Cameron 1

Houston Baptist University EDSP 6344

7015 FondrenHouston, Texas 77040

FULL AND INDIVIDUAL EVALUATION

Demographic Data

Student Name: Stephen Cameron Parents/Guardians: Rebecka CameronGrade: 2nd Address: 3227 Darlinghurst Dr, Oaktown,

TX 77901Date of Birth: 06/12/2006 Email Address: saintnick@northpole.comAge: 7 Phone Number: 713-817-6110Gender: M Date of Report: 11/1/2013

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 Stephen’s strengths and weaknesses and present levels of performance/functioning across multiple areas; (b) determine his disability condition(s) and educational needs; and (c) make recommendations regarding educational programming.

Background Information

Since Stephen entered school, he has not experienced any academic difficulties. Stephen was promoted to the next grade level since Pre-Kindergarten. It is reported that he enjoys being creative and helping others. Stephen has a love for science and enjoys playing basketball.

Sources of Evaluation Data

Standardized evaluation procedures were followed. Lonnie was tested in his home. This environment was quiet and conducive to an environment appropriate for testing. During the administration of The WJ III Tests of Achievement, Stephen was exceptionally cooperative. He appeared confident and self-assured. He responded promptly, but carefully to questions. He generally persisted with difficult tasks, but at times gave up easily after attempting them. For the timed tests, he wanted to complete the tasks before time was up. During these areas he seemed to push him. During the administration of the WJ III Cognitive Abilities test, Stephen was also cooperative. He appeared focused and eager to complete the tasks. His activity level seemed typical for his age. potential (see Table 1).

Cameron 2

Table 1. Sources of Evaluation Data

Sources of Information Informant/Position Dates

Parent/Student Information Rebecka Houghton, mother 09/04/2013

Student Observation/Interview

Sherneice Williams, Educational DiagnosticianRachel McCoy, General Education Teacher

09/03/2013

09/06/2013

Review of School Records Rachel McCoy, General Education Teacher

08/29/2013

Vision/Hearing Screening Nell Cherry, School Nurse 08/27/2013

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

Sherneice Williams, Educational Diagnostician

10/14/2013

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

Sherneice Williams, Educational Diagnostician

09/11/2013

Review of Educational Records

No previous evaluations have been conducted for Stephen Cameron.

Speech/Language

Evaluation of Stephen’s language consisted of informal and formal assessments of language proficiency in both the receptive and expressive domains. Stephen’s language proficiency on the Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement - Third Edition (WJ III ACH) when compared with same age peers may be regarded in the noted domains as:

Listening Comprehension: Average Oral Expression: High Average

Language functioning was observed during the evaluation and it was determined that Stephen expresses himself best in oral speech. He easily engages in informal conversation. He has intelligible speech and is able to make his needs known to others. His dominant language is English.

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

Cameron 3

Physical Information

Physical conditions that may directly affect Stephen’s ability to profit from the educational process were considered. Stephen’s hearing appeared to be within normal limits without correction. His vision screening indicated his vision was 20/20. He did not exhibit any signs of health or medical problems. He does not take any prescription medication.

He does not appear to have physical conditions that must be considered. Analysis of the noted evaluations, interviews, and observations indicate that Stephen can function in physical tasks at school.

Sociological

Sociological data concerning Stephen’s family and community environment that may influence learning/behavior patterns were considered. He lives with his mother and twelve year old brother. He loves his family and is very protective of his mom. Although dad does not live in the home, he is an active part in Stephen’s life. Stephen and his family appear to have a positive relationship. Based on current data, sociological factors do not appear to adversely affect Stephen’s learning and behavior patterns to a degree that would impede his learning.

Emotional/Behavioral

The evaluation of Stephen’s emotional and behavioral factors consisted of identifying those characteristics of behaviors which may impact his learning. During the WJ III tests of Achievement, Stephen was friendly, cooperative, polite, respectful, and independent. During the WJ III tests of Cognitive Abilities, Stephen was cooperative, anxious, and attentive. Based on observations, serious emotional and behavioral factors do not appear to significantly interfere with his ability to learn.

Intellectual

An intelligence test was administered in order to assess Stephen’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 Stephen. Most of the scores generated through the administration of the WJ-III COG reveal that Stephen’s overall intellectual ability is in the High Average range of standard scores.

Cameron 4

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 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.

Stephen obtained a General Intellectual Ability score (GIA) of 113 which is in the high average range of intellectual functioning and falls with the 80th percentile rank. This means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 80% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 20%. 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 score for Verbal Ability Scale is also in the high average range. However his Thinking Ability Scale was in the average range. Although he scored in the average range for Thinking Ability Scale, his Cognitive Efficiency Scale was in the superior range (see Table 1).

On the Verbal Ability Scale, Stephen obtained a standard score of 113, which is in the high average range and is at the 82nd percentile rank. This means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 18% of the students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 18%. The difference is (3) between Stephen’s actual score of (113) and predicted score of (110). His scores for this measure are not statistically significant. This means that his standard score for this measure is in the higher range as scores for his norm group.

On the Thinking Ability Scale, Stephen obtained a standard score of 110, which is in the average range and is at the 74th percentile rank. This means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 74% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining

Cameron 5

26%. The Thinking Ability Scale is measured by, Visual Auditory Learning, Spatial Relations, Sound Blending, and Concept Formation. On Visual Auditory Learning the difference is -26 between Stephen’s actual score of (88) and predicted score of (114). The scores for this measure are statistically significant. On Spatial Relations the difference is 10 between Stephen’s actual score of 116 and predicted score of 106. The scores for this measure are not statistically significant. On Sound Blending the difference is 37 between Stephen’s actual score of 141 and predicted score of 104. The score for this measure is significant. On Concept Formation the difference is -26 between Stephen’s actual score of 89 and predicted score of 115. The score for this measure is significant.

On the Cognitive Efficiency Scale, Stephen obtained a standard score of 122, which is in the Superior range and is at the 93rd percentile rank. This means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 93% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 7%. The Cognitive Efficiency Scale is made up of Visual Matching and Numbers Reversed tests.

On the Visual Matching test, the difference (1) between Stephen’s actual (108) and predicted (107) scores for this measure is not statistically significant. On the Numbers Reversed test, the difference (17) between Stephen’s actual (124) and predicted (107) scores for this measure is not statistically significant.

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

Cluster StandardScore

PR QualitativeDescription

General Intellectual Ability (GIA)

113 80 High Average

Verbal Ability 113 82 High Average

Thinking Ability 110 74 Low

Cognitive Efficiency

122 93 Superior

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

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

Cameron 6

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.  Stephen 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 his cognitive ability scores. Significant weaknesses or strengths for Stephen 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 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, Stephen obtained a standard scored of 113 which is in the High Average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 82nd percentile rank. This means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 82% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 18%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 8 years and 10 months. All of the scores obtained for this measure indicate that Stephen’s performance is comparable to that of average 7 year olds. Stephen took this testing seriously. 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 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.

Cameron 7

Stephen obtained a standard scored of 88 which is in the range Low Average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 21st percentile rank. This means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 21% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 12%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 6 years and 3 months. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Stephen’s performance is lower than that of average 7 year olds. Although Stephen was focused during this test, he struggled with the symbols, even though he put forth an effort in trying to remember them.

On the Visual-Auditory Learning-Delayed test which was administered several hours later, Stephen obtained a standard scored of 68 which is in the Very Low range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 2nd percentile rank. This means that Lonnie performed as well as or better than 2% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 98%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is less than 2 years and 0 months. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Stephen’s performance is lower than that of average 7 year 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 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 him to identify two or three pieces that form a complete targeted shape. Stephen obtained a standard score of 116, which is in the High Average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 86th percentile rank. This means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 86% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 14%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 12 years and 2 months. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Stephen’s performance is higher than that of average 7 year 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, Stephen obtained standard score of 141, which is in the Very Superior range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 99.7th percentile rank. This means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 99.7% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 0.3%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is greater than 25 years and 0 months. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Stephen’s performance is higher than that of average 7 year olds.

Incomplete Words test 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, Stephen obtained a

Cameron 8

standard score of 134, which in the Very Superior range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 99th percentile rank. This means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 99% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 1%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 20 years and 0 months. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Stephen’s performance is higher than that of average 7 year 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).

For Concept Formation, Stephen obtained a standard score of 89, which in the Low Average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 23rd percentile rank. This means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 23% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 77%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 6 years and 1 month. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Stephen’s performance is lower than that of average 7 year 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. For Visual Matching, Stephen obtained a standard score of 108, which in the Average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 71st percentile rank. This means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 71% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 29%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 7 years and 11 months. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Stephen’s performance is higher than that of average 7 year 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. For the Numbers Reversed test, Stephen obtained a standard score of 124, which in the Superior range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 94th percentile rank. This means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 94% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 6%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 11 years and 6 months. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Stephen’s performance is higher than that compared to average 7 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

Cameron 9

words, attempts to reorder the information repeating the objects first and then the numbers in sequential order. For the Auditory Working Memory test, Stephen obtained a standard score of 118, which is in the High Average range of intellectual functioning. This score is in the 88th percentile rank. This means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 88% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 12%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 9 years and 9 months. The score obtained for this measure indicates that Stephen’s performance is higher than that compared to average 7 year olds.

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

SummaryCluster Standard

ScorePR AE Qualitative

DescriptionVerbal Comprehension 113 82 8-10 High Average

Visual-Auditory Learning 88 21 6-3 Low Average

Spatial Relations 116 86 12-2 High Average

Sound Blending 141 99.7 >25 Very Superior

Concept Formation 89 23 6-1 Low Average

Visual Matching 108 71 7-11 Average

Numbers Reversed 124 94 11-6 Superior

Incomplete Words 134 99 20 Very Superior

Auditory Working Memory

118 88 9-9 High Average

Visual-Auditory Learning-Delayed

68 2 <2-0 Very Low

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

Cameron 10

cultural group. Adaptive behavior represents the interaction of personal, cognitive, social, and situational variables.

Stephen’s adaptive behavior was assessed using informal measures (i.e.: client’s information and observation of behavior during the individual evaluation, and parent information). Based on this data, his adaptive behavior appears to be within the High Average range and is consistent with his current intellectual functioning. The results of Stephen’s current intellectual functioning, GIA 113 (High Average) represents a fair sample of his abilities.

Academic/Developmental Performance

Information regarding an individual’s level of work performance may be gathered through data from, but not limited to observations, and the administration of previous intelligence tests. A collection of work performance data was used to assess Stephen’s level of acquired knowledge.

Informal and School Based Academic Testing

Stephen has attended public school since he began school. He’s now in the second grade. Although there aren’t any state assessments, he has taken district level assessments on his campus. His performance on several areas on the Cognitive Abilities tests was in the Very Low to Low range. He was eager to know how he did and wanted immediate feedback.

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

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

Cameron 11

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

Letter-Word Identification

Letter-Word Identification measured Stephen’s word identification skills. The initial items required him to identify letters that appear in large type on his side of the Test Book and the remaining items required him to pronounce words correctly. Stephen 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, Stephen obtained a standard score of 124 which is in the Superior range of academic functioning. This score is in the 94th percentile rank, which means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 94% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 6%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 9 years, 3 months. Stephen’s RPI of 100/90 on the Letter-Word Identification test indicates that on similar tasks, he would demonstrate 100% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.

The score obtained for this measure indicates that Stephen’s performance is typical compared to that of average students 9 years and 3 months old.

Reading Fluency

Reading Fluency measured Stephen’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. Stephen attempted to complete as many items as possible within a 3-minute time limit. Stephen’s RPI of 97/90 on the Reading Fluency test indicates that on similar tasks, he would demonstrate 97% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.

Stephen obtained a standard score of 119 which is in the Above Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 90th percentile rank, which means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 90% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 10%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 8 years, 6 months.

The score obtained for this measure indicates that Stephen’s performance is typical compared to that of average students 8 years and 6 months old.

Story Recall

Story Recall measured aspects of Stephen’s oral language including language development and meaningful memory. The task required him to recall increasingly

Cameron 12

complex stories that are presented using an audio recording. After listening to a passage, Stephen was asked to recall as many details of the story as he could remember.

Stephen obtained a standard score of 116 which is in the Above Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 85th percentile rank, which means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 85% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 15%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 10 years, 7 months. Stephen’s RPI of 95/90 on the Story Recall test indicates that on similar tasks, he would demonstrate 95% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.

The score obtained for this measure indicates that Stephen’s performance is typical compared to that of average students.

Understanding Directions

Understanding Directions is an oral language measure. The task required Stephen 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.

Stephen obtained a standard score of 105 which is in the Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 64th percentile rank, which means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 64% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 36%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 7 years, 10 months. Stephen’s RPI of 93/90 on the Understanding Directions test indicates that on similar tasks, he would demonstrate 93% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.

Calculation

Calculation is a test of math achievement measuring the ability to perform mathematical computations. The initial items on the Calculation test required Stephen to write single numbers. The remaining items required him to perform addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division combinations of these basic operations. The calculations involved whole numbers. Because the calculations are presented in a traditional problem format in the Subject Response Booklet, Stephen was not required to make any decisions about what operations to use.

Stephen obtained a standard score of 109 which is in the Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 73rd percentile rank, which means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 73% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 27%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 7 years, 7 months. Stephen’s RPI of 95/90 on the Calculations test indicates that on similar tasks, he would

Cameron 13

demonstrate 95% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.

Math Fluency

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

Stephen obtained a standard score of 117 which is in the High Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 87th percentile rank, which means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 87% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 13%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 8 years, 2 months. Stephen’s RPI of 94/90 on the Understanding Directions test indicates that on similar tasks, he would demonstrate 94% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.

Spelling

Spelling measured Stephen’s ability to write orally presented words correctly. He was required to produce uppercase and lowercase letters. The remaining items measured Stephen’s ability to spell words correctly. The items became increasingly difficult as the words became more difficult.

Stephen obtained a standard score of 108 which is in the Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 71st percentile rank, which means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 71% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 29%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 7 years, 8 months. Stephen’s RPI of 97/90 on the Spelling test indicates that on similar tasks, he would demonstrate 97% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.

Writing Fluency

Writing Fluency measured Stephen’s skill 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.

Stephen obtained a standard score of 119 which is in the High Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 90th percentile rank, which means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 90% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 10%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 8 years, 7 months. Stephen’s RPI of 98/90 on the Understanding Directions test indicates that on similar tasks, he would demonstrate 98% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.Passage Comprehension

Cameron 14

The initial Passage Comprehension items involve symbolic learning, or the ability to match a rebus (pictographic representation of a word) with an actual picture of the object. The next items were presented in a multiple-choice format and required Stephen to point to the picture represented by a phrase. The remaining items required him 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 removing pictorial stimuli and by increasing passage length, level of vocabulary and complexity of syntactic and semantic cues.

Stephen obtained a standard score of 117 which is in the High Average range of academic functioning. This score is in the 87th percentile rank, which means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 87% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 13%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 8 years, 10 months. Stephen’s RPI of 99/90 on the Passage Comprehension test indicates that on similar tasks, he would demonstrate 99% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency.

Writing Samples

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

Stephen obtained a standard score of 127 which is in the Superior range of academic functioning. This score is in the 96th percentile rank, which means that Stephen performed as well as or better than 96% of students in his norm group and not as well as the remaining 4%. Stephen’s age equivalent for this measure is 12 years, 3 months. Stephen’s RPI of 100/90 on the Writing Samples test indicates that on similar tasks, he would demonstrate 100% proficiency, whereas average age peers would demonstrate 90% proficiency. (See Table 4)

Cameron 15

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 Equivalent

Qualitative Description

Letter-Word Identification

124 94 100/90 9-3 Superior

Reading Fluency 11911191 90 97/90 8-6 High Average

Story Recall 116 85 95/90 10-7 High Average

Understanding Directions

105 64 93/90 7-10 Average

Calculation 109 73 95/90 7-7 Average

Math Fluency 117 87 94/90 8-2 High Average,

Spelling 108 71 97/90 7-8 Average

Writing Fluency 119 90 98/90 8-7 High Average

Passage Comprehension 117 87 99/90 8-10 High Average

Applied Problems 117 88 99/90 8-4 High Average

Writing Samples 127 96 100/90 12-3 Superior

Cameron 16

Assistive Technology

Stephen can access the school environment and curriculum without the need for AT services or devices. He communicates clearly and is expressively and receptively independent.

Transition

Transition was addressed at the annual ARD and documented that transition is not applicable to the subject at this is time because he is 7 years old and does not meet the age requirement.

Conclusion

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

Strengths – Stephen performed best in the areas of Oral Language. He obtained High Average on the Story Recall Subtest. Additional Strengths included Writing Fluency, Writing Samples, Math fluency, and Reading Fluency in which his scores ranged from Superior to High Average. A notable factor about Stephen’s performance seemed to improve when he was given the timed tests. He enjoyed the challenge of completing tasks within a certain amount of time.

Weaknesses – Although Stephen’s scores on the Achievement tests varied from Very Low to Very Superior in range, his overall test score was in the High Average range. He demonstrated significant relative weaknesses on two of the abilities tests: Visual-Auditory Learning and Concept Formation. Although Stephen was focused during the tests, he was overly anxious to do well. This desire to do well was a distraction during the test. Therefore, it is difficult to assess whether these areas are his true weaknesses.

Stephen’s overall intellectual ability, as measured by the WJ III GIA (Std), is in the High Average range of standard scores.

Stephen’s Verbal Ability (acquired knowledge and language comprehension) is also in the High Average range of standard scores when compared to others at his age level. His Thinking Ability (intentional cognitive processing) is in the Average range. His Cognitive Efficiency (automatic cognitive processing) is in the Superior range.

Stephen’s phonemic awareness standard score is in the Very Superior range when compared to others at his age level. His working memory is in the Superior range.

Significant discrepancies were not found between Stephen’s overall intellectual ability and his phonemic awareness and working memory.

Stephen’s oral language skills are High Average when compared to the range of scores obtained by others at his age level. Stephen’s overall level of achievement is High

Cameron 17

Average. Stephen’s academic skills and his ability to apply those skills are both within the High Average range. His fluency with academic tasks is in the Superior range.

When compared to others at his age level, Stephen’s standard scores are Superior in Written Expression. In Brief Math, Math Calculation Skills, and Brief Writing Stephen’s standard scores are in the High Average range (compared to age peers). His standard scores are within the Superior range in Brief Reading. Based on a mix of cognitive tasks associated with performance in each area, Stephen is performing at or above predicted levels in reading, mathematics, written language and oral language.

To help determine if any ability/achievement discrepancies exist, comparisons were made between his cognitive and achievement scores. Specifically, there is not a noteworthy difference between Stephen’s cognitive and achievement scores.

When the WJ III Cognitive Abilities test was administered, Stephen performed as well as expected. His GIA on the WJ III COG is 113, which is in the High Average range of intellectual functioning. The WJ III Cognitive test scores show no significant discrepancies. Therefore, the test may be based on a fair sample of Stephen’s abilities. (see Table 5).

Cameron 18

Table 6. Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement – Third Edition and Clusters Measuring the Seven IDEA Areas

Required LD Areas WJIII ACH Subtests

WJIII ACH

SubtestsSTD.

Scores

GIA GIA/ACHDif.

Sig.Y/N

Oral Expression Story Recall 116 113 -3 N

Listening Comprehension Understanding Directions

105 113 8 N

Written Expression Writing Sample 127 113 -14 NWriting Fluency 119 113 -6 N

Basic Reading Skills Letter-Word Identification

124 113 -11 N

Reading Comprehension Passage Comprehension

117 113 -4 N

Math Calculation Calculation 109 113 4 NMath Fluency 117 113 -4 N

Math Reasoning Applied Problems 117 113 -4 N

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

Cameron 19

Recommendations

The WJ III tests of Cognitive Abilities evaluation is considered a valid representation of Stephen’s current levels of functioning in the areas assessed. The WJ III test of Achievement is considered a valid representation of his current levels of functioning in the areas assessed. The following recommendations are based upon a review of evaluation data to assist Stephen during his educational career.

Based on the findings of the WJ III COG, test results are likely to be an accurate assessment of his potential therefore:

Provide Stephen with activities designed to increase her rate of production, such as recording the starting and stopping times on an activity or assignment or using a stopwatch or timer to increase response rate.

Provide various times activities, such as having Stephen calculate simple math facts as fast as he can. Chart daily performance.

Have Stephen estimate the amount of time that it will take to complete a task. Have him write down the starting and finishing times.

To help Stephen increase his speed in math operations drill him on math facts using visual stimuli such as computer programs and when he can respond to a math fact within 3 seconds, worksheets. Eventually move to timed tests.

Administer daily timed math tests to see how many facts Stephen can complete within a minute. He should record and monitor her progress.

Have Stephen follow steps to solve problems: write out the equation, expand the terms, and write out the steps of his solution (isolate unknown(s); solved for unknown(s); check answer with the goal; highlight answer).

For Visual-Auditory Learning:

Because memory is not a very stable trait, re-administer the memory tests at a different time of the day for comparison of performance (e.g., morning rather than late afternoon).

Administer additional assessments to determine if low memory scores are a function of poor memory or a reflection of [limited or poor attention, lack of initial comprehension].

For Concept Formation:

Administer additional assessments to determine if low scores are a function of poor reasoning skills, understanding and applying knowledge, and predicting logical conclusions.

Cameron 20

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.

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

Sherneice WilliamsEducational Diagnostician

Signature

___________________________________