Cameron 1
Houston Baptist University
EDSP 6344
7015 Fondren
Houston, Texas 77040
FULL AND INDIVIDUAL EVALUATION
Demographic Data
Student Name:
Grade:
Stephen Cameron
2nd
Date of Birth:
Age:
06/12/2006
7
Parents/Guardians: Rebecka Cameron
3227 Darlinghurst Dr, Oaktown,
Address:
TX 77901
saintnick@northpole.com
Email Address:
713-817-6110
Phone Number:
Gender:
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 Diagnostician
Rachel McCoy, General
Education Teacher
Rachel McCoy, General
Education Teacher
Nell Cherry, School Nurse
09/03/2013
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 School Records
Vision/Hearing Screening
09/06/2013
08/29/2013
08/27/2013
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:
Oral Expression:
Average
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
Standard
PR
Qualitative
Score
Description
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
Summary
Cluster
Standard
PR
AE
Qualitative
Score
Description
Verbal 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 Learning68
2
<2-0
Delayed
Note: STD= Standard Score; PR=Percentile Rank; AE= Age Equivalent
Very Low
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 LetterWord 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
Letter-Word
Identification
Reading Fluency
Standard
Score
Percentile
Rank
RPI
Age
Equivalent
Qualitative
Description
124
94
100/90
9-3
Superior
90
97/90
8-6
11911191
Story Recall
116
85
95/90
10-7
Understanding
Directions
105
64
93/90
7-10
High
Average
High
Average
Average
Calculation
109
73
95/90
7-7
Average
Math Fluency
117
87
94/90
8-2
Spelling
108
71
97/90
7-8
High
Average,
Average
Writing Fluency
119
90
98/90
8-7
Passage Comprehension
117
87
99/90
8-10
Applied Problems
117
88
99/90
8-4
Writing Samples
127
96
100/90
12-3
High
Average
High
Average
High
Average
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
STD.
Scores
116
GIA
GIA/
ACH
Dif.
Sig.
Y/N
113
-3
N
Listening Comprehension Understanding
Directions
105
113
8
N
Written Expression
Writing Sample
Writing Fluency
127
119
113
113
-14
-6
N
N
Basic Reading Skills
Letter-Word
Identification
124
113
-11
N
Reading Comprehension
Passage
Comprehension
117
113
-4
N
Math Calculation
Calculation
Math Fluency
109
117
113
113
4
-4
N
N
Math Reasoning
Applied Problems
117
113
-4
N
Oral Expression
WJIII ACH
Subtests
Story Recall
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 Williams
Educational Diagnostician
Signature
___________________________________