C.

Kent

Educational Achievement Report

Demographic Information
Name: Clark Kent
Date of Birth: 11/28/2006
Chronological Age: 7 years, 5 months
Evaluation Date: 4/20/2014
Primary Language: English
Primary Language of Test: English

School: Hebron-Harman Elementary

Grade/Educational Setting: 2
ID #: N/A
Examiner: Jordan Dobson
Date of Report: 4/24/2014

Reason for Referral

Clark Kent was evaluated on April 20th, 2014. At the time of the evaluation, Clark was in
the 8th month of 1st grade, making satisfactory to above satisfactory grades. He has no pertinent
medical or behavioral issues that affect his educational performance. According to the academic
history and interview with Clarks family, Clark has been experiencing difficulty in some academic
areas. For example, Clark has been performing inconsistently in the areas of reading, oral
language, and written language. Based on this information, Clark was referred for an educational
achievement evaluation.
Test Administered/Rationale
Due to Clarks inconsistency with his grades, the Woodcock Johnson Test of Achievement
III (WJ-ACH III) was administered. The WJ-ACH III is an individually administered test of
achievement measuring five curricular areas- reading, mathematics, written language, oral
language, and academic knowledge. The test provides a comprehensive system for measuring
general intellectual ability, specific cognitive abilities, scholastic aptitude, oral language, and
academic achievement. The WJ-ACH III was selected to be administered to Clark to gain more
information about his general academic performance that include the following skills: (1) reading
skills that include broad reading, basic reading skills, and reading comprehension, (2) oral
language skills that include listening comprehension and oral expression, (3) math skills that
include broad math, math calculation skills, and math reasoning, (4) written language skills that
include broad written language, basic writing skills, and written expression, and (5) an academic
knowledge cluster that assesses academic skills, academic fluency, academic applications, and
phoneme/grapheme knowledge.
Examiner Criteria Statements
In the opinion of the examiner:
__X__ The scores obtained are valid representation of students current educational performance levels.
_X___ The test(s) selected is a valid tool for the stated purpose and is valid for the student.
__X__ Linguistic, cultural, and /or economic differences did not influence testing.
Note: If these criteria are not met, the examiner(s) should state which ones do not apply and why.

Background Information

C. Kent 2
Clark is a seven year old boy who was born on November 28 , 2006. He is in 1st grade.
His favorite subjects are math and reading. His least favorite time of the school day is recess,
because, as he says, they don't get to do learning stuff. Clark gets along well with his classmates
and teachers. His typical day in school includes breakfast, morning work, math, science/social
studies, small groups, recess and lunch.
Clark lives with his parents and two older brothers. He describes them as nice, kind and
cheerful; a good family. He says his parents can be hard on him sometimes. His hobbies and
interests include bonding with his mom, making rainbow loom bracelets, boy scouts, playing with
his brothers or hanging out with the whole family.
When he is with his friends he likes to play board games, play outside sometimes, set up
bouncy houses, play video games and Minecraft. According to Clark, what he likes best about
himself is that he is a good student, he is good at Minecraft, and he has a wonderful family.
What he likes least about himself is that he can be mean sometimes and hit or kick people. The
best thing that has ever happened to him was meeting his cousins for the first time in Miami.
th

Familial Background Information

The primary language (spoken at home) of Clark is English.
When Clark was around 2 years old he had a seizure, and then about 6 months later he had
another one. He was examined by doctors and they determined that there were no significant
lasting effects of the seizures and that they were probably caused by an infection. At around one
year of age, it was discovered that Clark has an allergy to shellfish. Other than that, there is no
other significant medical information and no other remarkable early childhood events.
Clark's mother has three children. Clark is seven, Xavier is 11 and Sullivan is 15. Sullivan
has autism and severe cognitive disabilities which include aggressive behaviors. Specific
behavioral problems related to eating and sleeping for Clark include sleepwalking and talking.
Clark is involved with boy scouts and takes karate lessons. He is very social and tends to
make friends easily. For the most part, however, Clark does not enjoy being around his female
peers. Clark doesn't have any particular special talents, according to his mother, but he has good
coordination and she thinks that he would be good at sports when he gets older.
Educational Background Information
Clark went to pre-school and now attends Hebron-Harman Elementary School. He does
well in school, receiving CD and PR on his report cards, which is equivalent to A and B letter
grades. There have been no significant findings in regards to vision, hearing and health screenings.
Clark went to pre-school and was placed in a summer reading program before kindergarten. He
received speech therapy from age 2 to 4 for apraxia. He received speech therapy in both private
and school settings.
There are no documented behavioral successes or difficulties for Clark that relate to
school functioning. He has not received any prior psychological or educational evaluations. Clark
receives no accommodations or modifications used during testing or classroom instruction.
Behavioral Observations

C. Kent 3
Clarks conversational proficiency during the test session was typical for his age/grade
level. He was cooperative with all test sections and items in a manner typical for is his age and
grade level. Clark appeared confident and self-assured prior to beginning the test session, but
began to exhibit some anxiety during the test. He appeared less self-assured when he could not
complete sub-tests fully or when he knew he was answering questions wrong.
Clarks level of activity was typical for his age and grade level for the first half of the test.
He then became fidgety and restless during the last half of the test and kept asking how much
longer it would take. His attention and concentration was typical for his age until the last 25% of
the test, when he became more distracted and less attentive. Clark was prompt but careful in his
responses, but at times responded too quickly to a few test items or tried to change his answers
after the subtest. Clark was generally persistent with his responses to difficult tasks. He did not
give up easily on difficult items.
All of Clarks behaviors and his demeanor were typical for his age and grade level,
therefore, these test results are considered to provide an accurate representation of Clarks current
level of achievement.
Results
Reading Assessment Results
The Broad Reading cluster provides a comprehensive measure of reading achievement
including basic reading skills and reading comprehension. The Standard Battery of the WoodcockJohnson includes the following subtests: (1) Letter-Word Identification, (2) Reading Fluency, and
(3) Passage Comprehension was administered to Clark.
The Letter-Word Identification subtest measures word identification skills. Clark was
required to identify letters and to pronounce words correctly. Clark received a standard score of
123, which is in the superior range. The Reading Fluency subtest measures the ability to quickly
read simple sentences and decide if the sentences are true. Clark received a standard score of 76,
which is in the low range. The Passage Comprehension subtest measures the ability to match
the pictographic representation of a word with an actual picture of the object. In addition, Clark
was required to point to a picture represented by a phrase. Then Clark was required to read a
short passage and identify a missing key word that makes sense in the content of that passage.
Clark received a standard score of 107, which is in the average range.
Mathematics Assessment Results
The Broad Math cluster provides a comprehensive measure of math achievement including
problem solving, numeration, fluency, and reasoning. For the Standard Battery, the following
tests were administered: (1) Calculation, (2) Math Fluency, and (3) Applied Problems.
The Calculation subtest is a measure of computational skills and automaticity with basic
math facts and provides a measure of basic mathematical skills. This subtest required Clark to
accurately perform mathematical computations. Also included are problems requiring
manipulation of fractions and more advanced calculations using algebra, geometry, trigonometry,
and calculus. Clark received a standard score of 112 on the Calculation section, which is in the

C. Kent 4
high average range. The Math Fluency subtest measures the ability to solve simple addition,
subtraction, and multiplication facts quickly. For this test, Clark received a standard score of 96,
which is in the average range. The Applied Problems test required Clark to understand and solve
practical mathematics problems that are presented orally. Pictures of the written problem is
available for the student to see. The problems required Clark to listen to the problem, recognize
the procedures to be followed, and then perform relatively simple calculations. Clark received a
standard score of 113, which is in the high average range.
Oral Language Assessment Results
The Oral Language cluster provides a comprehensive measure of oral expression and
listening comprehension. For the Standard Battery, two tests are administered, Story Recall and
Understanding Directions.
The Story Recall subtest measures aspects of oral language including language
development and meaningful memory. During this portion of the test, Clark was required to recall
increasingly complex stories that are presented orally by the examiner. Clark received a standard
score of 97 in this area, which is in the average range. The Understanding Directions subtest is
an oral language measure. The task required Clark to listen to a sequence of instructions read
orally by the examiner and then follow the directions by pointing to various objects in a colored
picture. Clark received a standard score of 111, which is in the high average range.
Written Language Assessment Results
The Broad Written Language cluster provides a comprehensive measure of written language
achievement including spelling of single-word responses, fluency of production, and quality of
expression. The tests administered on the Standard Battery included Spelling, Writing Fluency,
and Writing Samples.
The Spelling subtest is a measure of the ability to write orally presented words correctly.
Test items measure prewriting skills and required Clark to produce uppercase and lowercase
letters, and to spell words correctly. Clark received a standard score of 114, which is in the high
average range. The Writing Fluency subtest measures skill in formulating and writing simple
sentences quickly. Each sentence must include a set of three stimulus words and describe an
accompanying picture. Clark received a standard score of 103, which is in the average range. The
Writing Samples subtest measures skill in writing responses to a variety of demands. Clark
received a standard score of112, which is in the high average range.
Interpretation of Assessment Findings
Reading Assessment Results
Clark's overall reading achievement is high average, with a standard score of 112. Within
this area, there is some discrepancy between subtests. Clark scored in the superior range for

C. Kent 5
letter-word recognition, but scored in the low range for reading fluency. Combined with this
average score for passage comprehension, this puts him in the high average range overall. It is
clear, however, that Clark needs improvement in reading fluency and could also possibly benefit
from enrichment spelling activities. It is important to consider the scores of all the individual
subtests, because based on his overall reading score, Clark appears to be in the high average
range, but upon closer examination, it is apparent that he needs to make improvement upon his
reading fluency.
Mathematics Assessment Results
Clark's overall mathematical achievement is high average, with a standard score of 111.
There are no significant discrepancies between the subtest scores within this category. Clark
scored in the high average range for math calculation and applied problems, but scored average in
math fluency. I believe that Clark has the potential to improve upon his math fluency in order to
be able to perform within a high average range in this area as well.
Oral Language Assessment Results
Clark's overall oral language achievement is average, with a standard score of 103. Clark
did well on both subtests, scoring in the high average range for understanding directions and in
the average range for story recall. Although he scored in the average range for story recall, there
is definite room for improvement. Additionally, Clark appeared to have anxiety during this section
because he was unable to remember important parts of most of the stories that were read to him. I
believe he should receive extra help in this area to improve his ability to recall important details of
a story and to help him develop comprehension strategies that may help to ease his anxiety in this
area.
Written Language Assessment Results
Clark's overall written language achievement is high average, with a standard score of 113.
There were no significant discrepancies within this area, however, he again scored lower on the
fluency subtest than on the other two subtests. While administering this subtest, I noticed that
Clark was distracted and taking an unusually long time to write certain sentences because he was
losing focus. All of the sentences he wrote were scored as correct, but he was not able to write
enough sentences in the given time to place him in the same score range as the other two writing
subtests. Clark has the potential to improve upon his writing fluency and possibly score in the high
average range upon subsequent testing.
There are no significant discrepancies across the broad testing areas of reading,
mathematics, oral language and written language. By examining the scores across these areas,
there is no cause for concern or no indication that Clark should be referred for special education
services. Within these areas, Clark seems to need the most improvement in the area of fluency.
Clark was able to answer test items accurately for reading, math and writing fluency, but was
unable to complete enough items within the given time to receive a score that matched his scores
on other subtests. Additionally, if Clark improves upon his story recall abilities, he could
potentially score in the high average range for oral language upon subsequent testing.
Summary/Discussion
Clark is a seven year old student at Hebron-Harman Elementary School who is being

C. Kent 6
evaluated due to inconsistency with his grades in areas of reading, writing and oral language.
This assessment is one component of that evaluation. This assessment indicates Clark's academic
achievement. When compared to his peers at his grade level, Clarks performance is in the average
range in the areas of story recall, math fluency, writing fluency, passage comprehension, and
handwriting. Clarks performance is in the high average range in the areas of understanding
directions, math calculation, spelling, applied problems, and writing samples. Clarks performance
is in the low range in the area of reading fluency. Clarks performance is superior in the area of
letter-word recognition.
These assessment results will be presented to the Eligibility Committee to assist in
determining if Clark requires special education services. Additionally, these results should be used
with all other available information when making a decision regarding Clarks eligibility for special
education services.
Recommendations and/or Proposed I.E.P. Goals
1. (Reading Fluency)
Clark will participate in extra reading practice two times a week with the teacher or a
trained aide, reading short passages quickly and accurately. During practice, Clark will receive
help from the aide if an error is made or if he does not know a word. Clark will read passages
without help with 95% accuracy by December of 2nd grade, as evaluated by running records.
2. (Reading Fluency)
Clark will be receiving the reading intervention listed above. In addition to running
records, by September of 2nd grade, Clark will score at least 44 on the DIBELS Oral Reading
Fluency test. By December of 2nd grade, Clark will score at least 68 on the DIBELS Oral Reading
Fluency test.
3. (Math Fluency)
Clark will complete basic math facts in a timed setting two times a week. After the time is
up, he will have a chance to go back and look at his answers to see and talk about what he got
wrong with the teacher. By December of 2nd grade, Clark will correctly answer at least 33 basic
math facts in a three minute time period.
4. (Writing Fluency)
Clark will be tested for writing fluency in September and December of 2nd grade using a
CBM standardized writing fluency test in which he is given a starter sentence, given 1 minute to
think about a story and three minutes to write a story relating to the starter sentence. By
September, Clark will write a story with 20-25 total words written and at least 17 words spelled
correctly, 3 out of 4 times. By December, he will write a story with 23-30 total words written and
at least 20 words spelled correctly, 3 out of 4 times.
5. (Story Recall)
Once a week, Clark will meet with the teacher or a trained aide. The teacher or aide will
read aloud a short passage and instruct Clark to draw a picture about what happened in the
passage and then orally retell the story. This will help Clark make a mental picture of the story in
his head, which will help him retell the details of the story. Clark will be able to accurately retell

C. Kent

passages read aloud to him 4 our of 5 times by December of 2 grade.

nd

Jordan Dobson
Type your name and professional affiliation
Applewood County Public Schools

April 27th, 2014_______

Date

SUMMARY OF SCORES
WOODCOCK-JOHNSON III, FORM A TESTS OF ACHIEVEMENT
Name of Student: Clark Kent
Date Administer: 4/20/2014
Age
Equivalent
(AE)

BROAD READING CLUSTER

BASIC READING SKILLS
READING COMPREHENSION CLUSTER
Letter-Word Identification

Passage Comprehension
Reading Fluency
BROAD MATHEMATICS CLUSTER
MATHEMATICS CALCULATION CLUSTER
MATHEMATICS REASONING CLUSTER

Calculation
Math Fluency
Applied Problems
ORAL LANGUAGE
Story Recall

Grade
Standard
Equivalent
Score
(GE)
(SS)

PR

classification

7-9
8-3

2.5
2.9

112
117

78
87

High Average
High Average

8-10
7-5
<4-1
7-8
7-5
7-9
7-7
6-11
7-10
7-10
6-7

3.5
2.1
<K.0
2.3
2.1
2.4
2.3
1.6
2.5
2.5
1.3

123
107
76
111
107
113
112
96
113
107
97

93
68
6
78
68
81
79
39
81
67
41

Superior
Average
Low
High Average
Average
High Average
High Average
Average
High Average
Average
Average

Understanding Directions
BROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE
BASIC WRITING SKILLS
WRITTEN EXPRESSION CLUSTER
Spelling
Writing Fluency
Writing Samples

8-4
7-8
7-10
7-7
7-10
7-3
7-10

3.0
2.4
2.5
2.2
2.5
1.9
2.5

111
113
113
110
114
103
112

C. Kent
77
80
81
74
82
57
79

8
High Average
High Average
High Average
Average
High Average
Average
High Average

STANDARD SCORES (SS) and CLASSIFICATIONS (use this language and the classification ranges in your
report, especially in the interpretation section)
131 and above
falls in the Very Superior range
121 to 130
falls in the Superior range
111 to 120
falls in the High Average range
90 to 110
falls in the Average range
80 to 89
falls in the Low Average range
70 to 79
falls in the Low range
<70
falls in the Very Low range

Reflection:
1.

Administering this formal assessment has enhanced my understanding of

professional and ethical practices and how formal assessment can guide instructional
strategies, as stated in CEC Standard 6 and InTASC Standard 6, respectively. Giving the
Woodcock-Johnson provided great experience for me to administer a test in a professional
and ethical manner. Giving the test to a seven year old, I faced some challenges regarding
questions he would ask that I couldn't answer or trying to keep him on task. I was able to
remain professional throughout the test, but I am glad I had this experience before
administering this test for the first time in my actual career. I also can clearly see the benefit of
a test like this when coming up with strategies and interventions to use in the classroom for a
student who needs to improve in certain areas based on their test scores. It was difficult
coming up with goals and recommendations, but this has given me experience in doing such
tasks and with more practice, it will get easier and easier.

2.

Generating the Educational Achievement Report helped me further understand the

psychoeducational process. While interpreting the results of the test, I began thinking that if
my examinee had scored extremely low on a certain area or if there was a big discrepancy
between testing areas, that I would want to further evaluate that person. There are many other
valid and reliable tests which concentrate specifically on certain broad areas covered by the
Woodcock-Johnson, which could be used to further evaluate a student. While interpreting the
scores and making recommendations for the student, I also realized and understood the value
of these tests in making such goals. I had to investigate interventions and other testing
methods to find what I thought was best to help the student improve. The scores of the test
certainly guided my suggestions for instruction and strategies to help the student improve.

3.

There is one thing I would do differently in the future with this test. First, I would
ensure that a good testing environment is available. The day I gave the test, the public library

C. Kent 9
was closed, so I had to administer the test in a public setting. Although the child did very well
on the test despite the distractions, I'm sure he could have done a little better if we were in a
better environment. I was also getting distracted at times because of the setting. Other than
that, there isn't anything I would do differently, I just think it would be beneficial to have a
couple more practice sessions before administering officially. I felt that I was very well
prepared to administer the test. I read through the manual, I read through the specific subtest
instructions and certain specific test items. I listened to the audio tape prior to administering
the test. I also practiced how I would hold my protocol so that the examinee couldn't see it
and how I would set up the environment so both the examinee and I could see the easel
during testing. These things really helped me prepare for the test and made things go a lot
more smoothly. But I would still need to administer the test at least two more times before I
felt very comfortable with it.