11/7/14 Decoding, Disfluency,
Dyslexia:
What does it all mean?
Best Practices in Reading Assessment
by Joe Edwards and Stephen McCrocklin
November 8th 2014 KPA Fall Convention
Decoding, Disfluency, Dyslexia
Overview

The problem, America, Kentucky & Louisville has “too many” struggling
readers

To develop a better understanding of ways critical reading skills and
reading deficits are conceptualized by various groups (The National
Reading Panel, “Dyslexia” as being defined by proposed KRS 158 (12RS HB);
DSM-5

Core components necessary to be a good reader and a better understanding
of where reading problems fall on a continuum from mild to substantial
deficits in core areas

Review of the commonly used assessment measures of reading skills and
what they measure: WJ-III and WJ-IV, WIAT-3, TOWRE-2, GORT-5 & CTOP-2

Several Case Examples

Models of assessment and intervention for reading problems—Response to
Intervention (RTI) vs. the Ability-Achievement Discrepancy Model.
1 11/7/14 Decoding, Disfluency, Dyslexia
 The
goals

To help psychologists have a better understanding of the ways major groups have
identified the skills necessary to be a good reader.

To help evaluators have a better understanding of the “key areas” to assess in
determining if a child or adult has a reading problem.

To help evaluators be able to place a person’s reading skill on a continuum in order
to identify whether a person has
_____________________________________________________________________
good reading skills
“at-risk”
mild
moderate severe
Reading Trajectory
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
K
2 11/7/14 Americans don’t read well
37% of 4th graders read below basic levels
– “partial mastery” of fundamental skills.
Kentuckians donʼ’t read well
50% of college freshmen need remedial classes
3 of 100 high school Freshmen graduate from college
The highest and lowest scoring schools districts both
spend over $10,000 per pupil per year.
3 11/7/14 National Institutes of Health charged by
Congress in 1965
  What
will it take to develop a
nation of readers?
  Reading
problems affect the
welfare of children
  NICHD
(National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development)
  Reid
Lyon, Ph. D.
NICHD research rigorous
research methods




2,500 research articles
More than 120 researchers
34,000 people

20,000 typical readers

14,000 with reading difficulty
48 research sites

42 sites in U.S.

6 international

China, England, Israel, Russia, Serbo-Croatia, Sweden, Turkey
4 11/7/14 Major Findings
  Reading
disabilities affect
10 million children 1:5 (20%)


Typical
Yale 9,10
  Affects
LD
boys and girls equally
Bowman Gray 5,9, Colorado 4,9,11, Miami 5,9, Yale 2,5,7,12
Major Findings (conʼ’t)
  Persistent
deficit
 not developmental lag in linguistic and
reading skills
 74% LD in 3rd grade still disabled in 9th
Yale, 1,4,7,10 Stanovich & Siegel 3
5 11/7/14 Matthew Effect
Major Findings (conʼ’t)
  Occur
continuously
upon a distribution

not clumped
together at tail-end
Bowman Gray 5,
Colorado1,4,5, Yale, 1,4,7,10
Stanovich & Siegel 3
6 11/7/14 For the 20% of children with severe
reading difficulties
 Phonological
  Substantial
deficit”
core deficit
converging evidence for a “phonological core
  Difficulty
acquiring, retaining, and manipulating sounds in
the English language
  Supported
by over 100,000 studies reviewed in
the National Reading Panel report
Research says...
“Children who fall behind in first grade reading have a one in
eight chance of ever catching up to grade level.”
Juel, 1994
“Phonemic awareness is the single best predictor of reading
success between kindergarten and second grade.”
Adams, Stanovich, 1995
“Phonemic awareness is more highly related to learning
to read than are tests of general intelligence, reading
readiness, and listening comprehension.”
Stanovich, 1993
7 11/7/14 GROWTH IN WORD READING ABILITY OF CHILDREN WHO
BEGIN FIRST GRADE IN THE BOTTOM 20% IN PHONEME
AWARENESS & LETTER KNOWLEDGE (Torgesen & Mathes,)
2000
5.7
Low
PA
Average
READING GRADE LEVEL
5
Low
Ave. PA
4
3.5
3
2
1
K
1
2
3
4
5
GRADE LEVEL CORRESPONDING TO AGE
GROWTH IN READING COMPREHENSION OF CHILDREN
WHO BEGIN 1st GRADE IN THE BOTTOM 20% IN PHONEME
AWARENESS & LETTER KNOWLEDGE (Torgesen & Mathes,
2000)
READING GRADE LEVEL
6.9
6
Average
5
Low
4
3.4
3
2
SAME VERBAL ABILITY – VERY
DIFFERENT READING
Low PA
COMPREHENSION
1
Ave. PA
K
GRADE LEVEL CORRESPONDING TO AGE
1
2
3
4
5
8 11/7/14 Reading is not a natural process
  Speech
is at least 200,000 yrs. old
  Reading is a recent invention 4,000 yrs. old
 Writing
uses arbitrary symbols – different
in various languages to represent human
speech
Decoding, Disfluency, Dyslexia
  Video
9 11/7/14 National Reading Panel
•  called by Congress in 1997
•  evaluated the existing
100,000 research studies
(published since 1966)
The National Reading Panel
 Why
it is critical to know about the NRP?
 How it can shape best practice?
10 11/7/14 The National Reading Panel
  To
be good readers the NRP has identified the
following skills:
 phonemic
awareness skills (the ability to manipulate the
sounds that make up spoken language)
 phonics skills (understanding there are relationships
between letters and sounds)
 the ability to read fluently with accuracy, speed and
expression
 Vocabulary knowing the meaning of words
 Reading comprehension strategies to enhance
understanding and enjoyment of what they read.
The National Reading Panel
Phonemic!
Awareness!
Vocabulary
Phonics
Fluency
Meaning
11 11/7/14 Key reading skills
  The
key reading skills identified by the NRP is
supported as critical reading skills in numerous
studies
  These
key reading skills are identified in the the
Dyslexia Law (KRS)
  These
key reading skills are discussed in DSM 5
12 11/7/14 Dyslexia:
Historical Background
  W.
Pringle Morgan, 1896- general
doctor and ʻ‘father of dyslexiaʼ’
  Language, specifically speech, is
critical to reading development
  Phonological awareness is essential for
learning to read successfully
"Dyslexia is a specific learning
disability . . .”
This definition recognizes the existence of
other specific learning disabilities and its place
on the taxonomic hierarchy of learning
disabilities.
13 11/7/14 " . . . that is neurobiological in
origin.”
The deficit is cognitive, intrinsic to the
individual, and occurs at the level of the
neuron.
Brain Activation with Reading
Typical Readers
Strong
activation
pattern
Dyslexic Readers
Weak
activation
pattern
14 11/7/14 ECTOPIC CELLS
"It is characterized by difficulties with
accurate and/or fluent word recognition
and by poor spelling and decoding
abilities.”
This current definition
recognizes fluency,
automaticity, and spelling
along with decoding as
being directly influenced
by the cognitive deficit
involved.
15 11/7/14 "These difficulties typically result from a
deficit in the phonological component of
language. . . ”
The core cognitive
deficit of dyslexia
resides in the
phonological
system.
". . . that is often unexpected in relation
to other cognitive abilities . . .”
There is nothing in this definition that would
preclude an individual with a generalized
developmental disability from also being dyslexic
if his cognitive assets were relatively superior to
his "deficit in the phonological component of
language."
16 11/7/14 "and the provision of effective
classroom instruction."
Individuals who can't read due solely to
poor instruction are not dyslexic.
"Secondary consequences may
include problems in reading
comprehension and reduced
reading experience that can
impede growth of vocabulary and
background knowledge."
17 11/7/14 The National Reading Panel
Phonemic!
Phonics
Awareness!
Fluency!
Meaning
Vocabulary
Comorbidity-Dyslexia likes company
70
Control
60
Dyslexia
50
40
30
20
10
0
ADHD
Conduct
Disorder
Depression
Anxiety
At Least 1
Comorbid
Diagnoses
18 11/7/14 KRS 158 (12 RS HB 69/GA) : Section 1
(definitions)
(c) “Dysgraphia” means difficulty in automatically
remembering and mastering the sequence of muscle motor
movements needed to accurately write letters or numbers;
(d) “Dyslexia” means “a language processing disorder that is
neurological in origin, impedes a person’s ability to read, write,
and spell, and is characterized by difficulties with accuracy or
fluency in word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding
abilities.”
(e) “Phonemic awareness” means the ability to recognize that
a spoken word consists of a sequence of individual sounds and
the ability to manipulate individual sounds in speaking;”
KRS 158 (12 RS HB 69/GA): regarding
technical assistance and training
(4 a) The use of specific screening processes and programs to identify student strengths and
needs;
(4 d) progress monitoring of student performance; and
(5) The department shall develop and maintain a Web-based resource providing teachers
access to:
(b) Current, scientifically based search and age-appropriate instructional tools that may be used for
substantial, steady improvement in:
1. Reading when a student is experiencing difficulty with phonemic awareness,
phonics, vocabulary, fluency, general reading comprehension, or reading in specific
content areas, or is exhibiting characteristics of dyslexia, aphasia or other reading
difficulties;”
2. Writing when a student is experiencing difficulty with consistently producing
letters or numbers with accuracy or is exhibiting characteristics of dysgraphia;
19 11/7/14 DSM 5 – Changes from DSM IV
Characteristics of
Specific Learning Disorder
Specific learning disorder is diagnosed through a clinical review of the individual’s
developmental, medical, educational, and family history, reports of test scores and
teacher observations, and response to academic interventions. The diagnosis
requires persistent difficulties in reading, writing, arithmetic, or mathematical
reasoning skills during formal years of schooling. Symptoms may include inaccurate
or slow and effortful reading, poor written expression that lacks clarity, etc..
Broadening the diagnostic category reflects the latest scientific understanding of
the condition. Specific symptoms, such as difficulty in reading, are just symptoms.
And in many cases, one symptom points to a larger set of problems. These problems
can have long-term impact on a person’s ability to function in daily life.
Early identification and intervention are particularly important. The broader
DSM-5 category of specific learning disorder ensures that fewer affected individuals
will go unidentified and more detailed specifiers will help clinicians more
effectively target services and treatment.
DSM 5: Specific Learning Disorder:
A. At least one of the following symptoms for 6 months
duration, despite interventions to target those difficulties:
1. Inaccurate or slow and effortful word reading (eg. reads
single words aloud incorrectly, frequency guesses words, has
difficulty sounding out words).
2. Difficulty understanding the meaning of what is read
(eg.,may read text accurately but not understand the
sequence , relationships, inferences or deeper meanings of
what is read).
3. Difficulties with spelling (e.g., may add, omit, or
substitute vowels or consonants).…..
20 11/7/14 DSM 5: Specific Learning Disorder continued
B. The affected academic skills are substantial and quantifiably below those expected for
the individual’s chronological age, and cause significant interference with academic or
occupational performance, or with activities of daily living, as confirmed by individually
administered standardized achievement measures and comprehensive clinical
assessment. If 17 or older, a documented history of impairing learning difficulties many
be substituted for the standardized assessment.
C.
The learning difficulties begin during school-age years but many not become fully
manifest until the demands for those affected academic skills exceed the individual’s
limited capacities (e.g., timed tests, reading or writing lengthy complex reports for a
tight deadline, excessively heavy academic loads).
D.
The learning difficulties are not better accounted for intellectual disabilities,
uncorrected visual or auditory acuity, other mental or neurological disorders,
psychosocial adversity, lack of proficiency in the language of academic instruction, or
inadequate educational instruction.
DSM 5: Specific Learning Disorder continued
The 4 diagnostic criteria (A-D) are to be met based on a clinical synthesis of the
individual’s history (developmental, medical, family, educational), school reports, and
psychoeducational assessment.
Note:
Specify if:
315.00 (F81.0) With impairment in reading:
Word reading accuracy
Reading rate of fluency
Reading comprehension
Note: Dyslexia is an alternative terms used to refer to a pattern of learning difficulties
characterized by problems with accurate or fluent word recognition, poor decoding and poor
spelling abilities. IF dyslexia is used to specify this particular pattern of difficulties, it is
important also to specify any additional difficulties that are present, such as difficulties with
reading comprehension or math reasoning.
315.2 (F81.81) With impairment in written expression (Spelling accuracy, Grammar
& punctuation accuracy, Clarify or organization of written expression.
315.1 (F81.2) With impairment in mathematics (number sense, memorization of
arithmetic facts, accurate or fluent calculation, accurate math reasoning)
21 11/7/14 The Issues with the Ability-Achievement
Discrepancy Model

According to Feifer (2008) “Throughout the years, there have been
numerous shortcomings inherent within the Achievement-Ability model
including the statistical imprecision of using cutoff scores from two
different normative samples (i.e., Wechsler Intelligence tests versus
Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Academic Achievement), the over-reliance on
a Full Scale IQ score in an attempt to capture the dynamic properties of
one’s reasoning skills (Hale & Fiorello, 2004), and the lack of agreement
on the magnitude of the discrepancy at various ages and grades (Feifer &
DeFina, 2000). Perhaps the most notable shortcoming of the discrepancy
model was that it results in a “wait-to-fail” scenario in which a student
must display a level of failure to acquire skills that must reach a
threshold of severity, or significance, to qualify for special educational
services.”

Formula is the GAP between Ability and Achievement (1.5 SD > 23 pts)
The Response to Intervention Model (RTI)
The inception of Response to Intervention models (RTI) came
about through the reauthorization of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act in 2004 (IDEA) and the overall idea
that school reform was needed to address students who were
not performing at grade level. The trend of RTI is to not only
use the data to make informed decisions concerning special
education services, but also as an early identifier of students
who are considered at-risk. At the heart of RTI is the concept
of using scientifically-based programs and approaches when
intervening at the intervention stage to prevent student
academic failure.
ID a student early when not working at grade level, design
an intervention and apply it to see if the student responds.
22 11/7/14 A possible solution – Blending Theoretical
Models
For these reasons, it is crucial that school districts take notice of the
importance of using RTI data, and administering I.Q. tests for the
Ability-Achievement model. Both types of data must be considered with
diagnosing a possible SLD because when using either model in seclusion—
the uncertainty outweighs the benefits. Also, using RTI data alone for
diagnosing a possible SLD diagnosis should not be used alone because it
only offers insight into one dimension of SLD.
According to Flanagan, Fiorello, and Ortiz (2010): Neither abilityachievement discrepancy nor RTI, when used as the sole indicator of
SLD, can identify this condition reliably and validly because SLD may be
present in students with and without a significant ability-achievement
discrepancy and in students who fail to respond to and who respond
favorably to scientifically based interventions.
Assessment Battery for a diagnostic
evaluation?

Cognitive Ability – strengths and weakness

Even ability level (Verbal, Perceptional Reasoning, Short-Term
Memory and Processing Speed) or variability within the profile?

Academic Achievement in reading, writing and mathematics

Assessment of Core Reading Skills via multiple measures

Phonemic Awareness

Phonics

Reading Fluency

Vocabulary

Reading Comprehension
23 11/7/14 Commonly used instruments to assess
achievement in reading skills

Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement 3rd or 4th Editions (WJ III or
WJ IV)

Wechsler Individual Achievement Test 3rd Edition (WIAT III)

Gray Oral Reading Test 5th Edition (GORT 5)

Test of Word Reading Efficiency 2nd Edition (TOWRE-2)

Comprehensive Test of Phonological Awareness 2nd Edition (CTOP-2)
The National Reading Panel
Phonemic!
Awareness!
Vocabulary
Phonics
Fluency!
Meaning
24 11/7/14 Phonemic Awareness
Phoneme: The smallest part of spoken language
Phonemic Awareness:
  Understanding that words are sequences of phonemes
  There are ~44 sounds or phonemes in English
  20% of the population has some level of difficulty
perceiving phonemes.
  Phonemic Awareness is different than Phonological
Awareness.
Phonemic Awareness



Comprehensive Test of Phonological Awareness 2nd Edition
(CTOPP-2) Age 4-24yrs
Lindamood Auditory Conceptualization Test ( LAC-3)
The Phonological Awareness Test 2 (PAT-2)
NOTE: This is not an all inclusive, approved or recommended list
25 11/7/14 CTOPP 2 subtests
1.  Elision measures the ability to remove phonological segments from spoken words
to form other words.
2.  Blending Words measures the ability to synthesize sounds to form words.
3.  Sound Matching measures the ability to select words with the same initial and final
sounds.
4.  Phoneme Isolation measures the ability to isolate individual sounds within words.
5.  Blending Nonwords measures the ability to synthesize sounds to form nonwords.
6.  Segmenting Nonwords measures the ability to segment nonwords into phonemes.
7.  Memory for Digits measures the ability to repeat numbers accurately.
8.  Nonword Repetition measures the ability to repeat nonwords accurately.
9.  Rapid Digit Naming measures the ability to rapidly name numbers.
10.  Rapid Letter Naming measures the ability to rapidly name letters.
11.  Rapid Color Naming measures the ability to rapidly name colors.
12.  Rapid Object Naming measures the ability to rapidly name objects.
CTOPP-2 Composites
CTOPP 2 Composite Scores
• Phonological Awareness Composite Score (PACS) – Represents the examinee’s
awareness of and access to the phonological structure of oral language.
• Phonological Memory Composite Score (PMCS) – Represents the examinee's ability to
code information phonologically for temporary storage in working or short-term memory.
• The Rapid Symbolic Naming Composite Score (RSNCS) – Measures the examinee’s
ability to include efficient retrieval of phonological information from long-term or permanent
memory and execute a sequence of operations quickly and repeatedly.
• Rapid Non-Symbolic Naming Composite Score (RNNCS) – Measures the examinee’s
ability to include efficient retrieval of phonological information from long-term or permanent
memory and executing a sequence of operations quickly and repeatedly using objects and
colors.
• The Alternate Phonological Awareness Composite Score (APACS) – Measures the
examinee’s phonological awareness exclusively with nonwords.
26 11/7/14 Phonological Processing Speed
  CTOPP-2
/ Rapid Symbolic Naming
  Rapid Automatized Naming and Rapid
Alternating Stimulus Tests (RAN/RAS)
  KTEA-II/III Rapid Automatized Naming
The National Reading Panel
Phonemic!
Awareness!
Vocabulary
Phonics
Fluency!
Meaning
27 11/7/14 Test of Word Reading Efficiency TOWRE-2 (ages 6-24)

Measure of an individual’s ability to pronounce
printed words (Sight Word Efficiency) and
phonemically regular nonwords (Phonemic
Decoding Efficiency) accurately and fluently.

Because it can be administered very quickly, the
test provides an efficient means of monitoring the
growth of two kinds of word reading skill that are
critical in the development of overall reading
ability.
Phonics- Word Decoding
  WIAT-III
  WJ-III,
WJ –IV
  KTEA-II, III
  TOWRE-2
  WRMT-NU
  PAT-2
Pseudoword Decoding
Word Attack
Nonsense Word Decoding
Phonemic Decoding Efficiency
Word Attack
Multiple
NOTE: This is not an all inclusive, approved or recommended list
28 11/7/14 Phonics- Reading real words in isolation






WIAT-III
WJ-III or IV
KTEA-3
TOWRE-2
WRMT-NU
WRAT-3
Word Reading
Letter-Word Identification
Letter and Word Reading
Sight Word Efficiency
Letter-Word Identification
Reading
(Wide Range Achievement Test-3)
NOTE: This is not an all inclusive, approved or recommended list
Phonics- Spelling




WIAT-II/III
WJ-III/IV
KTEA-II/III
WRAT-3
Spelling
Spelling, Spelling of Sounds
Spelling
Spelling
29 11/7/14 Phonics- Word reading efficiency

TOWRE-2
Sight Word Efficiency
Phonemic Decoding Efficiency

KTEA-II/III
Timed Word Recognition
Timed Nonsense Word Decoding

NOT WJ-IV Word Reading Fluency
NOTE: This is not an all inclusive, approved or recommended list
The National Reading Panel
Phonemic!
Awareness!
Vocabulary
Phonics
Fluency!
Meaning
30 11/7/14 Fluency/Rate and Accuracy
Oral Reading Test – 5th Edition
(GORT-5)
  WIAT III- Oral Reading Fluency
  Gray
  WJ-III/IV
Sentence Reading Fluency
GORT 5 (age range 6–23yrs)

New Features of the GORT-5 New normative data
collected in 2008-2010

Norms were extended upward to age 23 years, 11 months

Basal and ceiling rules were streamlined to make
administration easier and more efficient

Comprehension questions were completely revised, and
studies were provided to show that the items are passage
dependent

Reliability and validity studies were added
31 11/7/14 GORT-5

Rate. The Rate Score is derived from the amount of time in seconds taken by
a student to read a story aloud.

Accuracy. The Accuracy Score is derived from the number of words the
student pronounces correctly when reading the passage.

Fluency. The Fluency Score is a combination of the student’s Rate and
Accuracy Scores.

Comprehension. The Comprehension Score is the number of questions about
the stories that the student answers correctly. The open-ended format
ensures that the items are passage dependent.

Oral Reading Index. The Oral Reading Index is a composite score formed by
combining students’ Fluency and Comprehension scaled scores.

Rate, Accuracy, Fluency, and Comprehension are reported as raw scores,
grade and age equivalents, percentile ranks, and scaled scores having a mean
of 10 and a standard deviation of 3. The Oral Reading Index is reported as a
standard score based on a distribution having a mean of 100 and a standard
deviation of 15. Percentile ranks are also provided.
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
WJ IV ACH
norms children - adults
WJ III

Word-Letter Identification
(Decoding)

Word Attack

Reading Vocabulary

Comprehension (Passage
Comprehension)

Academic Fluency – measured by
reading, math and writing fluency
NKA - Sentence Reading Fluency
WJ IV New subtests and CLUSTERS

3 new reading subtests:
Reading Recall, Word Reading Fluency,
Oral Reading

3 new READING CLUSTERS:
READING COMPREHENSION-EXTENTED,
READING FLUENCY, and READING RATE
(3 min.)
CLUSTERS
READING, BASIC READING, and BROAD
READING
32 11/7/14 WJ IV ACH Assesses reading at multiple levels
1st Level
At a basic level there are 6 core tests measuring basic reading, math and
writing skills. Of these 6 core tests, Test 1 measures reading decoding skills
(Letter-Word ID) and Test 4 measures reading comprehension (Passage
Comprehension). These 6 core tests produce 4 CLUSTER scores in BRIEF
ACHIEVEMENT, READING, MATHEMATICS AND WRITTEN LANGUAGE.
Additional Reading Skills Assessment
Adding Test 7: Word Attack, creates the BASIC READING SKILLS CLUSTER.
Adding Test 8: Oral Reading (new), creates the READING FLUENCY CLUSTER.
Test 8 allows the examiner to hear the student read connected text out loud
(with an optional error analysis procedure—to categorize the types of oral
reading errors made). This allows for an informal reading inventory.
Tests 9,10 and 11 are fluency tests (revised) – now separate for each academic
area (sentence reading, math facts and sentence writing fluency)
WJ IV – Extended Battery
Extended Evaluation of Reading Skills –
allows the addition of two
additional reading tests
Test 12 Reading Recall (new)
A complex measure of reading comprehension – similar to
classroom reading comprehension tasks
CLUSTER – READING COMPREHENSION
Test 15 Reading Fluency (new) an important aspect of
reading speed, being able to read words and make accurate
sematic decisions quickly. This task requires knowledge of
words and their meaning and also requires cognitive fluency/
efficiency.
CLUSTER – READING RATE
(combines a measure of silent reading fluency
and a measure of oral reading fluency)
& READING COMP EXTENDED
33 11/7/14 WJ IV ACH
Consists of 7 reading tests (3 tests are new to the WJ)
Letter-Word Identification, Passage Comprehension, Word Attack
Oral Reading (new)
provides a standardized assessment of oral reading performance that
increases the scope of reading fluency assessment.
Reading Recall (new) assesses reading comprehension in a format that closely parallels
classroom reading comprehension tasks.
Word Reading Fluency (new)
expands the usefulness of the WJ IV for evaluation of
reading rate.
Provides 7 reading CLUSTER scores: READING (Test 1 and 4), BROAD
READING, BASIC READING SKILLS, READING COMPREHENSION, READING
COMPREHENSION—EXTENDED, READING FLUENCY (combines a measure of
silent reading fluency and a measure of oral reading fluency. Because speed of reading
may broadly affect academic performance), READING RATE (assesses the rapid
word comparison and sentence comprehension skills that are necessary for academic
success).
34 11/7/14 WIAT-III (age range 4 -19.11 expanded to 50.11)
Early Reading Skills
Word Reading
Word Reading
Pseudoword Decoding
Pseudoword Decoding
Reading Comprehension
Reading Comprehension
Oral Reading Fluency
WIAT-III
Early Reading Skills
Word Reading
Word Reading Rate
Pseudoword
Decoding
Pseudoword
Decoding Rate
Reading
Comprehension
Oral Reading Fluency
OR Accuracy
OR Rate
35 11/7/14 WIAT III - Written Expression
Spelling
Spelling
Alphabet Writing
Fluency
Written Expression
Sentence Composition
Essay Composition
WIAT III - Written Expression
Spelling
Alphabet Writing
Fluency
Sentence Combining
Sentence
Sentence Building
Composition
Word Count
Essay Composition
Theme Dev & Text Org
Grammar & Mechanics
36 11/7/14 WIAT III, WJ III, KTEA-II- Reading Comprehension
•  While Reading Comprehension Subtest Scores, in
general, correlate highly between measures such as the
WIAT-III, KTEA-2/3, and WJ-III/IV, scores for individual
students can vary greatly due to:
•  Differences in Output Demands (free response
[WIAT-III, KTEA-2/3] vs closed response [WJ-III/IV])
•  Differences in Processing Demands (e.g., literal vs
inferential item types and passage length variations
resulting in different demands for reasoning, reading
speed, working memory, and executive functions)
The National Reading Panel
Phonemic!
Awareness!
Vocabulary
Phonics
Fluency!
Meaning
37 11/7/14 Vocabulary
  WIAT-III
Oral Expression (expressive)
  WJ-III/IV
Reading Vocabulary (expressive)
  PPVT-4
Receptive Vocabulary
  EVT-2
Expressive Vocabulary
The National Reading Panel
Phonemic!
Awareness!
Vocabulary
Phonics
Fluency!
Meaning
38 11/7/14 Reading Comprehension
  WIAT-III
  KTEA-2/3
  GORT-5
  WJ-III/IV
Reading Comprehension
Reading Comprehension
Comprehension
& WRMT-R Passage Comprehension
Listening Comprehension
  WIAT-III
  KTEA-2/3
Listening Comprehension
Listening Comprehension
39 11/7/14 Good
Poor
Listening Comprehension
Children vary on a continuum of reading ability
Poor reader
Good understanding
Good reader
Good understanding
(dyslexic)
Poor reader
Poor understanding
Good reader
Poor understanding
(language-learning deficit)
(language comprehension
deficit)
Poor
Processing Speed
Working Memory
Good
Word Reading Skills
Case Study: Alice/5th Grader FSIQ =115
CTOPP-2
SS
%ile
Elision
85
16
Rate
8
25
103
58
Accuracy
6
9
95
37
Fluency
7
16
10
50
Phonological Memory
Rapid Naming
GORT-$
SS %ile
Comprehension
WIAT-III
SS
%ile
Pseudoword Reading
75
5
Word Reading:
85
16
Spelling
83
13
Reading Comprehension
90
25
Listening Comprehension
115
84
Dyslexic?
Yes
80
40 11/7/14 Case study: Scott/4th grade
CTOPP-2
Elision
SS
%ile
GORT-5
SS %ile
85
16
Rate
3
1
103
58
Accuracy
6
9
81
10
Fluency
5
5
Comprehension
6
9
WIAT-III
SS
%ile
Pseudoword Reading
67
1
Word Reading:
77
6
Spelling
70
2
Reading Comprehension
80
9
Listening Comprehension
115
84
Phonological Memory
Rapid Naming
Dyslexic?
Yes & Double
Deficit
81
Students who have double deficits – that is,
deficits in both rapid naming and phonological
awareness – have the most pronounced reading
impairments and are the most resistant to
intervention.
82
41 11/7/14 Case study: Josh/5th grade
CTOPP-2
SS
%ile
Elision
110
75
Rate
3
1
Phonological Memory
103
58
Accuracy
7
16
85
16
Fluency
5
5
12
75
Rapid Naming
GORT-5
SS %ile
Comprehension
WIAT-III
TOWRE-2
SS
%ile
79
Phonemic Decoding
75
5
70
Sight Word
80
9
SS
%ile
Pseudoword Reading
112
Word Reading:
108
Spelling
105
63
Reading Comprehension
105
63
Dyslexic?
Listening Comprehension
115
84
No- Phonological
Processing speed
deficit
83
Case study: Kim/10th grade
CTOPP-2
SS
%ile
GORT-5
SS %ile
Elision
110
75
Rate
13
84
Phonological Memory
103
58
Accuracy
14
91
Rapid Naming
115
84
Fluency
14
91
7
16
Comprehension
SS
%ile
SS
%ile
Pseudoword Reading
112
79
PPVT-4
120
91
Word Reading:
120
91
EVT-2
118
88
Spelling
110
75
WISC-V Vocabulary
14
91
Reading Comprehension
90
25
Listening Comprehension
80
8
WIAT-III
Vocabulary
What going on
here?
Language
Comprehension
84
42