Houston Baptist University FIE: Full Individual Evaluation

Name of Student: Crayton BareBirthdate: 09/18/1990 Age: 25-0 Gender: MGrade: 12+ Student ID: 1185 School: NAParents (Guardian) Name: Phylecia and Rob BareExaminer: Alexis Saperstein

Date of Evaluation: 9/18/2015

Name & Title of Source or Assessments Administered: Acronym Date

Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Third Edition KTEA- 3 10/17/2015

The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scare- Fourth Edition WAIS- 4 9/19/2015

Phylecia Bare (mother) Informal Interview 9/18/2015

Reason For ReferralCrayton requested a full educational evaluation due to a feeling of slow processing speed. Crayton is interested in entering graduate school for his Masters in Business Accounting (MBA) and wanted to see if he is eligible for disability support services. To rule out any disability, Crayton was administered an achievement test (KTEA-3) and ability test (WAIS-4).

SOCIOLOGICAL INFORAMTION AND EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

Sociological informationCrayton currently lives with his girlfriend of three years along with 2 other roommates. Crayton has one younger brother (21 years old) that lives in Los Angeles, California. Crayton works as a contract specialist at Halliburton and says he enjoys his job. Since retiring from playing professional baseball in 2014, Crayton enjoys painting, drawing, and cooking.

School(s) attended and when: 1996-2001: Lakewood Elementary School Dallas, Texas (k-4th) 2001-2003: McCulloch Intermediate School (5th-6th) 2003-2005: Highland Park middle School (7th-8th)2005-2009: Highland Park High School (9th-12th) 2009-2013: Baylor University (all 4 years)

Language/Communication Functioning Crayton’s milestones were on target if not early. He cooed at 4 weeks, gave eye contact and smiled at 6 weeks, mimicked sounds at 2 months, laughed at 4 months, said “da da” at 6 months, “ma ma” at 8 months, and “bye bye” at 9.5 months. Crayton can find words for his thoughts. Overall, Crayton feels confident as a writer, but feels his understanding of mechanics (i.e., the rules of grammar) are weak. Crayton had a poem published in conjunctions with the T.E.A in 4th grade. Crayon’s dominant language was determined through informal assessment and was confirmed by Crayton.

Physical FunctioningCrayton’s motor milestones developed early. He rolled from his tummy to his back at 8 months, scooted on his bottom at 9 months, pulled up at 10 months, took his first steps at 15 months and walked alone at 15 months. Crayton hardly crawled. His mother feels that he had no incentive to walk because he got

1

around so well by the type of scooting he did. Crayton played Tee ball at age 3 years. He soon showed evidence of excellent hand-eye coordination. He played baseball throughout his elementary, middle, and high school years. Crayton was drafted by the Los Angeles Dodgers in 2012 and retired in 2014 due to a wrist injury. Crayton’s scores on a recent vision and hearing screening are within normal range for age group. There are no medical or health concerns or physical limitations. Behavioral FunctioningCrayton arrived promptly to undertake the cognitive assessment. He was casually dressed and maintained a calm mood and assertive eye. Crayton answered questions clearly and confidently. During both assessment Crayton remained focused and compliant, so a rapport was established easily.

INTELLECTUAL/COGNITIVE FUNCTIONINGThe Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV)

Intellectual functioning was assessed using formal instruments. An intelligence test was administered in order to assess the student’s general range of intellectual functioning and to determine current strengths and weaknesses across cognitive processing areas.  The results of the present assessment appear to be valid because Crayton’s motivation and attention were good throughout the assessment process.

The WAIS-IV is an individually administered clinical instrument designed to assess the cognitive ability of adolescents and adults ages 16 years 0 months through 90 years 11 months. The standard score has a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. The scaled scores range from 1 to 19, providing a range of 3 standard deviations on either side of the mean. Percentile ranks range from 1 to 99, with 50 as the mean and median. An examinee’s true score is more accurately represented by establishing a confidence interval, which is a specified range of scores in which the true score is likely to fall

Standard score descriptive classifications are as follows:130 and above Very Superior

120-129 Superior110-119 High Average

90-109 Average80-89 Low Average70-79 - Borderline

69 and below – Extremely Low

Scale score descriptive classifications are as follows:16-19 – Very Superior

14-15 – Superior12-13 – High Average

8-11 – Average6-7 – Low Average

4-5 – Low1-3 – Extremely Low

The WAIS-IV is a battery of 15 subtests that provides an estimate of Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) and General Ability Index (GAI). Intelligence tests like this one are samples of problem solving abilities and learned facts, and are good predictors of future learning and academic success. However, there are several factors that the tests do not measure. For instance, they cannot determine motivation, curiosity, creative talent, work habits, study skills, or achievement in academic subjects. These should be considered when interpreting the scores in the report.

2

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS IV)Index/Subtest Composite

ScoreConfidence

Interval90%

DescriptiveCategory

Percentile Rank

Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) 108 104-111 High Average 70VCI (Verbal Comprehension Index) 105 100-110 Average 63PRI (Perceptual Reasoning Index) 113 107-118 High Average 81WMI (Working Memory Index) 92 87-98 Average 30PSI (Processing Speed Index) 114 106-120 High Average 82Verbal Comprehension/Crystalized Knowledge (Gc) 12 High Average Similarities 10 Average Vocabulary 12 High Average Information 11 Average Comprehension 13 High AverageFluid Reasoning (Gf) 10 Average Matrix Reasoning 14 Superior Figure Weights 8 Average Arithmetic 9 AverageVisual Spatial (Gv) 11 Average Block Design 9 Average Visual Puzzles 14 Superior Picture Completion 9 AverageWorking Memory (Gsm) 9 Average Digit Span 8 Average Letter Number Sequencing 10 AverageProcessing Speed (Gs) 13 High Average Coding 15 Superior Symbol Search 10 Average Cancellation 14 Superior

Kaufman Tests of Educational Achievement III (KTEA III)

Associational Fluency/Retrieval Fluency (Glr) 100 79 - 109 Average 34Phonological Processing (Ga) 104 97-111 Average 61(Standard Scores) 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 (Scaled Scores) 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Low Average Average High Average

FULL SCALE IQ: Crayton obtained an overall total composite score of 108, with a confidence interval of 104-111. We can be 90 percent confident his score falls within this high average range and is equal to or better than that of 70 percent of same age peers.

VCI: The VCI is a measure of verbal concept formation, verbal reasoning, and knowledge acquired from one’s environment. Crayton obtained a composite score of 105, with a confidence interval of 100-110. We can be 90 percent confident his true score falls within the average range and is equal to or better than 63 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 37%).

PRI: The PRI is a measure of perceptual and fluid reasoning, spatial processing, and visual-motor integration. Crayton obtained a composite score of 113, with a confidence interval of 107-118. We can

3

be 90 percent confident his true score falls within this high average range and is equal to or better than 81 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 19%).

WMI: The WMI is a measure of working memory abilities, which involve attention, concentration, mental control and reasoning. Working memory tasks require the ability to temporarily retain information in memory, perform some operation or manipulation with it, and produce a result. Crayton obtained a composite score total of 92, with a confidence interval of 87-98. We can be 90 percent confident his true score falls within the average range and is equal to or better than 30 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 70%).

PSI: The PSI provides a measure of the child’s ability to quickly and correctly scan, sequence, or discriminate simple visual information. This composite also measures short-term memory, attention, and visual-motor coordination. Crayton obtained a composite score total of 114, with a confidence interval of 106-120. We can be 90 percent confident his true score falls within this high average range and is equal to or better than 82 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 18%).

COMPREHENSION-KNOWLEDGE (Gc) is a person’s acquired knowledge of a culture and the effective application of this knowledge. This store is primarily verbal or language-based knowledge which represents those abilities that have been developed largely through the investment of other abilities during educational and general life experiences. Comprehension-Knowledge is important for all ages in reading, math, and writing achievement and becomes increasingly more important with age. The Gc score is based on the following four subtests: Similarities, Vocabulary, Information, and Comprehension. Each subtest measures an aspect of vocabulary knowledge of spoken English. Crayton achieved a scale score of 12 (high average).

Similarities is a core Verbal Comprehension subtest. The examinee is presented two words that represent common objects or concepts and describes how they are similar. It is designed to measure verbal concept formation and reasoning. Crayton achieved a scale score of 10 (average). The quality of Crayton’s response decreased as the items became more difficult and at times responding, “I don’t know.”

Vocabulary is a core Verbal Comprehension subtest. For picture items, the examinee names the object presented visually. For verbal items, the examinee defines words that are presented visually and orally. Vocabulary is designed to measure an examinee’s word knowledge and verbal concept formation. Crayton achieved a scale score of 12 (high average). Crayton did not exhibit difficulties in auditory discrimination during this subtest.

Information is a core Verbal Comprehension subtest. The examinee answers questions that address a broad range of general knowledge topics. It is designed to measure an examinee’s ability to acquire, retain, and retrieve general factual knowledge. Crayton achieved a scale score of 11 (average).

Comprehension is a supplemental Verbal Comprehension subtest. The examinee answers questions on his or her understanding of general principles and social situations. It is designed to measure verbal reasoning and conceptualization, verbal comprehension and expression, the ability to evaluate and use past experience, and the ability to demonstrate practical knowledge and judgment. Crayton achieved a scale score of 13 (high average). Initially, Crayton required consistent prompting for a second response; however, after successfully answering nine questions, Crayton began spontaneously providing enough information in his answer.

FLUID REASONING (Gf) ability/process area measures fluid intelligence.  It is the mental operations an individual uses when faced with a relatively novel task that cannot be performed automatically.  These operations may include forming and recognizing concepts, perceiving relationships among patterns, drawing inferences, comprehending implications, problem solving, and reorganizing or transforming information. The Gf ability/process is consistently very important to math achievement, moderately

4

related to reading achievement and consistently related to writing achievement. The Gf score is based on the following three subtests: Matrix Reasoning, Figure Weights, and Arithmetic. Each subtest measures the deliberate, but flexible control of attention to control novel “on the spot” problems that cannot be performed by relying exclusively on previous learned habits. Crayton achieved a scale score of 10 (average).

Matrix Reasoning is a core Perceptual Reasoning subtest. The examinee views an incomplete matrix or series and selects the response option that completes the matrix or series. Crayton achieved a scale score of 14 (superior). Crayton used mental imagery coupled with verbal mediation when working to the solution. In addition, Crayton touched the Stimulus Booklet to aid in problem solving.

Figure Weights is a supplemental Perceptual Reasoning subtest. Working within a specified time limit, the examinee views a scale with missing weight(s) and selects the response option that keeps the scale balanced. Crayton achieved a scale score of 8 (average). After correctly completing twelve problems, Crayton started erroneously matching color and shapes rather than finding the equivalently weighted shapes. Crayton reported frustration with this section stating, “I don’t understand how these shapes fit.”

Arithmetic is a core Working Memory subtest. Working within a specified time limit, the examinee mentally solves a series of arithmetic problems. Crayton achieved a scale score of 9 (average). Crayton attempted to write out the problems with his finger on the table. Crayton became restless when completing the final four items, leading him to guess answers well within the allotted 30-second time. VISUAL SPATIAL (Gv) ability/process area measures the ability to generate, perceive, analyze, synthesize, store, retrieve, manipulate, transform, and think with visual patterns and stimuli. The Gv score is based on the following three subtests: Block Design, Visual Puzzles, and Picture Completion. Each subtest measures the ability to make use of simulated mental imagery to solve problems. Crayton achieved a scale score of 11 (average).

Block Design is a core Perceptual Reasoning subtest. Working within a specified time limit, the examinee views a model and a picture or a picture only and uses red-and-white blocks to recreate the designs. Crayton achieved a scale score of 9 (average). Crayton appeared to systematically examine and carefully plan block placement prior to moving any blocks. Crayton persisted through

Visual Puzzles is a core Perceptual Reasoning subtest. Working within a specified time limit the examinee views a completed puzzles and selects three response options that, when combined reconstruct the puzzle. Crayton achieved a scale score of 14 (superior). Crayton mentally rotated the pieces. He did not visibly turn or twist his head in an attempt to rotate pieces, exhibiting strong visual processing.

Picture Completion is a supplemental Perceptual Reasoning subtest. Within working a specific time limit, the examinee views pictures with an important part missing and identifies the missing part. Crayton achieved a scale score of 9 (average). Crayton reflected on each choice and although choosing the correct option, he went beyond the allotted time of twenty seconds. Crayton became impulsive towards the end of the subtest stating the final (incorrect) answer in only 9 seconds.

WORKING MEMORY (Gsm) ability/process area measures the ability to actively maintain information in conscious awareness, perform some operation or manipulation with it, and produce a result. The Gsm score is based on the following two subtests: Digit Span and Letter Number Sequencing. Each subtest measures the ability of mental alertness and cognitive alertness. Crayton achieved a scale score of 9 (average).

Digit Span is a core Working Memory subtest that consists of three sections: Digit Span Forward (DSF), Digit Span Backwards (DSB), and Digit Span Sequencing (DSS). DSF involves the examinee reading a

5

sequence of numbers and recalling the numbers in the same order. For DSB, the examinee reads a sequence of number and recalls the numbers in reverse order. For DSS, the examinee reads a sequence of numbers in ascending order. Crayton achieved a scale score of 8 (average).

Letter Number Sequencing is a supplemental Working Memory subtest. The examinee is read a sequence of numbers and letters and recalls the number in ascending number and the letters in alphabetical order. Crayton achieved a scale score of 10 (average). Crayton had a Longest Letter-Number Sequencing (LLNS) of 5/8. His mistakes involved omitting one number and one letter within the sequence.

PROCESSING SPEED (Gs) ability/process area measures the ability to perform simple repetitive cognitive tasks quickly and fluently. The Gs score is based on the following three subtests: Coding, Symbol Search, and Cancellation. Each subtests measures the ability that requires maintained focused attention and concentration; therefore, attentive speediness. Crayton achieved a scale score of 13 (high average).

Coding is a core Processing Speed subtest. Using a key, the examinee copies symbols that are paired with number within a specified time limit. Crayton achieved a scale score of 15 (superior). Crayton used the Coding Key frequently indicating difficulty with short-term memory recall and number-symbol pairs.

Symbol Search is a core Processing Speed subtest. Working within a specified time limit, the examinee scans a search group and indicates whether one of the symbols in the target group matches. Crayton achieved a scale score of 10 (average). Crayton’s focus was consistent throughout the task. Crayton made only one mistake and did not demonstrate an obsessive concern with details.

Cancellation is a supplemental Processing Speed subtest. Working within a specified time limit, the examinee scans a structured arrangement of shapes and marks target shapes. Crayton achieved a scale score of 14 (superior). Crayton maintained a consistent response rate throughout the task. Crayton used his finger to guide his eyes and help catch the pattern. Crayton’s score on the second Cancellation subtest improved by 5 items: Item 1 (25’’) and Item 2 (30’’).

AUDITORY PROCESSING (Ga) Refers to the ability to notice, compare, discriminate, and distinguish distinct and separate sounds. Ga is what the brain does with sensory information from the ear, sometimes long after a sound has been heard. One aspect of Ga (Phonetic Coding) is related to oral language comprehension but this is simply a precursor to comprehension, not comprehension itself. The Ga score is based on the following three subtests: Phonological Processing, Nonsense Word Decoding, and Decoding Fluency. Crayton achieved a composite score of 104 (average).

Phonological Processing is a core subtest of the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Third Edition (KTEA III). The student responds orally to items that require manipulation of sounds. Tasks include rhyming, matching, blending, segmenting, and deleting sounds. Crayton obtained a standard score of 104 (average) with a confidence interval of 197-111. We can be 90 percent confident his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than 61 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 39%). Crayton is proficient with segmenting word sounds but struggles with blending sounds. This weakness in blending sounds may contribute to difficulty with decoding and spelling, specifically with short vowel words and hard/soft C, G, and S. Nonsense Word Decoding is a supplemental subtest of the KTEA III. The student applies phonics and structural analysis skills to decode nonsense words of increasing difficulty. Crayton obtained a standard score of 92 (average) with a confidence interval of 87-97. We can be 90 percent confident his score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than 30 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 70%). There was a significant positive difference between the ASB and this subtest, indicating that Nonsense Word Decoding is a personal weakness. Crayton exhibited frustration when decoding unfamiliar words.

6

Decoding Fluency is a supplemental subtest of the KTEA III. The student reads isolated nonsense words aloud as quickly as possible during two 15-second trials. Crayton obtained a standard score of 123 (high) with a confidence interval of 113-133. We can be 90 percent confident his true score falls within this high range and is equal to or better than 94 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 6%). Crayton fluently (quickly and accurately) decoded nonsense words under timed conditions. There was a significant negative difference between the ASB and this subtest, indicating that Decoding Fluency is a personal strength. LONG TERM STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL (Glr) Refers to the ability of storing new or previously acquired information and then fluently retrieving that information. Long Term Storage and Retrieval is the ability to store information in and fluently retrieve new or previously acquired information (e.g., concepts, ideas, items, names) from long term memory. Glr abilities have been prominent in creativity research where they have been referred to as idea production, ideational fluency, or associative fluency. The Glr score is based on the following three subtests: Associational Fluency, Object Naming, and Letter Naming. Crayton achieved a composite score of 100 (average) with a confidence interval of 79-109.

Associational Fluency is a core subtest from the KTEA III. The student says as many words as possible in 60 seconds that belong to a given semantic category. Crayton obtained a standard score of 94 (average) with a confidence interval of 79-109. We can be 90 percent confident his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than 34 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 66%). There were no weaknesses in fluent word retrieval that could contribute to reading problems.

Object Naming is a core subtest from the KTEA III. The student names pictured objects as quickly as possible during two short trials. Crayton obtained a standard score of 103 (above average) with a confidence interval of 104-132. We can be 90 percent confident his true score falls within this above average range and is equal to or better than 88 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 12%). Crayton exhibited no difficulty with this subtest and made no errors during the second trial.

Letter Naming is a core subtest from the KTEA III. The student names a combination of upper and lower case letters as quickly as possible during two short trials. Crayton obtained a standard score of 103 (average), with a confidence interval of 91-115. We can be 90 percent certain his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than 58 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 42%). Crayton exhibited no difficulty during this subtest but rather expressing curiosity stating, “this is so easy- what is this even telling you?”

Adaptive Behavior/Functioning

Using informal observations, Crayton’s adaptive behavior skills appear to be commiserating with his intellectual abilities.

ACADEMIC FUNCTIONINGKaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Third Edition (KTEA 3)

Academic functioning was assessed using formal instruments. An achievement test was administered in order to assess the student’s academic strengths and weaknesses in reading, mathematics, and written language.  The results of the present assessment appear to be valid because Crayton’s motivation and attention were good throughout the assessment process.

The Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Third Edition (KTEA-3) is an individually administered measure of academic achievement for grades prekindergarten through 12, or ages 4:0 through 25:11. It provides an analysis of a student’s academic strengths and weaknesses in reading, mathematics, and written language. The Academic Skills Battery (ASB) composite includes two subtests from each core

7

academic area. In addition, the KTEA 3 provides measures of all eight specific learning disability areas identified in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004.

Category Standard ScoreVery High 130 or aboveHigh 120-129Above Average 110-119Average 90-109Below Average 80-89Low 70-79Very Low 69 or below

Core Composite Score Summary Table

Composite/Subtest

Sum ofSubtest

StandardScores

StandardScores

90% Confidence

Interval

PercentileRank

DescriptiveCategory

Academic Skills Battery (ASB) Composite

640 107 104 - 110 68 Average

Math Concepts & Applications - 111 106 - 116 77 Above

averageLetter & Word Recognition - 97 92 - 102 42 Average

Written Expression - 117 107 - 127 87 Above average

Math Computation - 99 94 - 104 47 AverageSpelling - 96 90 - 102 39 AverageReading Comprehension - 120 113 - 127 91 High

Reading Composite 217 109 104 - 114 73 AverageLetter & Word Recognition - 97 92 - 102 42 Average

Reading Comprehension - 120 113 - 127 91 High

Math Composite 210 106 102 - 110 66 AverageMath Concepts & Applications - 111 106 - 116 77 Above

averageMath Computation - 99 94 - 104 47 AverageWritten Language Composite 213 106 99 - 113 66 Average

Written Expression - 117 107 - 127 87 Above average

Spelling - 96 90 - 102 39 Average

8

Supplemental Composite Score Summary Table

Composite/Subtest

Sum ofSubtest

StandardScores

StandardScores

90% Confidence

Interval

PercentileRank

Descriptive Category

Supplemental CompositesSound-Symbol Composite 196 98 93 - 103 45 Average

Phonological Processing - 104 97 - 111 61 Average

Nonsense Word Decoding - 92 87 - 97 30 Average

Decoding Composite 189 94 90 - 98 34 Average

Letter & Word Recognition - 97 92 - 102 42 Average

Nonsense Word Decoding - 92 87 - 97 30 Average

Reading Fluency Composite 342 116 110 - 122 86 Above

averageSilent Reading Fluency - 102 92 - 112 55 Average

Word Recognition Fluency - 117 109 - 125 87 Above

averageDecoding Fluency - 123 113 - 133 94 HighReading Understanding Composite

234 119 113 - 125 90 Above average

Reading Comprehension - 120 113 - 127 91 High

Reading Vocabulary - 114 107 - 121 82 Above average

Oral Language Composite 319 108 98 - 118 70 Average

Associational Fluency - 94 79 - 109 34 Average

Listening Comprehension - 115 105 - 125 84 Above

average

Oral Expression - 110 98 - 122 75 Above average

Oral Fluency Composite 212 107 93 - 121 68 Average

Associational - 94 79 - 109 34 Average

9

FluencyObject Naming Facility - 118 104 - 132 88 Above

averageComprehension Composite 235 120 113 - 127 91 High

Reading Comprehension - 120 113 - 127 91 High

Listening Comprehension - 115 105 - 125 84 Above

averageExpression Composite 227 116 107 - 125 86 Above

average

Written Expression - 117 107 - 127 87 Above average

Oral Expression - 110 98 - 122 75 Above average

Orthographic Processing Composite

316 106 99 - 113 66 Average

Spelling - 96 90 - 102 39 AverageLetter Naming Facility - 103 91 - 115 58 Average

Word Recognition Fluency - 117 109 - 125 87 Above

averageAcademic Fluency Composite 366 129 122 - 136 97 High

Writing Fluency - 126 114 - 138 96 High

Math Fluency - 117 110 - 124 87 Above average

Decoding Fluency - 123 113 - 133 94 High

CORE COMPOSITES

The Academic Skills Battery (ASB) composite consists of the following six subtests: Math Concepts and Applications, Letter and Word Recognition, Written Expression, Math Computation, Spelling, and Reading Comprehension. The scores from these subtests provide a measure of overall academic achievement in reading, math and written language. Crayton obtained a standard score of 107 (average) with a confidence interval of 104-110. We can be 90 percent confident his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than that of 68 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 32%).

Reading Composite consists of the following two subtests: Letter and Word Recognition and Reading Comprehension. This composite score consists of the following two subtests: Letter and Word Recognition and Reading Comprehension. The scores from these subtests provide a measure of how the student reads sight words and unpredictable word patterns and then how well student comprehends literal and inferential information. Crayton obtained a standard score of 109 (average) with a confidence interval of 104-114. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this average range and is equal

10

to or higher than that of 73 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 27%).. Although Crayton experienced difficulty comprehending narrative passages, he did exceptionally well with literal interpretations of expository texts.

Math Composite consists of the following two subtests: Math Concepts and Applications and Math Computation. The score from these subtests provide a measure regarding the student’s mathematical problem solving ability and computational skills. Crayton obtained a standard score of 106 (average) with a confidence interval of 102-110. We can be 90 percent certain his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than that of 66 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 34%). While Crayton scored within average range on math concepts and applications, he had difficulty with the concepts of time and money. In terms of math computation, Crayton used incorrect signs when computing and had trouble with correct placement of decimals.

Written Language Composite consists of the following two subtests: Phonological Processing and Nonsense Word Decoding. The score from these subtests provide a measure regarding the student’s ability to discriminate sounds by segmentation, sequencing, and decoding words. Crayton obtained a standard score of 106 (average) with a confidence interval of 99-113. We can be 90 percent certain that his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than that of 66 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 34%). Crayton is proficient with completing tasks for both written and oral expression.

READING SUBTESTS:Letter and Word Recognition measures identifying letters and pronouncing words. Crayton obtained a standard score of 97 (average) with a confidence interval of 92-102. We can be 90 percent certain his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than 42 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 58%). Crayton proficiently read real words under untimed conditions. Crayton’s errors involved reading short vowel words and words with unpredictable patterns. There was a significant positive difference between Crayton’s scores on the ASB and this subtest, indicating that Letter and Word recognition is a personal weakness. Reading Comprehension involves reading sentences and passages and answering literal and/or inferential questions. Crayton obtained a standard score of 120 (high) with a confidence interval of 113-127. We can be 90 percent certain his true score falls within this high range and is equal to or better than 91 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 9%). Crayton could comprehend both literal and inferential information from written expository passages. There was a significant negative difference between Crayton’s scores on the ASB and this subtest, indicating that Reading Comprehension is a personal strength. Silent Reading Fluency: The student silently reads simple sentences and marks yes or no in the Response Booklet to indicate whether the statement is true or false, completing as many items as possible within a two-minute time limit. Crayton obtained a standard score of 102 (average) with a confidence interval of 92-112. We can be 90 percent certain that his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than 55 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 45%). Reading Vocabulary: Early items require the student to point to one of three words with the same meaning as a picture and target word. Each of the remaining items requires the examinee to read a sentence (silently or aloud) and say or point to the word in the sentence that has a similar meaning to the target word. Crayton obtained a standard score of 114 (above average) with a confidence interval of 107-121. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this above average range and is equal to or better than that of 82 percent of his peers (and not as well as the remaining 18%). Although Crayton scored above average, he admitted a lack of confidence and that he inferred meaning from the context. Word Recognition Fluency: The student reads isolated words aloud as quickly as possible during two 15-second trials. Crayton obtained a standard score of 117 (above average) with a confidence interval of 109-125. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this above average range and is equal to or better than that of 87 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 17%). Crayton

11

fluently (quickly and accurately) read real words under timed conditions. Weaknesses with word identification were primarily in accuracy.

MATH SUBTESTS:

Math Concepts and Applications measures the ability to apply mathematical principles to real-life situations. Crayton obtained a standard score of 111 (above average) with a confidence interval of 106-116. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this above average range and is equal to or better than that of 77 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 23%).. Crayton was very focused during this subtest and continued to double-check his responses. At times, he would second-guess his original answer, changing his original correct response into an incorrect response.

Math Computation is basic math calculations. Crayton obtained a standard score of 99 (average), with a confidence interval of 94-104. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than that of 47 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 61%). There was a significant positive difference between the ASB composite and the Math Computation true score, indicating that this subtest is a personal weakness.

Math Fluency: The student writes answers to as many addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division problems as possible in 60 seconds. Crayton obtained a standard score of 117 (above average) with a confidence interval of 110-124. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this above average range and is equal to or better than that of 87 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 13%). When the allotted time was up Crayton stated, “UGH, I wish I could have finished! I could have done better. I am really good at math.”

WRITING SUBTESTS:

Written Expression measures the ability to write letters, words, sentences and paragraphs. Crayton obtained a standard score of 117 (above average) with a confidence interval of 107-127. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than that of 87 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 13%). Crayton printed clearly and consistently created sentences that combined various ideas- showing that tasks are an area of strength.

Spelling begins with student writing single letters that represent sounds and writing increasingly difficult words from dictation. Crayton obtained a standard score of 96 (average) with a confidence interval of 90-102. We can be 90 percent certain that his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than that of 39 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 61%). There is a significant positive difference between the ASB composite score and this subtest, indicating that spelling is a personal weakness. Crayton’s spelling errors suggest weaknesses in phonological and orthographic awareness.

Writing Fluency: The student writes one sentence for each picture presented in the Response Booklet and completes as many items as possible within a five-minute time limit. Crayton obtained a standard score of 126 (high) with a confidence interval of 114-138. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this high range and is equal to or better than that of 96 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 4%). Crayton successfully completed each sentences including appropriate nouns and adjectives.

ORAL LANGUAGE SUBTESTS:

Listening Comprehension: Each item requires the examinee to listen to either a sentence read by the examiner (for the early items) or a recorded passage played via the iPad. After listening to each sentence or passage, the student responds orally to literal and/or inferential comprehension questions asked by the

12

examiner. Crayton obtained a standard score of 115 (above average) with a confidence interval of 1105-125. We can be 90 percent certain that his true score falls within this above average range and is equal to or better than that of 84 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 16%). Crayton appeared to be ‘zoning out’ while listening to the passages. At times he placed his head down on the table to cut out external stimulus

Oral Expression: The student responds orally with complete sentences describing the photographs displayed on the iPad. As items progress in difficulty, one or two target words are required in the student’s response. The most difficult items require a response beginning with a phrase or target word(s). Crayton obtained a standard score of 110 (above average) with a confidence interval of 98-122. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this above average range and is equal to or better than that of 75 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 25%). Although Crayton’s true score is above average he stated, “I can’t get my brain to calm down! This is really frustrating!” Crayton exhibited additional difficulty when the response required him to begin with a target phrase as compared to just including a target word within a sentence.

Associational Fluency: The student says as many words as possible in 60 seconds that belong to a given semantic category. Crayton obtained a standard score of 94 (average) with a confidence interval of 79-109. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than that of 34 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 66%). There were no weaknesses in fluent word retrieval that could contribute to reading problems.

LANGUAGE PROCESSING SUBTESTS:

Phonological Processing: The student responds orally to items that require manipulation of sounds. Tasks include rhyming, matching, blending, segmenting, and deleting sounds. Crayton obtained a standard score of 104 (average) with a confidence interval of 197-111. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than 61 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 39%). Crayton is proficient with segmenting word sounds but struggles with blending sounds. This weakness in blending sounds may contribute to difficulty with decoding and spelling, specifically with short vowel words and hard/soft C, G, and S.

Object Naming Facility: The student names pictured objects as quickly as possible during two short trials. Crayton obtained a standard score of 103 (above average) with a confidence interval of 104-132. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this above average range and is equal to or better than 88 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 12%). Crayton exhibited no difficulty with this subtest and made no errors during the second trial.

Letter Naming Facility: The student names a combination of upper and lower case letters as quickly as possible during two short trials. Crayton obtained a standard score of 103 (average), with a confidence interval of 91-115. We can be 90 percent certain that his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than 58 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 42%). Crayton exhibited no difficulty during this subtest but rather expressing curiosity stating, “this is so easy- what is this even telling you?”

SUPPLEMENTAL COMPOSITES

(Reading Related Composites)

Sound-Symbol consists of the following two subtests: Phonological Processing and Nonsense Word Decoding. The score from these subtests provide a measure regarding the student’s ability to discriminate sounds by segmentation, sequencing, and decoding words. Crayton obtained a standard score of 98

13

(average) with a confidence interval of 93-103. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than 45 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 55%).

Decoding consists of the following two subtests: Letter and Word Recognition and Nonsense Word Decoding. The score from these subtests provide a measure of letter-sound relationships, including knowledge of letter patterns, to correctly pronounce written words. Understanding these relationships gives children the ability to recognize familiar words quickly and to figure out words they haven't seen before. Crayton obtained a standard score of 94 (average) with a confidence interval of 90-98. We can be 90 percent certain that his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than 34 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 66%).

Reading Fluency consists of the following three subtests: Silent Reading Fluency, Word Recognition Fluency and Decoding Fluency. The score from these subtests provide a measure of the ability to read a text accurately, quickly, and with expression. Fluency is important because it provides a bridge between word recognition and comprehension. When fluent readers read silently, they recognize words automatically. Crayton obtained a standard score of 116 (above average) with a confidence interval of 110-122. We can be 90 percent certain that his true score falls within this above average range and is equal to or better than that of 86 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 14%).

Reading Understanding: consists of the following two subtests: Reading Comprehension and Reading Vocabulary. The scores from these subtests provide a measure of the ability to read text, process it and understand its meaning. Crayton obtained a standard score of 119 (above average), with a confidence interval of 113-125. We can be 90 percent certain that his true score falls within this above average range and is equal to or better than that of 90 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 10%).

(Oral Composites)

Oral Language consists of the following three subtests: Associational Fluency, Listening Comprehension, and Oral Expression. The score from these subtests provide a measure of the ability to communicate with receptive and expressive language. Crayton obtained a standard score of 108 (average) with a confidence interval of 98-118. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than that of 70 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 30%).

Oral Fluency consists of the following two subtests: Associational Fluency and Object Naming Facility. The scores from these subtests provide a measure of how well and easily a student can communicate their ideas clearly and accurately in speech. Crayton obtained a standard score of 107 (average) with a confidence interval of 93-121. We can be 90 percent confident that his score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than that of 68 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 32%).

(Cross Domain Composite)

Comprehension consists of the following two subtests: Reading Composite and Listening Composite. The scores from these subtests provide a measure of listening comprehension, which is understanding the meaning of spoken words and reading comprehension, which is understanding the meaning of written words. Crayton obtained a standard score of 120 (high), with a confidence interval of 113-127. We can be 90 percent confident that his score falls within this high range and is equal to or better than that of 91 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 9%).

14

Expression consists of the following two subtests: Written Expression and Oral Expression. The scores from these subtests provide a measure of a student’s ability to communicate with writing ability using grammar and syntactic. It also measures a student ability to communicate orally with grammar, syntactic knowledge, and vocabulary knowledge with expressive language. Crayton obtained a standard score of 116 (above average) with a confidence interval of 107-125. We can be 90 percent confident that his true score falls within this above average range and is equal to or better than that of 86 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 14%).

Orthographic Processing consists of the following three subtests: Spelling, Letter Naming Facility, and Word Recognition Fluency. The scores from these subtests provide a measure of a student’s visual memory, or orthographic processing. Visual memory helps a student to retain the way words look in print so they can read fluently. Visual memory/Orthographic Processing is critical for reading and writing fluency. Crayton obtained a standard score of 106 (average) with a confidence interval of 99-113. We can be 90 percent certain that his true score falls within this average range and is equal to or better than that of 66 percent of same age peer (and not as well as the remaining 34%).

Academic Fluency consists of the following three subtests: Writing Fluency, Math Fluency, and Decoding Fluency. The scores from these subtests provide a measure of a student’s ability to quickly read short sentences, do simple math calculations, and write simple sentences. The pace or speed of performance “automaticity” frees up attention for higher order application. Fluency in foundation skills frees attention for application, creativity, and problem-solving. Crayton obtained a standard score of 129 (high) with a confidence interval of 122-136. We can be 90 percent certain that his true score falls within this high range and is equal to or better than that of 97 percent of same age peers (and not as well as the remaining 3%).

SUMMARY

Results from the cognitive assessment (WAIS IV) indicate that Crayton is a dominant nonverbal/visual learner. Dominance in nonverbal learning can be seen when comparing subtest scores on Visual Puzzles (reasoning with shapes) to Similarities (reasoning with words). Although Crayton is within average range in all areas, Working Memory (Gsm) is a relative weakness when compared to the other index scores. When reflecting on subtests addressing attention, we can see Figure Weights (logical thinking with memory) is a personal weakness (SS: 8) but when presented with novel tasks that tap into general funds of knowledge, Crayton excels. The significant relationship between Gsm and reading, writing and math is seen when reviewing Crayton’s scores from the achievement test (KTEA 3). When reading, Crayton relies on context clues and his large sight word vocabulary. These strategies are reflected in his reading comprehension score- which is a relative strength. However, when decoding nonsense words, Crayton’s scores reflect a lack of word attack skills that stem from a misunderstanding of regular and irregular word patters (i.e., phonemic awareness) specifically short vowel words and words with unpredictable patterns. Crayton’s scores on the KTEA-3 also reveal a relative weakness in math calculations. In math, his weakness lies with computing. At times Crayton did not use the correct order of operations, leading to his answer containing the incorrect sign (+ or -). These mistakes further call into question Crayton’s focus. Crayton compensates for memory tasks by performing tasks quickly as seen in his high average score on Processing Speed (PSI). Overall, Crayton’s scores on both the cognitive and achievement test are well within average.

(Assistive Technology)

An analysis of the required tasks within the relevant instructional areas revealed that Crayton has difficulty organizing his thoughts on paper and spelling; therefore, it is recommended that he have access

15

to a portable word processor with a spell check feature when completing longer writing assignments in all classes.

(Consideration of Eligibility)

Crayton does not meet the criteria for a learning disorder because he is performing at or above grade level in all areas of achievement and ability tests.

RECOMMENDATIONS

There is a significant difference in VCI and WMI, PRI and WMI, and WMI and PSI on the WAIS-4. To these clinically significant scores, the following recommendations should be implemented.

Repeated directions Keep oral directions short and simple Ensure directions are understood; have Crayton paraphrase directions Provide overlearning, review, and repetition Provide compensatory aids (e.g., write directions, procedures, and assignments on board or paper.

Provide lecture notes or arrange for peer-shared notes, provide study guide to be filled out during pauses in presentation)

Teach memory strategies (e.g., chunking, verbal rehearsal, visual imagery, and mnemonics) Audio record lectures

Based on the ASB Composite and Subtest Standard Score Differences on the KTEA-3, the following recommendations are encouraged:

Allow Crayton access to graph paper in math. This will help him with regrouping and aligning place values correctly when computing.

Crayton can have access to a number line to assist with subtraction. To aid with spelling, have Crayton use the cued spelling method: select a word to study and

confirm the correct spelling, spell the word aloud without looking at it, identify a rule that applies to the word, write the word, and finally read the word aloud.

Sound patterns in which a letter appears but is not pronounced should be directly taught as a word pattern

o gn/n, wr/r, kn/n, que/k, rh/r, sc/s, tch/ch, dge/j, oul/ou, stle/sle, gue/g, gh in ough/ou and augh/au, final t in words of French origin, and h at the beginning of certain words or root words.

o Silent e in a number of sound patterns: For long vowel sounds (game, tile) For soft g or c sounds (chance, change) Following a v (have, love, give)

Assurances and Signature

The multidisciplinary team provides the following assurances: 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 tests and other evaluation materials have been validated for the specific purposes for which

they were used The tests and other evaluation materials were administered by trained personnel in conformance

with the instructions provided by the producers.

16

The testing environment was conducive; there were no distractions such as outside noises or interruptions.

There were no language barriers present during the assessment

Alexis SapersteinDirector of Student Services, M.EdReading Specialist HBU Graduate Student

After reviewing this FIE again I realized how important it is to keep the recommendations section very short and clear. To be honest, I feel that most parents would not understand these reports. The summary of recommendations and simple explanations throughout each “g” is very helpful to understanding the reasoning behind each test. I will continue to keep explanations short and simple.

17