Assessing A Child. Spring 2013 SEDP 533. Amy Harr

Transcription

1 Running Header: Assessing a Child Assessing A Child Spring 2013 SEDP 533 Amy Harr

2 Assessing a Child 2 Identifying Data Name of Student: S Address: Richmond, VA Phone: xxx-xxx-xxxx Date of Birth: December 16, 2004 Grade: 2 Parents Names: Mike / Carry School: Richmond Public Schools Teacher: Ms. White Referred by: Parents Date of Testing: March 10, 2013 Date of Report: March 24, 2013 Chronological Age: 8 years, 3 months Examiner: Amy Harr

3 Assessing a Child 3 Reason for Referral: S was referred by his parents for an evaluation in order to determine if a learning disability was having a negative educational impact on his reading skills. Background History S is currently in the seventh month of second grade in the Richmond Public School system. He received a pullout reading intervention in first grade and has been in a pullout reading intervention since November of second grade. In addition S receives 1:1 private tutoring twice a week before school. S was recently diagnosed through a private psychologist as dyslexic. S lives with both parents and a ten-year-old sister. His father works from home as a computer programmer, and his mom works as a nurse in the intensive care unit at a local hospital. S was a full term baby with no significant early health history reported. The developmental milestones were within normal limits, except for being able to tie shoelaces. S s teacher says he gets along well with his classmates, and has many friends. She reports that he likes to make kids laugh, which can sometimes lead him to make outrageous comments, although she believes these comments also show his great imagination, and are usually delivered in a charming way. S s parents say he has no problem making friends and is often invited for play dates or has kids over to his house. They say he gets along with boys and girls all ages. He especially enjoys team sports, and seems to really look up to his big sister. The teacher indicated significant concerns related to numerous reversals, reading, forming letters of the alphabet, decoding, fatigue, low self-esteem, concentration, spelling, and

4 Assessing a Child 4 speed of processing, listening, fidgetiness, and retention of learned information, difficulty remaining seated and being sensitive. Academic records show that S has always struggled in reading, barely passing the school s PALS assessment for reading skills in Kindergarten and First grade, and failing to pass the Fall PALS in second grade. The tutor reports significant concerns related to omissions, substitutions, additions, rushing and heavy reliance on context and pictures. Listening Comprehension was described as being excellent, and he offers intelligent and creative predictions. Parents are concerned that although S is working hard and receiving tutoring, he isn t progressing at the pace needed to keep up with grade-level expectations and he is frustrated and struggling with reading, writing, and speed of processing. They point to the private psychologist s assessment that he has above average intelligence, and they want to see him achieve on a level that reflects his intelligence. Behavioral Observations: Classroom Observation. School counselor, Ms. Bellerive observed S in the classroom on Wednesday March 13, S was reported as engaged in the classroom discussion. He raised his hand to answer questions. He appeared to have a good understanding of the concepts. When the class broke into centers he expressed a desire to be in the computer center, but was told he had to find another center because there was no room for him at the computer center. Ms. Bellerive observed him wondering around and avoiding participation in any other center for about 15 minutes. He then returned to the computer station and asked for a turn. His teacher had to help him find another center and get him engaged in it.

5 Assessing a Child 5 Initial Interview with Student. S appeared confident in holding a conversation with an adult. He made good eye contact. S appeared to enjoy conversation. He smiled a lot, shared freely, and asked questions in return. S was inquisitive. He used a rich vocabulary to ask questions about the things he saw in the office. He seemed to have many ideas sparked from the answers to his questions. He spoke of many friends, playing with his sister, building a ginormous snowman in the park across the street from his house, and playing with his ornery cat. When S talked about things he likes to do it included imaginative play such as building forts, drawing pictures and games on his computer. He said he d like to design video games when he grows up. S was engaged, expressive and friendly in his interaction. Behavior during Testing. S entered the testing session with interest and enthusiasm. He appeared motivated to accomplish the tasks. He stayed attentive throughout the testing, although towards the end of the session he changed seating positions numerous times. S smiled a lot, and appeared to make his best effort at all times. Tests and Procedures Administered Informal Assessment: Reading A-Z Fluency Passage Informal Assessment: Wilson Fundations Unit 5 Quiz Formal Assessment: Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement Form B Informal Assessment Reading A-Z. Reading A-Z is an online resource of leveled readers and teaching tips designed from evidence-based practices that develop students reading skills. The Reading A-Z fluency assessment was administered to S with a 111-word passage at level J, which is considered a mid-year second grade passage. He read this passage without review or practices

6 Assessing a Child 6 while the assessor timed him and recorded errors. A words-per-minute rate and accuracy rate were then calculated. Reading A-Z recommends a reading rate expectation at the beginning of second grade of 70 words per minute, and by the end of second grade it is 100 words per minute. Accuracy expectations are 95% or better. S read 62 words per minute with a 97% accuracy rate. His accuracy rate meets second grade expectations, but the word-per-minute rate falls in the first grade range of Reading A-Z s scale. He made three errors. He substituted the for a. He misread large as long. He misread team s as team. A copy of this assessment is included at the end of this report. Wilson FUNdations. Wilson FUNdations is a phonics-based reading program that systematically and explicitly teaches word attack skills to improve decoding (reading) and encoding (spelling). S is being tutored in the Wilson Reading System. The informal assessment from Wilson FUNdations offers a look at encoding skills in four parts: sound mapping, spelling words from the current concept (in this case the concept is two syllable words with closed syllables), trick words (also known as high frequency words or sight words), and sentence dictation. The S scored 5 / 5 correct on the sound to letter mapping. He spelled 6/10 current concept words correctly. He spelled 0/2 trick words (high frequency words) correctly. In sentence dictation he made one capitalization error, 4 spelling errors, and 0 punctuation errors. This shows a weakness in spelling accuracy. A copy of this assessment is included at the end of this report. Formal Assessment Woodcock- Johnson III. The Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ-III) Tests of Achievement is a formal assessment that measures overall achievement in reading, mathematics, written language, and general knowledge. S was assessed with the standard battery, Tests 1 12, Form B. WJ-III has a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. The standard score is based on the mean and

7 Assessing a Child 7 standard deviation, which is the same as most deviation-iq scales so that the scores from this assessment can be used to relate to other scores that use the same mean and standard deviation. Woodcock-Johnson has provided a classification to the standard scores to assist in communicating the results in verbal labels rather than numbers. These verbal labels are in the table below under the heading of WJ III Classification. The raw score is the number of correct responses. The grade equivalent score (GE) is based on the student s performance as it compares to grade level of the normed group s average score. If the average score on the test for students in the sixth month of the second grade is 488, then the subject who scored 488 would receive 2.6 as a grade score. (Mather & Woodcock, 2001) The age equivalent score (AE) is found in the same way as the grade equivalent score; only it reflects the performance based on age level in the norming sample. The percentile ranking describes the subject s relative standing in the population by indicating the percentage of subjects who had scores the same or lower than the subject s score. Test Results for S S is in the 7 th month of second grade (2.7 grade level). He is 8 years old and three months (age 8-3). Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement Form B Subtest Raw Score GE AE Percentile Ranking Standard Score and Ranges WJ III Classification (Mather & Woodcock, 2001) Letter-Word Identification (83-92) Low Average Reading Fluency (75-94) Low Average

8 Assessing a Child 8 Story Recall ( Low Average Understanding Directions (87-106) Average Calculation (86-115) Average Math Fluency (78-95) Low Average Spelling (84 98) Average Writing Fluency (84 111) Average Passsage Comprehension (87-101) Average Applied Problems (99-119) Average Writing Samples 19-B (93 119) Average Story Recall-Delayed (83-124) Average Letter-Word Identification measures the ability to read real words in isolation. This test begins with identifying letters and moves into requiring the person to pronounce words correctly. S s raw score was 32, with a grade equivalent of 2.1, and an age equivalent of 7-5. S s percentile rank was 21, which means he scored as well or better than 21% of all students when compared to the norms for his age. S s performance was in the low average range with a standard score of 88. This is an area of weakness that confirms concerns expressed by his parents, teacher and tutor. Reading Fluency measures the ability to read simple sentences rapidly and decide if the statement is true. S s raw score was 11, his grade equivalent was 1.8 and his age equivalent was 7-1. His percentile rank was 15, which means he scored as well or better than 15% of all students when compared to the norms for his age. S s score was in the low average range with a standard score of 85. This is S s lowest standard score in the battery. The Reading A-Z informal

9 Assessing a Child 9 assessment puts his reading fluency below expectations for his grade level as well. This is an area of weakness that will need to be addressed. Story Recall is a measure of oral language, language development and meaningful memory. The test requires the student to recall increasingly complex stories after listening to a passage. S s grade equivalent score was 1.2 and his age equivalent score was 6-6. His percentile rank was 21, which means he scored as well or better than 21% of students in his norm reference. S s performance is in the low average range with a standard score of 88. This is another area of weakness for S. Understanding Directions measures the ability to comprehend directions presented orally. It is another oral language measure. S s grade equivalent score was 2.5 and age equivalent score S s percentile rank is 40, which means he scored as well or better than 40% of students when compared to the norms for his age. S s performance was average based on the standard score of 96. This is not an area of concern. Calculation is a measure of computation skills. The tasks require addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. S s raw score was 12, with a grade equivalent of 3.0 and an age equivalent of 8-3. His percentile rank was 51, which means he scored as well or better than 51% of students his age. S s standard score was 101, which falls in the average range. This is an area of strength for S. His parents and teacher have said they believe his best subject is math. Math Fluency is a speed measure to assess the fluency of recall of addition, subtraction and multiplication facts. S s raw score was 28, with a grade equivalent of 2.2 and an age equivalent of 7-6. His percentile rank was 19, which means he scored as well or better than 19% of students his age. S falls in the low average range with a standard score of 87. This is an area

10 Assessing a Child 10 of relative weakness. It might be explained by the rote memorization needed for math fluency. Concern over processing speed was expressed by S s parents and teacher. This seems to confirm that speed is an area of weakness. Spelling is a measure of the ability to spell words in isolation accurately from dictation. S s grade equivalent score was 2.2 and his age equivalent score was 7-6. His percentile ranking was 27, which means he scored as well or better than 27% of students his age. S falls in the average range with a score of 91. The Wilson FUNdations informal assessment showed a spelling weakness. Although S falls in the average range for spelling on the Woodcock-Johnson, his percentile rank may suggest that additional support would benefit his achievement in this area. Writing Fluency measures skills is creating and writing sentences from a picture and three words quickly. S s grade equivalent score was 2.7 and his age equivalent score was 8-1. His percentile rank was 44, which means he scored as well or better than 44% of students his age. His standard score was 98, which puts him in the average range. This is not an area of concern for S. Passage Comprehension measures the ability to read and understand short passages of reading material using a cloze (fill-in-the-blank) procedure. S s raw score was 22, with a grade equivalent score of 2.3 and an age equivalent score of 7-8. His percentile rank was 35, which means his scored as well or better than 35% of students his age. S falls in the average range with a score of 94. This is not an area of concern for S. Applied Problems measures the ability to analyze and solve math problems. To solve the problems, the person must listen to the problem, recognize the procedure to be followed, and

11 Assessing a Child 11 then perform relatively simple calculations. S s raw score was 32, with a grade equivalent score of 3.6 and an age equivalent score of S s percentile rank is 72, which means he scored as well or better than 725 of students his age. S falls in the average range with a score of 109. This is S s highest standard score in the battery. This is an area of strength for S. It would be exciting to see the skills S uses in this area inform instruction when designing support plans for his growth in areas of weakness. Writing Samples requires responding in writing to a variety of demands. The responses are rated according to established criteria, but penalties for spelling and punctuation are not applied for most of the items. S s grade equivalent score was 3.8 and his age equivalent score was 9-2. S s percentile rank was 66, which means he scored as well or better than 66% of students his age. S falls in the average range with a score of 106. This is another area of strength for S. Story-Recall Delayed is a measure of oral language and meaningful memory on a previously presented test. S took this test the day after he heard the stories. His grade equivalent score was 4.3 and his age equivalent score was 9-8. His percentile rank was 60, which means he scored as well or better than 60% of students his age. He falls in the average range with a standard score of 104. This area is another area of strength for S. Summary S is an enthusiastic second grade student who is motivated to learn, has a large vocabulary, and a creative perspective. His parents referred him for evaluation with concerns for his reading, spelling and writing skills. He is mostly in the average range of academic achievement based on the Woodcock Johnson III. S is strongest in Applied Problems (math),

12 Assessing a Child 12 with additional strengths in Math Calculation, Writing Samples, and Story Recall. He scored in the low average range in Letter-Word Identification, Reading Fluency, Story Recall and Math Fluency. His reading fluency scores are significantly low considering the intensive tutoring he has had in this area. Informal assessment shows areas of weakness in reading fluency and spelling. In a response to intervention model it appears S may be found eligible for special education services for a learning disability. Recommendations To the school: 1. It is recommended that S have a child study team review the results of testing, informal assessments, records, interviews, and observations to determine if he is eligible for special education services. To the Teacher: 1. It is recommended that progress be monitored over time with probes that inform instructional decisions such as what interventions are working and what changes in his program need to be initiated. 2. Direct instruction supported by graphic organizers will support S s processing speed and comprehension. 3. Multi-sensory practices including manipulatives are known to support student learning and retention of the information. 4. Explicit instruction with opportunities for rephrasing, reformatting and retrieval will support comprehension and retention.

13 Assessing a Child Cumulative review and hand-on or experiential learning can be incorporated in to the instruction. 6. Frequent review of spelling rules and syllable patterns should be used to support automaticity in spelling. 7. S should have personal spelling lists made from his written work so that he can learn to spell high frequency words that he uses in his writing vocabulary. 8. S can proof for spelling errors by reading his sentences backwards to increase focus on spelling. 9. Math fluency skills need attention as well. Math calculations and applied problems are areas of strength. It is doing simple calculations quickly that shows S s weakness. Math fluency grows faster with practice. S seems to like competition. Perhaps he can compete against himself to better his speed in math facts every day with a one-minute drill. Many of the above recommendations will work for math facts as well as reading and spelling skills. To the Parents: 1. Listening to S read every day will greatly benefit his reading skills. By having a parent to correct errors he is given an opportunity to get those challenging words stored into his brain with accuracy. 2. Orally reading stories to S that are of high interest and that are higher than his independent reading level is recommended to continue to build S s background knowledge, keep his vocabulary growing, and foster a joy of reading. 3. Over-learning is recommended to maintain progress and build automaticity. Parents can review information with S every day, and set up regular practices for him to teach back what he learned that day.

14 Assessing a Child Support S s spelling practice by reinforcing the multi-sensory aspects of simultaneously saying the letters while writing them, then reading back the word while scooping it. 5. S s parents are encouraged to continue to collaborate and communicate with S s teachers and tutor. Their input has been and will continue to be very valuable.

15 Assessing a Child 15 References Mather, N., & Woodcock, R.W. (2001). Examiner s Manual. Woodcock- Johnson III tests of Achievement. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.