Percentile Rank Standard Score

Jasmine Keller is a fourth grade student who has been monitored and reported as a student at-risk. Jasmine has a, “weak short-term memory that affects her involvement and progress in the general education curriculum in the areas of reading decoding, reading fluency, reading comprehension, spelling, and math calculations. Her reading level is at second grade. Broken down word recognition is at an equivalent of grade 1.7, and comprehension at 1.3. She has relative strength in vocabulary. If given classroom assessments with a screen reader she is very successful. Her writing skills assessed to be uneven with only weak spelling skills, which is at a first or

▪ phonemic awareness /oral language: The student is scoring very well in phonemic awareness/oral language. He was able to get 10 out of 10 in sounding out words. He was also able to identify and say almost the entire alphabet.

I have been working with Colin for the past year to assist him with auditory processing and phoneme awareness skills. Following completion of The

Student 3 increased their score six out of six times during the intervention period. They reached proficiency five out of six times on the weekly skills assessment of comprehension. The student also reached the benchmark goal for Daze.

The inventory should be individually administered to students in order to accurately observe student automaticity with the high-frequency word recognition. Elementary students are frequently given this test in order to progress monitor high-frequency word mastery and general factors of fluency.

Some strengths of this achievement assessment include that not every subtest will be administered depending on the age of the student and the variety of areas that this assessment measures. This assessment measures oral expression and listening comprehension that could help a child qualify for special education services. The math subtests provide valuable data that can be used for objectives for the child’s Individualized Education Program (IEP). Also, the results from this achievement test can be used to determine if a child has a Specific Learning Disability and in which areas he or she would qualify in for services. A weakness of this test is that the administrator must know the scoring procedures for each subtest. With the Pseudoword decoding subtest, the child is timed and the administrator will record the student’s responses exactly using correct punctuation or phonetic symbols and this can lead to inaccuracies in scoring. The WIAT-III has multiple areas to be tested to give us an accurate reading of the child’s

The presenting issues showed that the student in question experienced difficulties in reading and comprehension. I was able to administer the KTEA to her on October 13th her results from the test explained where she was experiencing difficulties. When observing her individually with reading she has a hard time with comprehension. She will read a story and when you ask her questions about the story she will often forget what she just read. Observing her from September to October has also showed me the issues of her vocabulary being low for a fifth grade student.

Paula is apart of the target student group in her class. She does lack the cognitive capabilities as her peers in the higher cognitive functioning groups.Though Paula does show eagerness to perform as well as her other peers, there are many things, including her low cognitive ability, that keeps her from catching onto the information he is taught. During the initial pre-test, Paula, scored with a 33.34%,one of the two lowest scores in the class. Like her peers, Paula was not able to finish the test, and the test fairly measured the information that she was able to answer before getting highly frustrated with the pre-test like her peers. Paula was able to correctly identify the questions that asked about the needs of a plant. Paula was

Luke scored a 91 in the Oral Language cluster. This cluster included the Story Recall and the Understanding Directions tests. Luke received a 74 on the Story Recall test and a 103 on the Understanding Directions test. Luke was below average in the Story Recall section, but high average on the Understanding Directions. On the Story Recall section Luke was able to remember the last parts of the sentences, but not the beginning. Luke seemed to really enjoy the Understanding Directions test. These averaged out to an average on the Oral Language cluster.

The Basic Reading Skills composite measures T’Niq’s ability to read a list of words and correctly pronounce nonsense words. T’Niq’s standard score of 72 falls in the low range at the 3rd percentile, indicating that he performed the same as or above 3 percent of his same-aged peers. Based on T’Niq’s performance on this composite, it appears that he will benefit from explicit instruction on word recognition skills and phonics skills.

When performing the Yopp-Singer test of phoneme segmentation Carmen was showing confidence when breaking words apart. Carmen is a seven-year-old second grade student that is not performing at a second-grade reading level. Although she is not reading at her grade level, Carmen works hard to raise her reading level. She is constantly reading at home and practicing her reading during class. Currently, Carmen is reading at a first grade level with some minor challenges that she will need to overcome

The student read aloud will serve as a formative assessment on fluency and word recognition.

Ben is in RTI, and in tier two of the intervention program. He is mainly struggling with phonemic awareness and this is impacting his ability to read fluently and break apart words. So we are focusing on first improving his phonemic awareness, and then we will work on fluency.

The words ranged from simple words like "a" to more complex words like "number". For this assessment, I printed the sight words onto bigger cards and I laid them out for J.R. Her job was to read the words that were listed. If she read them correctly and without hesitation then she got it correct. However, if she had to spell out the word or if she hesitated for a long period of time then I marked it wrong because she is supposed to recognize them right away. J.R. did fairly well on this assessment. She was able to recognize 88 sight words out of 100. I recognized that the words that she got wrong were the harder sight words. The second assessment that I completed with J.R. was the spelling inventory assessment. For this assessment, I gave J.R. a simple spelling test. I would say the word to her and include the word in a sentence. As I did this, J.R. wrote the words down. This assessment was given to see if J.R. could hear and write the constants (initial and final), the short vowels, digraphs, blends, and common long vowels that appear in the words that were given. This was one of the assessments that J.R. struggled with. She spelled most of the words wrong and she had trouble identifying digraphs and blends in words. The third assessment that I conducted was the phonemic awareness assessment. This assessment tested skills such as rhyming, phoneme isolation, oral blending, oral segmentation, and

Kurtis’ overall achievement in reading and written expression fell within the average range with slightly low average scores in reading fluency and oral reading when compared to his same aged peers. Kurtis struggled with word attack skills and had difficulty with sounding out of words. Kurtis could identify beginning sounds, but when he was asked to read nonsense words he struggled with short vowel sounds and correct pronunciation. However, Kurtis’ Letter-Word Identification and Passage Comprehension were within the average range. When he read sentences orally he mispronounced words, and did not slow down to correct his errors even when they did not make sense. On the reading fluency subtest, he was required to read a short sentence and