SPED 465 INTEGRATED REPORT

Name: Laura Ingles

DOB: October 10th, 2002
Age: 16.7
Grade: 10.8
Date of Evaluation: 05/06/2019
Examiner: Kelsey Barrett
Instruments: Woodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement IV
Oral Reading Fluency CBM (OFR-CBM)
Connors and Vanderbilt Questionnaire

REASON FOR REFERRAL:

Laura is a 16 year old and 7 month 10 th grade student at Prairie High School Laura has been
referred for test by her general education teachers for a possible consideration of access to special
education services for Laura. Laura’s parents reached out to her general education teacher in concern of
Laura’s recent homework grades, which prompted Laura’s referral. Laura’s parents are extremely active
in her life. Laura comes from a positive and warm home environment, where is safe and supported. Both
of Laura’s parents are firefighters. Laura has three little brothers, she often spends her afternoons and
weekends supervising her brothers when her parents are not around. Laura’s educators and parents
report that Laura is a hard worker, and always puts satisfactory effort forth on all assignments and
school-related tasks. Due to the performance in reading related tasks in Laura’s science, history and
English classes, Laura is being referred for assessment to investigate the academic concern, to analyze if
there is a reason for special education services.

EDUCATIONAL HISTORY:
Laura is currently a student at Prairie High School, where is currently placed in the 10 th grade.
She has been a student within this school district since she was in kindergarten. Laura currently has
passing grades in all of her classes, but she is on the verge of not passing English. Previous grades state
that Laura has received sufficient grades in all of her classes, nothing below a B appears on Laura’s
transcript after review of past grades. Standardized testing results indicate that Laura passed all
standardized tests administered in 4th and 7th grade, but in 9th grade, she only passed the mathematics
standardized test given.
 TEACHER INTERVIEW:
Laura’s referring general educator was interviewed. Laura is in the teacher’s 2 nd period creative
writing class. This is the second year in a row which this teacher has had Laura as a student. She states
that Laura has always gotten her classwork done, and that she always has put satisfactory time in
assignments, but acquiring concepts and completing assignments takes much longer for Laura compared
to her peers. It is an expectation that assignments are due in the beginning of class, but at times it takes
Laura 45+ minutes to find her assignments which are due in her bag. Her teacher states that her classes
center around collaboration, and Laura is constantly collaborating with her peers. Laura’s teacher states
that she often talks out-of-turn and speaks out without raising her hand. She often spends a lot of time
staring out of the window, or generally of task. Laura’s teacher stated that Laura is often very
unorganized and unsure of where her assignments are, even when she gets them completed.

OBSERVATIONS DURING THE ASSESSMENT:

Laura appeared to be consistently high-energy before, during and after the assessment. Laura
rarely maintained eye-contact for longer than a few seconds. When Laura was spoken to or speaking
herself, she often looked around at many objects and out of the window. Laura would often sing
between each subtest. voice when answering questions during the assessment. Laura did respond to
conversation thoughtfully and logically, indicating that Laura’s expressive and receptive language skills
are sufficient.

TEST RESULTS:
Woodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement IV Subtest Scores
Subtest Scores Standard Score Confidence Percentile Rank Qualitative
Interval (68%) Descriptor
Letter Word 61 (58-65) .5% Well Below
Identification Average
Applied Problems 111 (101-116) 77% Below Average
Spelling 98 (94-102) 45% Average
Passage 112 (107-117) 79% Above Average
Comprehension
Calculation 94 (90-98) 34% Average
Writing Samples 93 (88-98) 32% Average
Word Attack 85 (80-91) 16% Below Average
Sentence Reading <40 (<40-<40) .1% Below Average
Fluency
Math Facts 80 (75-85) 5% Below Average
Fluency
Sentence Writing 140 (141-154) 99.6% Above Average
Fluency
Reading Recall 94 (90-97) 34% Average
Number Matrices 112 (106-117) 79% Above Average

Woodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement Cluster Scores

Cluster Scores Standard Score Confidence Percentile Rank Qualitative
Interval (68%) Descriptor
Reading Fluency 84 (81-87) 14% Below Average
Broad Reading 44 (<40-49) .1% Below Average
Basic Reading 70 (67-73) 2% Below Average
Skills
Reading 106 (102-110) 66% Average
Comprehension
Mathematics 102 (99-105) 55% Average
Broad 93 (90-96) 32% Average
Mathematics
Math Calculation 86 (83-89) 18% Below Average
Skills
Math Problem 112 (108-116) 79% Below Average
Solving
Broad Written 110 (104-111) 75% Average
Language
Written 160 154->160 99.9% Superior
Expression

Oral Reading Fluency (ORF-R CBM)

Score Score
Tier 1 Benchmark Score 161
Tier 2 Benchmark Score 130
Laura Ingle’s Score 73

Connors and Vanderbilt Questionnaire

Qualitative Score Score
Most likely does not have ADHD >10
Might have ADHD 10-30
Most Likely has ADHD 30+
Laura Ingle’s Score 52
Subtests:

1. Test 1 (Letter Word Identification)- Letter-Word Identification measures the examinee’s word
identification skills, a reading and writing ability. The initial items require the individual to
identify letters that appear in large type on the examinee’s side of the Test Book. The remaining
items require the person to read aloud individual words correctly. The examinee is not required
to know the meaning of any word. The items become increasingly difficult as select words
appear less frequently in written English. Laura Ingle’s scored a standard score of

2. Test 2 (Applied Problems: Applied Problems requires the person to analyze and solve math
problems, a quantitative knowledge ability. To solve the problems, the person must listen to the
problem and recognize the procedure to be followed, and then perform relatively simple
calculations. Because many of the problems include extraneous information, the individual must
decide not only the appropriate mathematical operations to use, but also which numbers to
include in the calculation. Item difficulty increases with more complex calculations.

3. Test 3 (Spelling)- Spelling, a reading-writing ability, requires the person to write words that are
presented orally. The initial items measure prewriting skills, such as drawing lines and tracing
letters. The next set of items requires the person to produce uppercase and lowercase letters.
The remaining items measure the person’s ability to spell words correctly. The items become
increasingly difficult as the words become more difficult.

4. Test 4 (Passage Comprehension)- Passage Comprehension measures the ability to use syntactic
and semantic cutes to identify a missing word in a text, a reading-writing ability. 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 are
presented in a multiple-choice format and require the person to read a short passage and
identify a missing key word that makes sense in the content of that passage (a cloze approach to
reading comprehension assessment). The items become increasingly difficult by removing
pictorial stimuli and by increasing passage level length, level of vocabulary, and complexity of
syntax.

5. Test 5 (Calculation) Calculation is a test of math achievement ability to perform mathematical

computations, a quantitative knowledge ability. The initial items in Calculation require the
individual to write single numbers. The remaining items require the person to perform addition,
subtraction, multiplication, division, and 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 Response Booklet, the person is not required to
make any decisions about what operations to use or what data to include.

6. Test 6 (Writing Samples)- Writing Samples measures the examinee’s skill in writing responses to
a variety of demands, a reading-writing ability. The person must write sentences that are
evaluated for their quality of expression. Item difficult increases by increasing passage length,
the level of vocabulary, and the sophistication of the content. The individual is not penalized for
errors in basic writing skills, such as spelling or punctuation.

7. Test 7 (Word Attack)- Word Attack measurers a person’s ability to apply phonic and structural
analysis skills to the pronunciation of unfamiliar printed words, a reading-writing ability. The
initial items require the individual to produce the sound for single letters. The remaining items
require the person to read aloud letter combinations that are phonically consistent or are
regular patters in English orthography but are nonsense to low-frequency words.

8. Test 8 (Oral Reading)- Oral Reading is a measure of story reading accuracy and prosody, a
reading-writing ability. The individual reads aloud sentences that gradually increase in difficulty.
Performance is scored for both accuracy and fluency of expression.

9. Test 9 (Sentence Reading Fluency)- Sentence Reading Fluency measures reading rate, requiring
both reading-writing cognitive processing speed abilities. The task involves reading simple
sentences silently and quickly in the Response Booklet, deciding if the statement is true or false,
and then circling yes or no. The difficulty of the level of the sentences gradually increases to a
moderate level. The individual attempts to complete as many items as possible within a 3-
minute time limit.

10. Test 10 (Math Facts Fluency)- Math Facts Fluency measures speed of computation or the ability
to solve simple addition, subtraction, and multiplication facts quickly, requiring both reading-
writing and cognitive processing speed abilities. Each sentence must relate to a given stimulus
picture in the Response Booklet and must include a given sent of three words. The words
gradually require the formulation of more complex sentence structures. The test has a 5-minute
time limit.

11. Test 11 (Sentence Writing Fluency)- Sentence Writing Fluency Measures an individual’s skill in
formulating and writing simple sentences quickly, requiring both reading-writing and cognitive
 processing speed abilities. Each sentence must relate to a given stimulus picture in the Response
Booklet and must include a given set of three words. The words gradually require the
formulation of more complex sentence structures. This test has a 5-minute time limit.

12. Test 12 (Reading Recall)- Reading Recall is a measure of reading comprehension and meaningful
memory, The individual reads a short story silently and then retells as much of the story as he or
she can recall.

13. Test 13 (Number Matrices)- Number Matrices is a measure of quantitative reasoning, requiring
both quantitative knowledge and fluid reasoning abilities. A matrix is presented, and the
individual must identify the missing number. Although the test is not times, there is a general
guideline of either 30 seconds or 1 minute per problem.

Clusters:

• Reading: The Reading cluster is a measure of reading achievement, including reading decoding
and the ability to comprehend and connect text while reading. This cluster is a combination of Test: 1
Letter-Word Identification and Test 4: Passage Comprehension.

• Broad Reading: The Broad Reading Cluster provides a comprehensive measure of reading
achievement, including reading decoding, reading speed, and the ability to comprehend connected text
while reading. This cluster is a combination of Test 1: Letter-Word Identification, Test 4: Passage
Comprehension, and Test 9: Sentence Reading Fluency.

• Basic Reading Skills: The Basic Reading Skills cluster is an aggregate measure of sight vocabulary,
phonics, and structural analysis that provides a measure of basic reading skills. This cluster is a
combination of Test 4: Passage Comprehension and Test 12L Reading Recall from the Extended Battery.

• Reading Comprehension: The Reading Comprehension cluster is an aggregate measure of

comprehension and reasoning, and to a lesser extent, long-term retrieval. It is a combination of Test 4:
Passage Comprehension and Test 12: Reading Recall from the Extended Battery.

• Mathematics: The Mathematics cluster provides a measure of math achievement including

problem solving and computational skills. This cluster includes Test 2: Applied Problems and Test 5:
Calculation.

• Broad Mathematics: The Broad Mathematics cluster provides a comprehensive measure of

mathematic achievement, including problem solving, number facility, automaticity, and reasoning and
cognitive processing speed. This cluster includes Test 2: Applied Problems, Test 5: Calculation, and Test
10: Math Facts Fluency.
• Math Problem Solving: The Math Problem Solving cluster provides a measure of mathematical
knowledge and reasoning and fluid reasonings. The cluster includes Test 5: Calculation and Test 10:
Math Facts Fluency.

• Broad Written Language: The Broad Written Language provides a comprehensive measure of
written language achievement, including spelling of single-word responses, fluency if production, quality
of expression and processing speed. It includes Test 3: Spelling, Test 6: Writing Samples, and Test 11:
Sentence Writing Fluency.

• Written Expression: The Written Expression cluster is an aggregate measure of meaningful

written expression fluency and cognitive processing speed. This cluster is a combination of Test 6:
Writing Samples and Test 11: Sentence Writing Fluency.

Test Interpretations

The student Laura Ingle’s academic skills were demonstrated in the areas of math, written
language and reading were assessed using the Woodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement. This specific
test provides standard scores and percentile ranks which indicate how Laura Ingles performed
compared to her same-aged peers. The standard scores which are between 85-115 are considered to be
average, scoring one standard deviation of the mean which falls within the normative expectations
compared to same-aged peers. Scores which are 115 and above are considered to be above average and
above the normative expectations, which constitute a strength for Laura Ingles. Scores that are above
115 are two standard deviations above the mean, which constitutes strength for Laura Ingles. Scores
which are 85 and below are considered to be below average, and below normative expectations, which
constitutes a weakness for Laura Ingles. Scores between 2 and 3 standard deviations below the mean
are considered to be well below the average, and below normative expectations, constitution the area
as an area of need.

Laura Ingles took the Woodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement IV. This test assessed Laura
Ingle’s academic achievement. Laura’s score compared to the normative expectation of her peers were
qualified as average in reading comprehension, mathematics, and broad written language skills. Laura’s
scores compared to the normative expectation of her peers are above average in written expression.
Laura’s subtest score of number matrices is above average compared to the normative expectation of
her peers. Laura’s subtest score of spelling is also above average compared to the normative
expectations of her peers. These qualify the Laura’s scores in number matrices and spelling constitute
these areas as areas of strengths for Laura.

Laura Ingles demonstrated that she may have a weakness in the academic areas of language
arts. Based upon the composite score which Laura was scored with, compared to the normative
expectations with same aged peers Laura score is below the normative expectation in reading and
mathematics clusters. Laura scored below average in basic reading skills, broad reading as well as
reading fluency. These scores are constituted as a weakness within Laura Ingle’s academics. When
Laura’s verbal expressive language had to be applied during the assessment, Laura scored below the
average.
 Laura’s Oral Reading Fluency was assessed using the Oral Reading Fluency CBM (ORF-R CBM).
Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) is a reading curriculum-based measurement (R-CBM) that tests students’
ability to read aloud. The ORF provides criterion-based expectations both for Tier 1 and Tier 2. Laura’s
score on the ORF-M is below average compared to her peers. Laura’s score on the ORF-C constitute oral
reading fluency as an area of weakness for Laura.

Laura’s general educator filled out the Connors and Vanderbilt Teacher Questionnaire, designed
to obtain information on a child’s behavior within educational institutions. This test is designed to assess
Attention/Hyperactive Deficit Disorder (ADHD). Responses on this teacher questionnaire indicate that
Laura often daydreams, and disrupts other students. The information obtained from this test can
provide beneficial information for behavior for Laura Ingles. Laura’s score is qualitatively higher than the
rank of “Most likely has ADHD”. Given the score obtained from Laura’s Connors and Vanderbilt
Questionnaire, it is suggested that Laura Ingle’s may have a diagnosis of ADHD.

ASK HART IF ADHD SHOULD BE IN THE SUMMARY, AND HOW

CONCLUSION/SUMMARY:

Laura’s current academic abilities in written expression are higher than the norm which
constitutes written expression as a major strength for Laura. Laura performs below average in Letter
Word Identification and Word Attack. These weaknesses influence Laura’s abilities within reading
fluency. On many items that required an oral response, Laura did not answer or was unable to answer
many of the questions being asked. Based upon the assessment, this suggests that Laura may have a
weakness with communicating expressive language skills.

RECCOMENDATIONS:

- Based upon results the Woodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement VI, Laura may benefit from
addition instruction in the content area of mathematics focusing on calculation and problem
solving.

- Based upon results from the Woodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement VI and the ORF CBM,
Laura may benefit form addition instruction using direct instruction, applying echo reading
methods which may benefit reading fluency skills.

- Considering the results from both the Woodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement VI and the ORF
CBM, Laura Ingle’s may benefit from every day practice reading aloud for 30 minutes, to practice
and increase the stamina of her reading fluency.
 - Considering the results from both the Woodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement VI and the ORF
CBM, Laura Ingle’s may benefit from phonics instruction to increase her word attack skills and
benefit her reading fluency.

- Due to the results on the Connors and Vanderbilt Questionnaire filled out by Laura’s teacher,
Laura may benefit from a six-section folder to keep her assignments due easily accessible in,
which may increase the time that Laura is obtaining instruction.

- Due to the results on the Connors and Vanderbilt Questionnaire filled out by Laura’s teacher,
Laura may benefit from developing an unobtrusive signal to obtain her attention which may
increase overall instruction time in the classroom.

Examiner: Kelsey Barrett

Signature of Examiner: