recognition TaskVisual 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 test booklet over and underline what he just saw (a recognition task). 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 correct100% accuracySubtest 5:V-P-M-KVisual Perception & Memory linked to a Written Response: Recall TaskEvaluated 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 correct80% accuracyAUDITORY TASKSSubtest 6: A-P-M-KAuditory Perception & Memory linked to a Written Response: Recall TaskMeasured 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 correct95% accuracy Subtest 7: Phoneme-Grapheme Association with a Written ResponseMeasured 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 correct83% accuracy Subtest 8: A-P-DAuditory Perception & Discrimination: Recognition TaskEvaluated 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 similar choices (a recognition task). John excelled at this task. He worked quickly and accurately throughout the task. He had 0 errors and 0 self-corrections. 18/18 correct100% accuracySlingerland 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 InadequatelyDevelopedBelowAverageAverageVery Well DevelopedExtremely Well DevelopedLiability ScalesMinimally ProblematicLess ProblematicNo More ProblematicModerately ProblematicExtremely ProblematicSMALSI- School Motivation and Learning Strategies InventoryA norm-referenced self-report questionnaire completed by the student.CategoryT-Score(=50, S=10)InterpretationStudent 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 encoding55AverageNOTE Note-taking/Listening Skills: discriminating important material when taking notes, organizing notes, efficiency in note taking.59AverageREAD Reading/Comprehension Strategies: previewing, monitoring, and reviewing texts, including self-testing, to ensure understanding.63Very Well DevelopedWRITEWriting/Research Skills: researching topics in a variety of ways, organizing writing projects, monitoring and self-checking for errors53AverageTEST Test-Taking Strategies: increasing efficiency in test taking, including eliminating unlikely answers and strategic guessing.58AverageTIM/ORG Time Management: effective use of time to complete assignments, understanding of time needed for academic anizational Techniques: organizing class and study materials, structuring assignments including homework and other projects.58AverageStudent 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.48No More Problematic TANX Test Anxiety: student’s experience of debilitating symptoms of test anxiety, lowered performance on tests due to excessive worry.58No More ProblematicCONFID Concentration/Attention Difficulties: difficulty attending to lectures and other academic tasks, monitoring and adjusting attention to performance, concentrating and avoiding distractions.44No More Problematic??????????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. 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-3rd 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-3rd Edition: Long VersionA standardized norm-referenced measure of attention and behavior.High scores indicate areas of concern.CategoryFatherTeacherJohnInattention47Average65Elevated46AverageHyperactivity-Impulsivity<405757Learning Problems61Elevated73Elevated46Executive Functioning5772ElevatedN/AAggression445649Peer/ Family Relations4380Elevated45DSM-IV-TR: ADHD Inattentive4965Elevated54DSM-IV-TR: ADHD Hyperactive-Impulsive<405555DSM-IV-TR: Conduct Disorder455644DSM-IV-TR: Oppositional Defiant Disorder4167Elevated50Conners 3 Global Index: Total4472ElevatedN/A*These behaviors were not observed in the clinic or reported by John’s parents.Categories in which John seemed to be exhibiting behaviors that fell within the Elevated or Very Elevated rangeCategoryCommon Characteristics of High Scores in the CategoryExample of Items in this CategoryInattentionMay 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 ProblemsAcademic 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 FunctioningMay 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 RelationsMay 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 InattentiveOften 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 DefiantDisorderMay 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 IndexHigh 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.SUMMARYJohn 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. 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.StrengthsJohn 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 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.NeedsJohn 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 sentences. Often his sentences were very basic and not as developed as would be expected for his grade level.RECOMMENDATIONSThe 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.HOMEGeneral: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: up a meeting with John’s current school to discuss how the objectives of his IEP can be implemented. Consider re-implementing tutoring services to help John with his math skills, specifically related to number sense. See the links below: Consider non-profit organizations to assist John with his writing difficulties. offers after school tutoring, workshops, and in classroom support for writing and to strengthen student’s creative writing skills. See link below: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: Utilize online math tutorials specific to John’s areas of need through Khan Academy. See link: 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. 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: 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: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. 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. Download the sentence builder app to assist John with sentence and thought formation. Cost $5.99. See link below: 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: SCHOOLThe 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: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. 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.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: 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: 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. (Book, $27.35) 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. 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: . Also, attached in the appendix is an example of how you can help model this strategy. 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. 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. Writing: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!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.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: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. WritingReading 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. 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: teachers/story-starters/ 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: .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! MathYour 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: 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 InternGraduate Student InternGraduate Student Intern__________________________________ ____________________________Kary Zarate, M.Ed Norma A. Lopez-Reyna, Ph.D.Instructor, UIC Assessment ClinicDirector, UIC Assessment ClinicAPPENDIXRecommended strategiesPage numberGuide to Solving Math Word Problems55Solving Math Problems through Drawing56Sentence Frames:Making Predictions FrameI-Message Frame5757Appendix of ScoresWoodcock-Johnson IV Test of Cognitive Abilities 57Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement59Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals- 5th Edition60Comprehensive Reading Inventory61KeyMath?-3 Diagnostic Assessment61Slingerland Screening Tests 61School Motivation and Learning Strategies Inventory63Conners Rating Scales-3rd Edition64Steps 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…AddSubtractMultiplyDivideAll togetherLess thenTimes, groups Out of/ Part ofMoredifferenceProductRatio/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 mistakeName: ______________________________ 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!)Making Predictions FrameGuessing what will happen next based on information or illustrations in the story.Because the character ____, I predict s/he will _____.Because the main character ran away from home, I predict that he will…At first I thought ______, but now I believe _______.I think _____ will _____ because _____ usually ____.Since ________, I can assume that _____ will _____.Since it’s been raining all week, I can assume that the game will be cancelled.I-Message FrameI 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.”APPENDIX OF SCORESJohn Smith, 10 years old, 4th gradeWoodcock-Johnson IV Test of Cognitive Abilities (WJ-IV Cog)A norm-referenced measure of cognitive processing abilities.Test NumberTest NameStandard Score(=100, S=15)Interpretation1Oral Vocabulary 73Below Average2Number Series80Below Average3Verbal Attention85Low Average4Letter-Pattern Matching98Average5Phonological Processing74Below Average6Story Recall107Average7Visualization92Average8General Information75Below Average9Concept Formation62Significantly Below Average10Numbers Reversed100Average11Number-Pattern Matching104Average12Nonword Repetition109Average13Visual-Auditory Learning107Average14Picture Recognition96Average15Analysis-Synthesis96Average16Object-Number Sequencing105Average17Pair Cancellation102Average18Memory for Words78Below AverageCLUSTER SCORESCOMPREHENSION-KNOWLEDGE Subtests 1, 871Below AverageFLUID REASONING EXTENDED Subtests 2, 9, 15 74Below AverageSHORT-TERM WORKING MEMORY EXTENDED Subtests 3, 10, 1696AverageCOGNITIVE PROCESSING SPEED Subtests 4, 17, 11100AverageAUDITORY PROCESSING Subtests 5, 1294AverageLONG-TERM RETRIEVAL Subtests 6, 13109AverageVISUAL PROCESSING Subtests 7, 1493AveragePERCEPTUAL SPEED Subtests 4, 11101AverageQUANTITATIVE REASONING Subtests 2, 15 85Low AverageNUMBER FACILITY Subtests 10, 11 103AverageCOGNITIVE EFFICIENCY Subtests 4, 10, 3, 11 98AverageWoodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (WJ-IV Ach), Form AREADINGA norm-referenced measure of isolated academic skills.Test NumberCLUSTER/Subtest NameStandard Score(=100, S=15)InterpretationReadingREADING Subtests 1, 492AverageBROAD READING Subtests 1, 4, 995AverageBASIC READING SKILLS Subtests 1, 7101AverageREADING COMPREHENSION-EXTENDED Subtests 4, 12, 1789AverageREADING FLUENCY Subtests 8, 999AverageREADING RATE Subtests 9, 1597Average1Letter – Word Identification98Average4Passage Comprehension84Below Average7Word Attack106Average8Oral Reading98Average9Sentence Reading Fluency99Average12Reading Recall100Average15Word Reading Fluency95Average17Reading Vocabulary90AverageWoodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (WJ-IV Ach), Form AWRITINGA norm-referenced measure of isolated academic skills.Test NumberCLUSTER/Subtest NameStandardScore(=100, S=15)PercentileRankInterpretationWritingWRITTEN LANGUAGE Subtests 3, 69971AverageBROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE Subtests 3, 6, 119456AverageBASIC WRITING SKILLS Subtests 3, 149984AverageWRITTEN EXPRESSION Subtests 6, 118732 Average3Spelling10494Average6Writing Samples9464Average11Sentence Writing Fluency8018Below average14Editing9366AverageWoodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (WJ-IV Ach), Form AMATHA norm-referenced measure of isolated academic skills.Test NumberCLUSTER/Subtest NameStandardScore(=100, S=15)InterpretationMathBROAD MATHEMATICS Subtests 2, 5, 1083Below AverageMATH CALCULATION SKILLS Subtests 5, 1089AverageMATH PROBLEM SOLVING Subtests2, 1372Below Average2Applied Problems74Below Average5Calculation85Low Average10Math Facts Fluency94Average13Number Matrices77Below AverageClinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals- 5th Edition (CELF – 5)A norm-referenced measure of receptive & expressive language skills.Test NameScaled Score(=10, S=3)InterpretationRecalling Sentences10AverageFormulated Sentences6Below averageWord Classes9AverageFollowing Directions9AverageUnderstanding Spoken Paragraphs9AverageWord Definitions9AverageSentence Assembly7Low averageSemantic Relationships8AverageCORE & INDEX SCORES(Standard Score =100, S=15)ScoreStandard ScorePercentile RankInterpretationCORE LANGUAGE SCORESubtests WC, FS, RS, SR8923AverageRECEPTIVE LANGUAGE INDEXSubtests WC, FD, SR9127AverageEXPRESSIVE LANGUAGE INDEXSubtests FS, RS, SA8516Low averageLANGUAGE CONTENT INDEXSubtests WC, USP, WD9332AverageLANGUAGE MEMORY INDEXSubtests FD, FS, RS8923AverageComprehensive Reading Inventory (CRI)Authentic Reading LevelsNarrative TextsSILENT Reading ComprehensionORAL Word Reading FluencyIndependent 44InstructionalNANAFrustration55KeyMath?-3 Diagnostic Assessment, Form A (KeyMath)A norm-referenced measure of math skills.Test numberSubtest/ CLUSTERScaledScore(=10, S=3)Standard Score(=100, S=15)Interpretation1Numeration4---Below Average2Algebra6---Below Average3Geometry7---Low Average4Measurement6---Below Average5Data Analysis and Probability7---Low Average BASIC CONCEPTS CLUSTER Subtests 1, 2, 3, 4, 5---78Below Average6Mental Computation & Estimation6---Below AverageOPERATIONS CLUSTER Subtests 6, 7, 8---N/AN/A9Foundations of Problem Solving4---Below Average10Applied Problem Solving6---Below AverageAPPLICATIONS CLUSTER Subtests 9, 10---73Below Average Slingerland Screening Tests for Identifying Children with Specific Language Disability – Form CTest NumberTest NameNumber CorrectTotal AccuracyVISUAL TASKS1Copying: Distance Copying293583% correct2Copying: Near Point Copying101283% correct3V-P-D-MVisual Perception, Discrimination & Memory: Recognition Task1414100% correct4V-P Visual Perception Matching: Recognition Task88100% correct5V-P-M-KVisual Perception & Memory linked to a Written Response: Recall Task81080% correctAUDITORY TASKS6A-P-M-KAuditory Perception & Memory linked to a Written Response: Recall TaskLettersNumbersSpelling42294330100% correct67% correct97% correct7Phoneme-Grapheme Association with a Written Responsebeginning soundsending sounds105108100% correct63% correct8A-P-DAuditory Perception & Discrimination: Recognition Task1818100% correctSlingerland–Form C Error AnalysisTest NumberInsertionsRecallOmissionsReversalsLetter FormationTranspositions14121134526117289TOTAL037021SMALSI- School Motivation and Learning Strategies InventoryA norm-referenced self-report questionnaire completed by the student.CategoryT-Score(=50, S=10)InterpretationStudent 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 encoding55AverageNOTE Note-taking/Listening Skills: discriminating important material when taking notes, organizing notes, efficiency in note taking.59AverageREAD Reading/Comprehension Strategies: previewing, monitoring, and reviewing texts, including self-testing, to ensure understanding.63Very Well DevelopedWRITEWriting/Research Skills: researching topics in a variety of ways, organizing writing projects, monitoring and self-checking for errors53AverageTEST Test-Taking Strategies: increasing efficiency in test taking, including eliminating unlikely answers and strategic guessing.58AverageTIM/ORG Time Management: effective use of time to complete assignments, understanding of time needed for academic anizational Techniques: organizing class and study materials, structuring assignments including homework and other projects.58AverageStudent 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.48No More Problematic TANX Test Anxiety: student’s experience of debilitating symptoms of test anxiety, lowered performance on tests due to excessive worry.58No More ProblematicCONFID Concentration/Attention Difficulties: difficulty attending to lectures and other academic tasks, monitoring and adjusting attention to performance, concentrating and avoiding distractions.44No More ProblematicConners Rating Scales-3rd Edition: Long VersionA standardized norm-referenced measure of attention and behavior.High scores indicate areas of concern.CategoryFatherTeacherJohnInattention47Average65Elevated46AverageHyperactivity-Impulsivity<405757Learning Problems61Elevated73Elevated46Executive Functioning5772ElevatedN/AAggression445649Peer/ Family Relations4380Elevated45DSM-IV-TR: ADHD Inattentive4965Elevated54DSM-IV-TR: ADHD Hyperactive-Impulsive<405555DSM-IV-TR: Conduct Disorder455644DSM-IV-TR: Oppositional Defiant Disorder4167Elevated50Conners 3 Global Index: Total4472ElevatedN/A ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download