teachingstrategees.weebly.comteachingstrategees.weebly.com/.../13997910/lisette_diag_report_2.docx · Web viewStandardized evaluation procedures were followed. The testing environment

Reyes 1

Houston Baptist University EDSP 6344

7015 FondrenHouston, Texas 77040

FULL AND INDIVIDUAL EVALUATION

Demographic Data

Examinee Name:

Lisette Reyes Parents/Guardians:

Grade: Address: 6767 Bissonett StDate of Birth:

9/13/1962 Email Address:

[email protected]

Age: 51 Phone Number:

(281) 425-3239

Gender: Female Date of Report:

10/1/2013

Reason for Full and Individual Evaluation

This Full and Individual Evaluation (FIE) represents a multidisciplinary evaluation conducted by a team of professionals. The purpose of this FIE is to: (a) describe Lisette’s strengths and weaknesses and present levels of performance/functioning across multiple areas; (b) determine her disability condition(s) and educational needs;

mailto:[email protected]

Reyes 2

and (c) make recommendations regarding educational programming.

Sources of Evaluation Data

Standardized evaluation procedures were followed. The testing environment was quiet and conducive an environment in which true scoring measurements could be derived. Lisette was extremely pleasant, cooperative, friendly and tasks driven. During the testing, Lisette vocalized her willingness to take part in the exam. Lizette spoke in proper English and boasted that English was her favorite subject in School.

Table 1. Sources of Evaluation Data

Sources of Information

Informant/Position Dates

Examinee Information

Lisette Reyes 10/1/13

Examinee Observation/Interview

Ralph Bridges (Diagnostician)

10/1/13

Review of School Ralph Bridges 10/1/13

Reyes 3

Records (Diagnostician)Vision/Hearing Screening

Dr. Wexler 10/1/13

Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities-Third Edition (W-J III Cognitive)


10/1/13

Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement-Third Edition (W-J III Achievement)


10/1/13

Review of Educational Records

No previous evaluations have been conducted for Lisette. She earned all of her high school credits for courses and graduated 12th grade during the 1979-1980 school year. She then went on to study Education at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette.

Speech/Language

Evaluation of Lisette’s language consisted of informal and formal assessments of language proficiency in both the receptive and expressive domains. Lisette’s language proficiency on the Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement - Third Edition (WJ III ACH) when compared

Reyes 4

with same age peers may be regarded in the noted domains as:

Listening Comprehension: AverageOral Expression: Average

Lisette expresses herself best in oral speech. Language functioning was observed during the evaluation and it was determined that she does not show difficulties to communicate during informal conversation. She has intelligible speech and is able to make her needs known to others. She is dominant in both languages, English and Spanish.

Lisette was able to follow instructions for testing and engaged in appropriate conversation. She was able to take turns during conversation and remained on topic. All evaluation instruments and procedures were administered in her dominant language.

Physical Information

Physical conditions that may directly affect Lisette’s ability to profit from the educational process were considered. Lisette’s hearing appeared to be within normal limits without correction. Her vision screening indicated that she does not require corrective lenses. She did not exhibit any signs of health or medical problems. She does not take any prescription medication.She does not appear to have physical conditions that must be considered to provide her with specific modifications.

Reyes 5

Noted evaluations, interviews, and observations indicate that Lisette can function in a regular manner on a daily basis.

Sociological

Sociological data concerning Lisette’s family and community environment that may influence learning-behavior patterns were considered. She is married to her husband of 30 years, Fred. They have four children and six grandchildren. Lisette’s family appears to have a positive relationship. Based on current data, sociological factors do not appear to adversely affect Lisette’s learning and behavior patterns to a degree that would impede her learning.

Emotional/Behavioral

The evaluation of Lisette’s emotional and behavioral factors consisted of identifying those characteristics of behaviors, which may impact her learning. During the evaluation, Lisette was friendly, cooperative, polite, respectful, and independent. Based on client’s interviews and observations, serious emotional and behavioral factors do not appear to significantly interfere with her ability to learn.

Intellectual

Reyes 6

An intelligence test was administered in order to assess Lisette’s general range of intellectual functioning and to determine current cognitive strengths and weaknesses. The Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities- Third Edition (WJ III COG) is a battery of carefully engineered tests for measuring cognitive abilities and related aspects of cognitive functioning. In all, 31 tests are contained in the standard battery, an extended battery, and the diagnostic supplement. Some WJ III COG tests are appropriate for individuals as young as 24 months, and all of the tests can be used with individuals from 5 to 95 years of age. Various tests from the WJ II COG are combined into clusters for interpretive purposes. Only the tests in the standard battery were administered to Lisette. Most of the scores generated through the administration of the WJ-III COG reveal that Lisette overall intellectual ability is in the Average range of standard scores.

The WJ III COG provides a General Intellectual Ability score (GIA) and three cognitive performance clusters (Verbal Ability Standard Scale, Thinking Ability Standard Scale and Cognitive Efficiency Standard Scale). The cluster scores are reported as age-correlated standard scores. The cluster scores are scaled to a metric with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.

The General Intellectual Ability Scale (GIA) represents the first principal component, or single g

Reyes 7

factor, accounting for the most variance in overall performance on the tests that comprise the scale. The score will often be the best single-score predictor of various global criteria such as overall school achievement or other life outcomes that have some relationship to cognitive ability.

The Verbal Ability Scale is a measure of language development that includes the comprehension of individual words and the comprehension of relationships between words.

The Thinking Ability Scale is a sampling of the different thinking processes that may be invoked when information is short-term memory cannot be processed automatically.

The Cognitive Efficiency Scale is the capacity of the cognitive system to process information automatically.

Lisette obtained a General Intellectual Ability score (GIA) of 96, which is in the average range of intellectual functioning and falls with the 44th percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 44% of the students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 56%. The GIA is derived from the combined sum of cluster scores for the Verbal Ability, Thinking Ability, and Cognitive Efficiency scales, and is considered to be the score that is most representative of general intellectual functioning. His cluster scores for Verbal

Reyes 8

Ability Scale, Thinking Ability Scale, and Cognitive Efficiency Scale are also in the average range (see Table 2).

On the Verbal Ability Scale, Lisette obtained a standard score of 94, which is in the average range and is at the 40th

percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 40% of the students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 60%. The difference (-7) between Lisette’s actual (94) and predicted (103) scores for this measure is not statistically significant. This means that her standard score for this measure is in the same range as scores for her norm group.

On the Thinking Ability Scale, Lisette obtained a standard score of 96, which is in the average range and is at the 46th

percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 46% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 54%. The difference (-4) between Lisette’s actual (96) and predicted (102) scores for this measure is not statistically significant. This means that her standard score for this measure is in the same range as scores for her norm group.

On the Cognitive Efficiency Scale, Lisette obtained a standard score of 107, which is in the average range and is at the 72nd percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 72% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 28%. The difference (11) between Lisette’s actual (107) and predicted (98) scores for this measure is not statistically significant.

Reyes 9

This means that her standard score for this measure is in the same range as scores for her norm group.

Table 2.Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities- Third Edition Cluster Scores

SummaryCluster Stand

ardScore

PR Actual

Score

Predicted

Score

Score Diff.

SD Sig at + or – 1.50 Y/N

.

Qualitative

Description

General Intellectual Ability (GIA)

96 44 96 Average

Verbal Ability

94 40 94 103 -7 -0.61

N Average

Thinking Ability

96 46 96 102 -4 -0.42

N Average

Cognitive Efficiency-

107 72 107 98 11 +0.88

N Average

Note: SD= Standard Deviation; PR=Percentile Rank; Sig.=Significant; Diff=Difference

Reyes 10

Broad Clusters and Subtest Score Interpretations

On the WJ III COG, the broad ability clusters were designed to provide breadth among the different narrow abilities within each broad (Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities) CHC factor. Each test was designed to contribute a different aspect to the broad ability. The Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities- Third Edition contains 20 tests, each measuring a different aspect of cognitive ability. The tests combine to form clusters for interpretive purposes. Lisette was administered nine (9) tests which represent seven (7) broad CHC factors (Comprehension-Knowledge (Gc), Long-Term Retrieval (Glr), Visual-Spatial Thinking (Gv), Auditory Processing (Ga), Fluid Reasoning (Gf), Processing Speed (Gs) and Short-Term Memory (Gsm) ) to obtain her cognitive ability scores. Significant weaknesses or strengths for Lisette were prominent. (See Table 3)

Comprehension-Knowledge (Gc) measures the breadth and depth of a person’s acquired knowledge, the ability to communicate one’s knowledge and ability to reason using previous learned experiences or procedures. The test of Verbal Comprehension measures Comprehension-Knowledge (Gc). Verbal Comprehension includes four subtests (Picture Vocabulary, Synonyms, Antonyms, and Verbal Analogies). Picture Vocabulary measures aspects of lexical knowledge. This subtest requires the examinee to identify pictures of familiar and unfamiliar objects. The

Reyes 11

examinee is asked to verbally identify the objects. The items become more difficult as the selected pictures appear less frequently in the environment or represent less familiar concepts. Synonyms and Antonyms subtests measure different aspects of vocabulary knowledge. In the Synonyms subtest, the person is given a word and is asked to provide a synonym. In the Antonyms subtest, the person is given a word and is asked to provide an antonym. Verbal Analogies subtest measures the examinee’s ability to reason using lexical knowledge. The examinee hears three words of an analogy and is then asked to complete the analogy with an appropriate fourth word. Each subtest measures a different aspect of language development in spoken English language, such as knowledge of vocabulary or ability to reason. On the Verbal Comprehension test, Lisette obtained a standard scored of 94, which is in the average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 40th percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 40% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 60%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 28 years. All of the scores obtained for this measure indicate that Lisette’s performance is comparable to that of average 28 year olds.

Long-term Retrieval (Glr) measures the ability to store information and retrieve it later. The Visual-Auditory Learning and Visual-Auditory Learning-Delayed tests measure Long-Term Retrieval. The Visual-Auditory test measures associative and meaningful memory. The examinee learns and recalls rebuses (pictographic representations of words) that begin as phrases and then

Reyes 12

sentences that increase in length and complexity. The Visual-Auditory Learning-Delayed test can be used to provide additional information about Long-Term Retrieval (Glr) abilities, specifically aspects of associative and meaningful memory. The Visual-Auditory Learning-Delayed test is presented 30 minutes to 8 days after Visual-Auditory Learning; it is a memory exercise that requires the examinee to recall the symbol/word relationships learned in Visual-Auditory Learning. Lisette obtained a standard scored of 90 which is in the range average of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 30th percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 30% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 70%. Lisette age equivalent for this measure is 7 years and 10 months. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Lisette performance is comparable to that of average 7 year and 10 month olds. On the Visual-Auditory Learning-Delayed test which was administered 37 minutes after the Visual-Auditory Learning test, Lisette obtained a standard scored of 106 which is in the average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 67th percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 67% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 33%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 11 years and 10 months. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Lisette’s performance is comparable to that of average 11 year and 10 month olds.

Visual-Spatial Thinking (Gv) measures the ability to perceive, analyze, synthesize, and think with visual patterns, including the ability to store and recall visual

Reyes 13

representations. Spatial Relations is a measure of Visual-Spatial Thinking. This cluster includes one subtest: Spatial Relations (the ability to use visualization in thinking) and required her to identify two or three pieces that form a complete targeted shape. Lisette obtained a standard score of 96, which is in the average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 41st percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 41% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 59%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 11 years and 6 months. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Lisette’s performance is comparable to that of average 11 year and 6 month olds.

Auditory Processing (Ga) measures the ability to analyze, synthesize, and discriminate auditory stimuli, including the ability to process and discriminate speech sounds that may be presented under distorted conditions. Sound Blending and Incomplete Words are tests that measure Auditory Processing. The Sound Blending test measures the ability to produce language sounds. The examinee listens to a series of syllables and phonemes (sounds) and asked to blend the sounds into a word. For Sound Blending, Lisette obtained a standard score of 109, which is in the average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 75th

percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 75% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 25%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is >25 year old. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Lisette’s performance is higher than to that of average 25 year olds. Incomplete Words test

Reyes 14

measures auditory analysis and auditory closure and requires the examinee to hear a word from an audio recording that is missing one or more phonemes and identify by completing the word. For Incomplete Words Lisette obtained a standard score of 94, which is in the average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 37th percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 37% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 63%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 14 years and 10 months. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Lisette’s performance is comparable to that of average 14 year and 10 month olds.

Fluid Reasoning (Gf) measures the ability to reason, form concepts, and solve problems using unfamiliar information or new procedures. Concept Formation is a test that measures Fluid Reasoning. Concept Formation involves categorical reasoning based on principles of inductive logic and an aspect of executive processing – flexibility in thinking when required to shift one’s mental set frequently. This test requires the individual to examine a stimulus set and then formulate a rule that applies to the item(s). Lisette obtained a standard scored of 90, which is in the average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 27th

percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 27% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 73%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 9 years and 1 month. All of the scores obtained for this measure indicate that Lisette’s

Reyes 15

performance is comparable to that of average 9 year and 1 month olds.

Processing Speed (Gs) measures the ability to perform automatic cognitive tasks, as an aspect of cognitive efficiency. Visual Matching measures Processing Speed. The Visual Matching test measures cognitive efficiency, which is the speed at which an individual can make visual symbol discriminations. Lisette obtained a standard scored of 101, which is in the average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 57th percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 57% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 43%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 14 years and 9 months. All of the scores obtained for this measure indicate that Lisette’s performance is comparable to that of average 14 year and 9 month olds.

Short-Term Memory (Gsm) measures the ability to apprehend and hold information in immediate awareness and then use it within a few seconds. Numbers Reversed and Auditory Working Memory tests are measurements of Short-Term Memory. The first test administered was Numbers Reversed, which measures short-term memory span, and requires the individual to hold a span of numbers in immediate memory while performing a mental operation on it by reciting the numbers in reverse order. Lisette obtained a standard scored of 108, which is in the average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 75th

Reyes 16

percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 75% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 25%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is >26 years old. All of the scores obtained for this measure indicate that Lisette’s performance is higher than to that of average 26 year olds.

The second test, Auditory Working Memory, measures short-term auditory memory span and working memory or divided attention. The examinee listens to a series of digits and words, attempts to reorder the information repeating the objects first and then the numbers in sequential order. Lisette obtained a standard scored of 103, which is in the average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 63rd percentile rank. This means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 63% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 37%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 18 years and 2 months old. All of the scores obtained for this measure indicate that Lisette’s performance is comparable to that of average 18 year and 2 month olds.

Reyes 17

Table 3. Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities – Third Edition Cluster Subtest Scores

SummaryCluster Standard

ScorePR AE Qualitative

DescriptionVerbal Comprehension

94 40th 28 Average

Visual-Auditory Learning

90 30th 7-10 Average

Spatial Relations 96 41st 11-6 Average

Sound Blending 109 75th >25 Average

Concept Formation

90 27th 9-1 Average

Visual Matching 101 57th 14-9 Average

Numbers Reversed

108 75th >26 Average

Incomplete Words


Auditory 103 63rd 18-2 Average

Reyes 18

Working Memory

Visual-Auditory Learning-Delayed


Note: STD= Standard Score; PR=Percentile Rank; AE= Age Equivalent

Adaptive Behavior

Adaptive behavior is the effectiveness with which individuals meet the standards of personal independence and social responsibility expected of individuals of their age and cultural group. Adaptive behavior represents the interaction of personal, cognitive, social, and situational variables.

Lisette’s adaptive behavior was assessed using informal measures such as the client’s observations and interviews. Based on this data, her adaptive behavior appears to be within the average range and consistent with her current intellectual functioning.

Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement-Third Edition (WJ III ACH)

Reyes 19

The Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement -Third Edition contains 22 tests measuring five curricular areas – reading, mathematics, written language, oral language, and academic knowledge – and two auxiliary writing evaluation procedures. Specific combinations, or groupings, of these 22 tests form clusters for interpretive purposes. The tests in the Standard Battery combine to form 10 cluster scores, including a total achievement score. This test has mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15.

In addition, the WJ III ACH contains tests that impact the performance of cognitive abilities according to the CHC Theory of Cognitive Abilities. The Quantitative Knowledge (Gq) factor, measures stored acquired quantitative declarative and procedural knowledge. This factor is represented in the Standard Battery by Test 5: Calculation and Test 10: Applied Problems. The Reading/ Writing Ability (Grw) factor, measures depth of lexical knowledge including spelling, language comprehension, and English language usage. This factor is represented in the Standard battery by Test 1: Letter-Word Identification, Test 7: Spelling, Test 9: Passage Comprehension and Test 11: Writing Samples. The Comprehension-Knowledge (Gc) factor, measures breadth and depth of a person’s acquired knowledge of a culture and the effective application of this knowledge. This factor is represented in the Standard Battery by Test 3: Story Recall and Test 4: Understanding Directions. The Long-Term Retrieval (Glr) factor, measures storage of information in long-term memory and fluent retrieval of it later through association. This factor

Reyes 20

refers to the process of storing and retrieving that information. This factor is represented in the Standard Battery by Test 12: Story Recall-Delayed. Lisette’s performance on the tests that represent the Standard Battery is discussed below.

Letter-Word Identification

Letter-Word Identification measured Lisette’s word identification skills. The items required her to pronounce words correctly. Lisette’s was not required to know the meaning of any word. The items become increasingly difficult as the selected words appear less and less frequently in written English.

On the Letter-Word Identification subtest, Lisette obtained a standard score of 115, which is in the High-Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 85th

percentile rank, which means that Lisette’s performed as well as or better than 85% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 15%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is >30 years. Lisette’s RPI (Relative Proficiency Index) of 99/90 on the Letter-Word Identification test indicates that on similar tasks, she would demonstrate 99% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.

The score obtained for this measure indicates that Lisette’s performance is typical compared to that of average students >30 years old.

Reyes 21

Reading Fluency

Reading Fluency measured Lisette’s ability to quickly read simple sentences in the Subject Response Booklet, decide if the statement is true, and then circle Yes or No. The difficulty level of the sentences gradually increased to a moderate level. Lisette attempted to complete as many items as possible within a 3-minute time limit. Lisette’s RPI (Relative Proficiency Index) of 85/90 on the Reading Fluency test indicates that on similar tasks, she would demonstrate 85% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.

Lisette obtained a standard score of 96 which is in the Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 42nd percentile rank, which means that Lisette’s performed as well as or better than 42%of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 58%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 15 years, 9 months.

The score obtained for this measure indicates that Lisette’s performance is typical compared to that of average students 15 years and 9 months old.

Story Recall

Story Recall measured aspects of Lisette’s oral language including language development and meaningful memory.

Reyes 22

The task required her to recall increasingly complex stories that are presented using an audio recording. After listening to a passage, Lisette’s was asked to recall as many details of the story as she could remember.

Lisette obtained a standard score of 84, which is in the Low-average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 16th percentile rank, which means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 16% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 84%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 9 years, 0 months. Lisette’s RPI (Relative Proficiency Index) of 84/90 on the Story Recall test indicates that on similar tasks, she would demonstrate 84%proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.

The score obtained for this measure indicates that Lisette’s performance is typical compared to that of average students 9 years old.

Understanding Directions

Understanding Directions is an oral language measure. The task required Lisette to listen to a sequence of audio-recorded instructions and then follow the directions by pointing to various objects in a colored picture. The items gradually increase in linguistic complexity as the number of tasks to perform increases.

Lisette obtained a standard score of 100 which is in the Average range of academic functioning. This score is in

Reyes 23

the 52nd percentile rank, which means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 52% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 48%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 15 years, 2 months. Lisette’s RPI (Relative Proficiency Index) of 91/90 on the Understanding Directions test indicates that on similar tasks, she would demonstrate 91% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.

The score obtained for this measure indicates that Lisette’s performance is typical compared to that of average students 15 years, 2 months.

Calculation

Calculation is a test of math achievement measuring the ability to perform mathematical computations. The items on the Calculation test required Lisette to perform addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division combinations of these basic operations, as well as some geometric, trigonometric, logarithmic, and calculus operations. The calculations involve negative numbers, percentages, decimals, fractions, and whole numbers. Because the calculations are presented in a traditional problem format in the Subject Response Booklet, Lisette was not required to make any decisions about what operations to use.

Lisette obtained a standard score of 94, which is in the Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 36th percentile rank, which means that Lisette

Reyes 24

performed as well as or better than 36% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 64%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 12 years, 11 months. Lisette’s RPI (Relative Proficiency Index) of 81/90 on the Calculation test indicates that on similar tasks, she would demonstrate 81% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.


Math Fluency

Math Fluency measured Lisette ability to solve simple addition, subtraction, and multiplication facts quickly. She was presented a series of simple arithmetic problems in the Subject Response Booklet. This test has a 3-minute time limit.

Lisette obtained a standard score of 115, which is in the High-average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 86th percentile rank, which means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 86% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 14%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is >25 years. Lisette’s RPI

Reyes 25

(Relative Proficiency Index) of 97/90 on the Math Fluency test indicates that on similar tasks, she would demonstrate 97% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.

The score obtained for this measure indicates that Lisette’s performance is typical compared to that of average students >25 years.

Spelling

Spelling measured Lisette’s ability to write orally presented words correctly. She was required to spell words correctly. The items became increasingly difficult as the words became more difficult.

Lisette obtained a standard score of 102, which is in the Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 57th percentile rank, which means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 57% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 43%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is >30 years. Lisette’s RPI (Relative Proficiency Index) of 94/90 on the Spelling test indicates that on similar tasks, she would demonstrate 94% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.


Reyes 26

Writing Fluency

Writing Fluency measured Lisette’s skills in formulating and writing simple sentences quickly. Each sentence must relate to a given stimulus picture in the Subject Response Booklet and include a given set of three words. This test has a 7-minute time limit.

Lisette obtained a standard score of 133, which is in the Very Superior range of academic functioning. This score is in the 99th percentile rank, which means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 99% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 1%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is >21 years. Lisette’s RPI (Relative Proficiency Index) of 100/90 on the Writing Fluency test indicates that on similar tasks, she would demonstrate 100% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.


Passage Comprehension

The initial Passage Comprehension items involve symbolic learning, or the ability to read a short passage and identify a missing key word that makes sense in the context of that passage. The items became increasingly difficult by

Reyes 27

removing pictorial stimuli and by increasing passage length, level of vocabulary and complexity of syntactic and semantic cues.

Lisette obtained a standard score of 97, which is in the Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 44th percentile rank, which means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 44% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 56%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 21 years. Lisette’s RPI (Relative Proficiency Index) of 86/90 on the Passage Comprehension test indicates that on similar tasks, she would demonstrate 86% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.The score obtained for this measure indicates that Lisette’s performance is typical compared to that of average students 21 years.

Applied Problems

The Applied Problems test measured Lisette’s skills to analyze and solve practical math problems. It is a measure of quantitative reasoning, math achievement, and math knowledge. Because no reading is required, low performance will likely be related to limits in mathematical knowledge. Low performance may result from limited fluid reasoning (Gf), limited math skills, or comprehension difficulties.

Lisette obtained a standard score of 91, which is in the Average range of academic functioning. This score is in

Reyes 28

the 29th percentile rank, which means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 29% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 71%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 16 years, 0 months. Lisette’s RPI (Relative Proficiency Index) of 61/90 on the Writing Samples test indicates that on similar tasks, she would demonstrate 61% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.


Writing Samples

Writing Samples measured Lisette’s skills in writing responses to a variety of demands. She was required to produce written sentences that were evaluated with respect to the quality of expression. Item difficulty increased by increasing passage length, level of vocabulary, grammatical complexities, and level of concept abstraction. Lisette was not penalized for errors in basic writing skills, such as spelling or punctuation.

Lisette obtained a standard score of 153, which is in the Exceptionally Superior range of academic functioning. This score is in the >99.9th percentile rank, which means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 99% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining .1%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is >30 years. Lisette’s RPI (Relative Proficiency Index) of 100/90 on the

Reyes 29

Writing Samples test indicates that on similar tasks, she would demonstrate 100% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.


Story Recall-Delayed

Story Recall-Delayed test is a measure of meaningful memory, an aspect of long-term retrieval. This test required Lisette to recall elements of stories administered from 30 minutes to 8 days after administration of Story Recall test.

Lisette obtained a standard score of 98, which is in the Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 47th percentile rank, which means that Lisette performed as well as or better than 47% of students in her norm group and not as well as the remaining 53%. Lisette’s age equivalent for this measure is 10 years, 0 months. Lisette’s RPI (Relative Proficiency Index) of 89/90 on the Story Recall-Delayed test indicates that on similar tasks, she would demonstrate 89% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.


Reyes 30

Table 4. Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement (WJ III ACH)-Third Edition

Standard Battery Score Summary

Standard Battery Subtests

Standard

Score

Percentile

Rank

RPI Age Equival

ent

Qualitative

Description


115 85 99/90

>30 High-average

Reading Fluency

96 42 85/90

15-9 Average

Story Recall

84 16 84/90

9-0 Low-average


100 52 91/90

15-12 Average

Calculation 94 36 81/90

12-11 Average

Math Fluency

115 86 97/90

>25 High-average

Spelling 102 57 94/9 >30 Average

Reyes 31

0Writing Fluency

133 99 100/90

>21 Very Superior


97 44 86/90

21 Average

Applied Problems

91 29 61/90

16-0 Average

Writing Samples

153 >99.9 100/90

>30 Exceptionally

SuperiorStory Recall-Delayed

98 47 89/90

10-0 Average

Total Achievement

111 79 96/90

>30 High-average

Assistive Technology

Lisette can access the work environment and curriculum without the need for AT services or devices. She communicates clearly and is expressively and receptively independent.

Reyes 32

Transition

Lisette’s is retired from education after 33 years of service. She will continue to tutor struggling students at her church.

Conclusion

During individual achievement testing, Lisette demonstrated the following academic strengths and weaknesses:

Lisette's oral language skills are average when compared to the range of scores obtained by others at her age level. Lisette's level of achievement is high average range. Lisette's fluency with academic tasks and her ability to apply academic skills are both found to be in the high average range. Her academic skills were found to be in the average range.

When compared to others at her age level, Lisette's standard score is very superior in written expression. Her broad written language and brief writing scores are in the superior range. Her standard scores are average (compared to age peers) in broad reading, brief reading, broad mathematics, math calculation skills, and brief mathematics. When scores for a selected set of her achievement areas were compared, Lisette demonstrated a significant strength in broad written language.

Reyes 33

Lisette's overall intellectual ability, as measured by the WJ III GIA, is in the average range of standard scores.

To help determine if any ability/achievement discrepancies exist, comparisons were made between his cognitive and achievement scores and discrepancies were found in the areas or Written Expression, Basic Reading Skills, and Calculation.

These discrepancies match Lisette’s Strengths in Written Expression, where she scored in the very superior range. Overall, the discrepancies do not affect Lisette’s academic learning or work development.

Table 5. Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement – Third Edition and Clusters Measuring the Seven IDEA Areas

Required LD Areas

WJIII ACHSubtests

WJIII ACH

Subtests

STD.

GIA GIA/ACHDif.

Sig.Y/N

Reyes 34

ScoresOral Expression Story Recall 84 98 +14 N

Listening Comprehension


100 98 -2 N

Written Expression

Writing Sample

153 98 -55 Y

Writing Fluency

132 98 -34 Y

Basic Reading Skills


115 98 -17 Y

Reading Comprehension


97 98 0 N

Math Calculation Calculation 94 98 +4 NMath Fluency 115 98 -17 Y

Math Reasoning Applied Problems

91 98 +7 N

Note: STD=Standard Scores; Dif.=Difference; GIA=General Intellectual Ability; Sig.=Significance

Recommendations

Reyes 35

This evaluation is considered a valid representation of Lisette’s current levels of functioning in the areas assessed. The following recommendations are based upon a review of evaluation data to assist Lisette during her educational career. These recommendations are intended for the classroom as well as test settings:

Provide the examinee extra time for solving Math calculations.

Assurances

The multidisciplinary team assures that the testing, evaluation materials, and procedures used for the purpose of evaluation were selected and administered so as not to be racially or culturally discriminatory.

The multidisciplinary team assures that the tests and other evaluation materials have been validated for the specific purpose for which they were used.

The multidisciplinary team assures that the tests and other evaluation materials were administered by trained personnel in conformance with the instructions provided by their producers.

More than one procedure was used for determining whether a student has a disability and for determining an appropriate educational program for the student.

Reyes 36

Technically sound instruments were used to assess the relative contribution of cognitive and behavioral factors, in addition to physical or developmental factors.

The evaluation provides relevant information that directly assists persons in determining the educational needs of the child and is sufficiently comprehensive to identify the special education needs and related (supportive) services as a required to assist the child to benefit from special education.

MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM

Ralph BridgesEducational Diagnostician

SIGNATURE OF EVALUATOR

X Ralph Bridges

Ralph Bridges

Educational Diagnostician

Documents

teachingstrategees.weebly.comteachingstrategees.weebly.com/.../13997910/lisette_diag_report_2.docx · Web viewStandardized evaluation procedures were followed. The testing environment