Eight
Illustrative Case Reports
The purpose of this chapter is to illustrate the use of the WJ IV OL and ACH in evaluations. Although in most instances additional assessment data would be collected as part of a comprehensive evaluation, such as the results from group administered tests, additional standardized tests, informal measures, and so forth, the intent of this chapter is to demonstrate the type of information that you can derive from these two batteries when used together. Knowledge of the test content, administration, and scoring and interpretive options (presented in Chapters 1 through 7 of this book) is required to fully understand the information presented here. The types of scores selected for each report differ slightly to illustrate the use of standard scores, percentile ranks, and proficiency levels based on RPIs. Although these were real cases and the background information is true, the names of the cases, schools, and birthdates have been changed to protect confidentiality.
The first case report is a 9-year-old male, Bryan, who was referred due to concerns about his limited progress in reading. Even though Bryan is currently receiving help from both his parents and his school, more information was needed to make recommendations for increasing his academic success. Bryan was administered both the WJ IV OL and WJ IV ACH with a recommendation to also then administer the WJ IV COG. The second case is Jonas, an 11th-grade student who was referred for a reevaluation because of continued difficulties with handwriting and mathematics. The third case is Veronica, a recent college graduate who has been accepted to graduate school, who is seeking information about whether she has a learning disability and what she should do about her slow reading rate. Although in all three cases further documentation would be required to justify eligibility decisions, the reports illustrate the type of information that can be obtained through use of the WJ IV OL and ACH.
Each report includes the reason for referral, background information, information on prior evaluations, tests administered, behavioral observations, test results, and recommendations. The focus of all three reports is on the characteristics and educational needs of the person, rather than on an in-depth description of the scores. Each case includes the scores appended to the end of the report. These may be used to provide additional practice with score interpretation.
As examiners attempt to resolve referral questions and make appropriate recommendations, they must consider and integrate findings from behavioral observations, error analysis, and test scores. The basic score report generated by the WJ IV online scoring program (free access included with each Test Record) can serve as a beginning point for the case report, but it does not interpret the results. Initially, the basic score report from the online scoring program provides only the score results and includes observations (if entered). Future releases will offer additional features, some of which will be fee based. As with any computer-generated report, examiners are responsible for interpreting results, integrating information from various sources, drawing conclusions, and making specific recommendations that address the referral concern.
Educational Evaluation Report
Name: Bryan Anthony
Parents: Richard and Kathie Anthony
Date of Birth: 09/08/2004
Age: 9-8
Grade: 3.8
Test Dates: 5/6, 5/10, 5/12/2014
School: Harper Primary School
Reason for Referral
Mrs. Kathie Anthony referred her son Bryan for an evaluation of his oral language and academic abilities. The purposes of this evaluation were to determine Bryan's current levels of academic performance, as well as what instructional methodologies would be most effective for addressing his educational needs.
Background Information
Bryan will be entering the fourth grade in the fall. Mr. and Mrs. Anthony have been concerned about Bryan's limited progress in reading since the age of 5.
Current Situation
Bryan currently resides with his mother, father, and four sisters on a farm in Payson, Arizona. He has two younger sisters who are 3 and 6 years old, and two older sisters who are 10 and 13. Mrs. Anthony's brother and several of his children have been diagnosed with dyslexia and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Mrs. Anthony reports that now as adults, “they have horrible spelling and spell words just the way they sound.”
Bryan's parents reported that he loves information, enjoys figuring things out, and loves telling and hearing stories. In contrast, he is struggling with reading words, but not so much with comprehension. Once he figures out what something says, he understands the meaning. He often misreads simple words, such as the, a, if, and of and almost always asks for help when he has to pronounce longer words. If his parents sound out the word, he quickly gets it. If they try to point to syllables so that he has to figure it out, he gets frustrated and stops reading.
Bryan's grades are poor even though he studies before school, attends a math and reading reteach program after school until 5:30 p.m., and is pulled out of class to work with a reading teacher during school hours. His mother stated that his reading went from a 1.7 grade level in October, to a 2.4 level in December, to a 2.1 level in April. The school team advised that because he was working so hard and making no progress, they should pursue testing to find out what is hindering him. His third-grade teacher reported that just when she thinks that he has it down, he will forget what he has learned.
Mrs. Anthony reported that they spend their nights trying to get his homework done amidst the tears. He is frustrated that he has to study harder than others and is not improving. The Anthonys are frustrated because he is not making much improvement despite all of their efforts. When he is left to read on his own, he gets no more than 2 right out of 10 on his weekly comprehension worksheets. When his mother reads it to him, he can easily tell her all of the correct answers.
In spite of his struggles with reading, Bryan enjoys school. He likes to draw ice dragons, fire dragons, and Vikings with swords. He particularly enjoys classroom activities that involve projects.
Educational History and Prior Evaluations
Bryan began school at the age of 2. His mother taught a home preschool that Bryan was a part of from the time he could walk. When he was 2 he would often hop down from the table and show a 4-year-old child how to do the task on their worksheets without saying a word. Although he seemed bright in many ways, his mother observed that at the ages of 4 and 5, when the other kids in the class were grasping letter sounds and symbols, he was not.
Bryan's parents then took him to Head Start in New Mexico for an evaluation. He tested just under his age level and they were told it was developmental. Just before entering kindergarten, at the age of 5, his mother had him tested again through MECA in New Mexico. Mrs. Anthony reported that he scored well because he knew what a “quart Mason jar” was and used all three names, which none of the other kids did. When asked to tell about the picture of a penguin, he got excited and answered “icy cold penguins” and proceeded to tell how they play in the water. His scores were at 6 years in most areas and 4 years 6 months in a few others. His mother was told again that any concerns they had were just developmental.
Bryan attended Fuller Elementary in Eloy, Arizona, for the first semester of kindergarten. His mother developed a word wall and they constantly practiced his sight words. He struggled to retain them for very long. Bryan's teacher described him as “delightful and smart,” but when she was asked how he was doing compared with the other kids, she said she was concerned about his speech and referred him for an evaluation. The family moved to Nevada and the testing was done at his new school. The results were similar to the prior assessments and his parents were told again that it was just developmental.
In first grade, the family moved back to New Mexico. When his mother asked the teacher at a conference how Bryan was doing, she replied that he was delightful, but behind in reading. For second grade, Bryan attended a project-based charter school; his teacher was sick the whole first semester and he had multiple substitutes. The principal tutored Bryan and other children who were struggling with reading, and Mrs. Anthony was told that he was a great kid and doing just fine.
The Anthonys then moved back to Arizona to run the family farm. Bryan began third grade at St. Paul Elementary. The third-grade teacher was brand new to teaching. In the first few months, her notes home changed from “he is a hard worker” to “wish he would pay more attention in class.” His reading helper's notes also changed from “Bryan is a great kid trying hard” (first week) to “He is despondent and gets no support at home” (fourth week). The Anthonys felt that he was not getting the help he needed and that the situation was not going to change. They then moved Bryan to Harper Primary School down the road. He now likes learning again but is still struggling with reading.
Tests Administered
- Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language (WJ IV OL)
- Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (WJ IV ACH) Standard and Extended
- Interview with Mrs. Anthony
Testing Observations
Testing was conducted in one 2-hour session and one 1-hour session. Although Bryan was engaged during all of the testing, his ability to sustain attention was quite variable. He was cooperative and pleasant throughout all testing.
On several occasions, directions had to be repeated, and Bryan had to be reminded about what he was supposed to be doing. Bryan also had a tendency to stop trying as soon as a question or problem became too challenging. When he had difficulty on one problem, he would then stop trying on the others and say that they were “too hard.”
Test Results
The WJ IV OL and WJ IV ACH were scored according to grade norms. Because these two batteries are co-normed, direct comparisons can be made among his oral language and achievement scores. These comparisons can help determine the presence and significance of any strengths and weaknesses among his abilities. These tests provide measures of Bryan's specific oral language abilities, as well as his current levels of academic achievement.
Bryan's performance is compared to his grade peers using standard score (SS) ranges:
| SS Range | <69 | 70–79 | 80–89 | 90–110 | 111–120 | 121–130 | >130 |
| Verbal label | Very low | Low | Low average | Average | High average | Superior | Very superior |
| Note. Standard scores (SS) have a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. | |||||||
His academic proficiency on specific tasks is described by the Relative Proficiency Index (RPI) levels:
| RPI Range | 0–3 | 3–24 | 24–67 | 67–82 | 82–95 | 95–98 | 98–100 | 100 |
| Level of proficiency | Extremely limited | Very limited | Limited | Limited to average | Average | Average to advanced | Advanced | Very advanced |
| Note. The proficiency ranges (i.e., limited, average, advanced, etc.) are associated with RPI scores, not the standard scores. RPIs are presented as a fraction with the denominator fixed at 90, representing the 90% proficiency level of average age- or grademates on the task. The numerator (top number) fluctuates from 0 to 100 depending on the student's performance (e.g., 10/90 or 80/90). The RPI is interpreted as “when the typical student performs at 90% proficiency, this student can be expected to perform at 98%, 69%, or 45% proficiency or whatever the number on the top indicates.” RPIs are indicators of functionality or proficiency on a task and predict how well the student will do on similar tasks. Sometimes there are differences between standard scores and RPIs. The best method is to consider both standard scores (relative standing compared to peers) and RPIs (proficiency compared to average age- or grademates with 90% proficiency). | ||||||||
A full set of scores is appended to the end of this report.
Oral Language Abilities and Academic Achievement
Bryan's oral language abilities were assessed using the WJ IV OL, and his academic performance was assessed in reading, writing, and math using the WJ IV ACH. On the WJ IV ACH, only performance on the Broad clusters and a few of the individual tests are discussed because there were few significant differences in his performance among measures of basic skills, fluency, and comprehension.
Oral Language Abilities
Overall, Bryan's oral language abilities fell mostly in the average range. He demonstrated grade-appropriate vocabulary knowledge, listening comprehension, and phonological awareness. Bryan had average ability to blend together speech sounds, which is the basis for learning phonics, and to segment or break apart speech sounds, which is the basis for spelling. His lowest score was on the Rapid Picture Naming test, which required the rapid naming of pictures of common objects (SS = 86; 68% confidence band 81–92).
| WJ IV OL Cluster/Tests | RPI | Proficiency | SS (±1 SEM) |
| Sound Blending | 85/90 | Average | 95 (89–102) |
| Segmentation | 94/90 | Average | 104 (99–109) |
| Rapid Picture Naming | 54/90 | Limited | 86 (81–92) |
| Broad Oral Language | 92/90 | Average | 104 (92–109) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 95/90 | Average to advanced | 108 (102–115) |
| Oral Comprehension | 91/90 | Average | 102 (95–109) |
| Understanding Directions | 89/90 | Average | 99 (94–104) |
Reading
Bryan's proficiency was limited to very limited on all reading tests. On the timed Word Reading Fluency test, which required marking the two words in a row of four words that go together based on a semantic connection (e.g., horse yellow cab blue), Bryan had an RPI of 4/90. This indicates that when average grademates are having 90% success on tasks requiring quick word reading, Bryan will only have 4% success. On the Letter-Word Identification test, he had an RPI of 19/90, which indicates very limited proficiency in word recognition reading when compared to his average grade peers. He had difficulty applying phonic skills and recognizing common sight words with ease (e.g., there and when). As words increased in length, he tended to guess at their pronunciations by using the initial consonant, rather than examining the entire word (e.g., reading sentence as science). Bryan tended to give up on more difficult words rather than attempting to sound them out.
| WJ IV ACH Cluster/Tests | RPI | Proficiency | SS (±1 SEM) |
| Word Reading Fluency | 4/90 | Very limited | 81 (76–86) |
| Broad Reading | 36/90 | Limited | 85 (82–88) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 19/90 | Very limited | 81 (78–84) |
| Passage Comprehension | 34/90 | Limited | 80 (75–84) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 59/90 | Limited | 94 (89–98) |
Written Language
Bryan's proficiency in writing was slightly more advanced than his reading proficiency. His lowest performance was on the Spelling test that measured his ability to spell simple to more complex words. Although he was able to represent the sounds in many of the words, he omitted salient sounds from several words and tended to spell words the way they sound, rather than the way they look (e.g., he spelled from as frum). Bryan found it easier to spell phonically regular nonsense words (made-up words that conform to common English sounds and spelling patterns; Spelling of Sounds, RPI = 83/90) than to spell real words that contained irregular elements (Spelling, RPI = 55/90).
On Writing Samples, a test that measures skill in formulating and writing sentences or phrases in response to a variety of demands, Bryan was able to write complete sentences. Although there is no penalty for misspelled words, he had several spelling errors on common words (e.g., road as roud, hole as holl).
| WJ IV Cluster/Tests | RPI | Proficiency | SS (±1 SEM) |
| Spelling of Sounds | 83/90 | Average | 94 (89–99) |
| Broad Written Language | 80/90 | Limited to average | 93 (91–96) |
| Spelling | 55/90 | Limited | 88 (85–91) |
| Writing Samples | 86/90 | Average | 98 (94–101) |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 89/90 | Average | 99 (93–105) |
Mathematics
Bryan also had some difficulty on tests of mathematics. He was able to add and subtract single digits by counting on his fingers. He was able to complete two-digit addition and subtraction problems without regrouping. He was able to count accurately with pictures, add and subtract using pictures, and identify the correct time on a clock. Although Bryan was able to identify the names of coins, he had difficulty adding up the value of coins. He was unable to complete multiplication problems involving more than single digits, and he was unable to solve simple division problems.
| WJ IV Cluster/Tests | RPI | Proficiency | SS (±1 SEM) |
| Broad Mathematics | 58/90 | Limited | 87 (83–90) |
| Applied Problems | 40/90 | Limited | 80 (75–85) |
| Calculation | 68/90 | Limited to average | 90 (86–94) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 67/90 | Limited to average | 92 (87–97) |
WJ IV Variation and Comparison Procedures
Variations
On the WJ IV, intra-individual variations are computed to show the likelihood of a person obtaining a particular score given the average of their other cognitive, oral language, or achievement cluster scores. Large variations indicate areas of significant strength or weakness. There were no significant variations among Bryan's oral language abilities or his achievement.
Comparisons
The WJ IV OL and ACH have several comparison procedures in which one composite ability is used to predict performance in other areas. When his Broad Oral Language score is compared to his achievement, all aspects of reading, as well as math problem solving, are lower than predicted. For example, when his predicted score based on the Broad Oral Language score (SS = 104) was compared to his actual score on the Reading cluster (SS = 79), only two out of 100 students would have a Reading cluster score as low or lower. When his predicted score based on his Broad Oral Language score (SS = 104) was compared to his Math Problem Solving score (SS = 80), only three out of 100 students would have a standard score of 80 or lower.
In addition, significant discrepancies were found when Bryan's Academic Knowledge (knowledge of humanities, science, and social studies) cluster score was compared to his overall reading achievement and math problem solving. These results indicate that Bryan's oral language abilities and academic knowledge are all significantly higher than his present performance in reading and math problem solving, and they suggest that he has the aptitude for a higher level of performance in both areas.
Summary
Bryan will be entering fourth grade in the fall. He has a history of difficulty with reading, despite numerous interventions from both home and school. He was referred for an evaluation by his mother because of her concerns regarding his struggles with learning to read. Bryan's verbal ability (acquired knowledge and language comprehension) is average when compared to his grade peers, which suggests that he should be reading at grade level. Bryan appears to have some difficulty with the control of attention, rather than a weakness in memory per se. Although Bryan is cooperative and enjoys learning, he does not persist when he perceives that tasks have become too challenging for him. Instead, he just states that the problems are “too hard.” Presently, Bryan needs targeted instruction that will increase his overall level of achievement and proficiency in word reading, spelling, and mathematics.
Educational Recommendations
- Conduct further intellectual/cognitive assessment to help determine the specific factors that are inhibiting Bryan's performance in reading and math problem solving. Administer measures of associative memory and perceptual speed to see if these factors are contributing to reading difficulties; administer measures of reasoning ability, working memory, and visual-spatial thinking to determine if any of these abilities are affecting math performance. These findings should be integrated with the results from the present assessment.
- Ask the school to explore eligibility for learning disabilities (LD) services this summer or as soon as Bryan returns to school. Presently, Bryan has significant discrepancies between his oral language and reasoning abilities and his reading and math achievement; he has made insufficient reading progress in school even with additional assistance.
- As he enters fourth grade, Bryan will require specific accommodations in the classroom, such as extended time on assignments and shortened homework assignments. Until his reading and math performance improve, Bryan will need adjustments in the difficulty level in both school and homework assignments. Although he is entering fourth grade, his performance levels are below those of his grade peers.
- Bryan would benefit from sitting at the front of the classroom so as to maximize his attention.
- When possible, break Bryan's in-class assignments into smaller, more manageable chunks. Give him one part at a time with instructions to hand each in as it is completed and pick up the next. Each time he hands in a portion of the work, provide reinforcement for completed work. Using this technique, he will be more likely to stay on task and complete assignments.
- Bryan has average oral language skills, as well as a good foundation of world knowledge. Provide Bryan with opportunities, such as oral reports and science projects, so that he can demonstrate his strengths in certain school subjects.
- Have Bryan's third-grade teacher and his parents complete rating scales regarding his ability to control and sustain attention. Meet with Bryan's pediatrician to discuss the possibility of ADHD.
- Many of the behaviors that Bryan exhibits result from difficulties with attention. Keep in mind that these difficulties do not stem from a lack of effort or caring. Bryan wants to do well, but too often the expectations and academic demands are too high for his present skill levels.
- Bryan will feel frustrated by his attention and learning difficulties. Try to minimize his frustration by providing short periods of instruction (e.g., 10 to 15 minutes) that are followed by rewards or some type of engaging activity, such as a game. Alternatively, he may stay on task for longer periods of time if he receives feedback and rewards throughout the activity (e.g., chips, Monopoly money).
- Encourage Bryan to persist even when tasks become difficult. Show him that if he sticks with a problem and attempts alternative solutions, he will often be able to answer the problem correctly. When Bryan says that he cannot do a problem, say: “Let's take a closer look at that.” Guide him in the steps to follow to solve the problem. As his confidence increases, he will need less support and encouragement.
Initial Instructional Goals
- To make progress, Bryan requires specialized reading instruction. During the summer and ideally into the school year, he would benefit from enrollment in an online reading program: Virtual Reading Coach developed by Mindplay in Tucson, Arizona. The program begins with an initial reading assessment that determines exactly which skills he should use and then plans a prescriptive program based on the assessment results. He should spend 30 minutes a day, 5 days a week with this program, ideally for the next 6 months. A home version is available at www.myreadingteam.com and a school version is available at www.mindplay.com
- Bryan has mastered basic phonic skills, but needs to understand how to read multisyllabic words. Provide Bryan with instruction that increases his recognition of common letter patterns, builds his understanding of spelling rules, and shows him how to use structural analysis (breaking words apart into syllables). He needs to be taught common prefixes, suffixes, and roots. One program that would be beneficial is REWARDS, published by Sopris West (www.soprislearning.com). Reading and spelling instruction will be most effective if the patterns taught for reading are taught for spelling at the same time.
- In the classroom, use a systematic spelling program, such as Scholastic Spelling (Spelling Grade 4 Pupil Edition), that will provide Bryan with a solid foundation in common orthographic spelling patterns, as well as how to spell common high frequency words (www.scholastic.com). Another good program would be Spellography (www.soprislearning.com). This program addresses multisyllabic decoding skills, reading fluency, vocabulary using word roots, and spelling patterns and is appropriate as an intervention in grades 4 to 5.
- To build speed and accuracy in pronunciation of sight words and phonetically irregular words, use 1-minute speed drills. Time Bryan daily on reading lists of common, irregular words as quickly as he can but with accuracy as the primary goal. Record and display his daily performance on some type of graph. Also have him practice spelling these words.
- Teach Bryan basic math skills including the concept of place value, adding and subtracting multidigit numbers with and without regrouping, two-digit multiplication, and simple division. Introduce fractions and decimals.
- This summer have Bryan begin use of an online math program, such as ALEKS, to supplement math instruction (http://www.aleks.com). This program will design a math curriculum to address gaps in Bryan's knowledge.
- Provide practice in math facts and math using fun video games. Many of these can be found on www.coolmath.com
- Provide instruction in learning the value of coins, how to add them together, and how to make change.
- Provide daily review of different types of math problems. A good book to use would be Math4Today which provides daily 10-minute worksheets with a variety of math problems geared at a fourth-grade level.
- To maximize attention, alternate instruction in math skills with games to reinforce and develop those skills.
Woodcock-Johnson IV Score Report
| Name: Anthony, Bryan | School: Harper |
| Date of Birth: 09/08/2004 | Grade: 3.8 |
| Age: 9 years, 8 months | |
| Sex: Male | |
| Dates of Testing: | |
| 05/11/2014 (OL) | |
| 05/12/2014 (ACH) |
TESTS ADMINISTERED
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement Form A
Woodcock-Johnson Online Scoring and Reporting Program, Release 1.0
TABLE OF SCORES
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language (Norms based on grade 3.8)
| CLUSTER/Test | W | GE | RPI | Proficiency | SS (68% Band) |
| ORAL LANGUAGE | 499 | 4.7 | 93/90 | average | 106 (101–112) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 502 | 5.4 | 95/90 | avg to advanced | 108 (102–115) |
| Oral Comprehension | 496 | 4.1 | 91/90 | average | 102 (95–109) |
| BROAD ORAL LANGUAGE | 497 | 4.3 | 92/90 | average | 104 (99–108) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 502 | 5.4 | 95/90 | avg to advanced | 108 (102–115) |
| Oral Comprehension | 496 | 4.1 | 91/90 | average | 102 (95–109) |
| Understanding Directions | 494 | 3.6 | 89/90 | average | 99 (94–104) |
| ORAL EXPRESSION | 495 | 3.7 | 90/90 | average | 100 (95–104) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 502 | 5.4 | 95/90 | avg to advanced | 108 (102–115) |
| Sentence Repetition | 488 | 2.8 | 79/90 | limited to avg | 94 (89–99) |
| LISTENING COMP | 495 | 3.8 | 90/90 | average | 100 (95–105) |
| Oral Comprehension | 496 | 4.1 | 91/90 | average | 102 (95–109) |
| Understanding Directions | 494 | 3.6 | 89/90 | average | 99 (94–104) |
| PHONETIC CODING | 496 | 3.9 | 90/90 | average | 100 (96–105) |
| Segmentation | 498 | 5.3 | 94/90 | average | 104 (99–109) |
| Sound Blending | 494 | 2.3 | 85/90 | average | 95 (89–102) |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 486 | 1.9 | 71/90 | limited to avg | 86 (81–91) |
| Rapid Picture Naming | 480 | 1.6 | 54/90 | limited | 86 (81–92) |
| Retrieval Fluency | 493 | 2.6 | 84/90 | average | 93 (86–99) |
| Sound Awareness | 488 | 2.4 | 78/90 | limited to avg | 90 (84–95) |
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (Norms based on grade 3.8)
| CLUSTER/Test | W | GE | RPI | Proficiency | SS (68% Band) |
| READING | 462 | 1.9 | 26/90 | limited | 79 (77–82) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 457 | 1.9 | 19/90 | very limited | 81 (78–84) |
| Passage Comprehension | 467 | 1.9 | 34/90 | limited | 80 (75–84) |
| BROAD READING | 463 | 2.3 | 36/90 | limited | 85 (82–88) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 457 | 1.9 | 19/90 | very limited | 81 (78–84) |
| Passage Comprehension | 467 | 1.9 | 34/90 | limited | 80 (75–84) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 466 | 3.0 | 59/90 | limited | 94 (89–98) |
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 468 | 2.0 | 42/90 | limited | 83 (81–86) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 457 | 1.9 | 19/90 | very limited | 81 (78–84) |
| Word Attack | 479 | 2.3 | 68/90 | limited to avg | 89 (84–93) |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 477 | 2.1 | 61/90 | limited | 83 (79–86) |
| Passage Comprehension | 467 | 1.9 | 34/90 | limited | 80 (75–84) |
| Reading Recall | 488 | 2.7 | 83/90 | average | 93 (89–97) |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 476 | 2.1 | 60/90 | limited | 82 (79–85) |
| Passage Comprehension | 467 | 1.9 | 34/90 | limited | 80 (75–84) |
| Reading Recall | 488 | 2.7 | 83/90 | average | 93 (89–97) |
| Reading Vocabulary | 475 | 2.0 | 58/90 | limited | 83 (78–88) |
| READING FLUENCY | 470 | 2.7 | 59/90 | limited | 90 (87–94) |
| Oral Reading | 475 | 1.9 | 58/90 | limited | 86 (83–89) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 466 | 3.0 | 59/90 | limited | 94 (89–98) |
| READING RATE | 444 | 2.4 | 20/90 | very limited | 87 (83–90) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 466 | 3.0 | 59/90 | limited | 94 (89–98) |
| Word Reading Fluency | 422 | 1.8 | 4/90 | very limited | 81 (76–86) |
| MATHEMATICS | 469 | 2.5 | 54/90 | limited | 85 (81–88) |
| Applied Problems | 466 | 2.0 | 40/90 | limited | 80 (75–85) |
| Calculation | 473 | 2.9 | 68/90 | limited to avg | 90 (86–94) |
| BROAD MATHEMATICS | 471 | 2.7 | 58/90 | limited | 87 (83–90) |
| Applied Problems | 466 | 2.0 | 40/90 | limited | 80 (75–85) |
| Calculation | 473 | 2.9 | 68/90 | limited to avg | 90 (86–94) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 475 | 2.9 | 67/90 | limited | 92 (87–97) |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 474 | 2.9 | 67/90 | limited to avg | 91 (87–94) |
| Calculation | 473 | 2.9 | 68/90 | limited to avg | 90 (86–94) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 475 | 2.9 | 67/90 | limited | 92 (87–97) |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 468 | 1.9 | 46/90 | limited | 80 (76–84) |
| Applied Problems | 466 | 2.0 | 40/90 | limited | 80 (75–85) |
| Number Matrices | 470 | 1.7 | 52/90 | limited | 84 (79–89) |
| WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 480 | 2.8 | 73/90 | limited to avg | 92 (89–94) |
| Spelling | 471 | 2.5 | 55/90 | limited | 88 (85–91) |
| Writing Samples | 489 | 3.3 | 86/90 | average | 98 (94–101) |
| BROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 484 | 3.0 | 80/90 | limited to avg | 93 (91–96) |
| Spelling | 471 | 2.5 | 55/90 | limited | 88 (85–91) |
| Writing Samples | 489 | 3.3 | 86/90 | average | 98 (94–101) |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 492 | 3.7 | 89/90 | average | 99 (93–105) |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 475 | 2.6 | 66/90 | limited | 89 (87–92) |
| Spelling | 471 | 2.5 | 55/90 | limited | 88 (85–91) |
| Editing | 480 | 2.8 | 76/90 | limited to avg | 92 (87–97) |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 490 | 3.5 | 88/90 | average | 98 (95–101) |
| Writing Samples | 489 | 3.3 | 86/90 | average | 98 (94–101) |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 492 | 3.7 | 89/90 | average | 99 (93–105) |
| ACADEMIC SKILLS | 467 | 2.4 | 46/90 | limited | 84 (82–87) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 457 | 1.9 | 19/90 | very limited | 81 (78–84) |
| Spelling | 471 | 2.5 | 55/90 | limited | 88 (85–91) |
| Calculation | 473 | 2.9 | 68/90 | limited to avg | 90 (86–94) |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS | 474 | 2.2 | 56/90 | limited | 84 (81–87) |
| Applied Problems | 466 | 2.0 | 40/90 | limited | 80 (75–85) |
| Passage Comprehension | 467 | 1.9 | 34/90 | limited | 80 (75–84) |
| Writing Samples | 489 | 3.3 | 86/90 | average | 98 (94–101) |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY | 478 | 3.1 | 75/90 | limited to avg | 94 (90–97) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 466 | 3.0 | 59/90 | limited | 94 (89–98) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 475 | 2.9 | 67/90 | limited | 92 (87–97) |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 492 | 3.7 | 89/90 | average | 99 (93–105) |
| ACADEMIC KNOWLEDGE | 494 | 3.6 | 89/90 | average | 99 (95–102) |
| Science | 489 | 3.2 | 85/90 | average | 96 (91–102) |
| Social Studies | 495 | 3.5 | 88/90 | average | 98 (93–103) |
| Humanities | 497 | 4.2 | 92/90 | average | 102 (97–108) |
| PHONEME-GRAPHEME KNOWLEDGE | 483 | 2.5 | 76/90 | limited to avg | 90 (86–94) |
| Word Attack | 479 | 2.3 | 68/90 | limited to avg | 89 (84–93) |
| Spelling of Sounds | 488 | 2.9 | 83/90 | average | 94 (89–99) |
| BRIEF ACHIEVEMENT | 464 | 2.1 | 37/90 | limited | 82 (79–84) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 457 | 1.9 | 19/90 | very limited | 81 (78–84) |
| Applied Problems | 466 | 2.0 | 40/90 | limited | 80 (75–85) |
| Spelling | 471 | 2.5 | 55/90 | limited | 88 (85–91) |
| BROAD ACHIEVEMENT | 473 | 2.6 | 60/90 | limited | 87 (85–89) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 457 | 1.9 | 19/90 | very limited | 81 (78–84) |
| Applied Problems | 466 | 2.0 | 40/90 | limited | 80 (75–85) |
| Spelling | 471 | 2.5 | 55/90 | limited | 88 (85–91) |
| Passage Comprehension | 467 | 1.9 | 34/90 | limited | 80 (75–84) |
| Calculation | 473 | 2.9 | 68/90 | limited to avg | 90 (86–94) |
| Writing Samples | 489 | 3.3 | 86/90 | average | 98 (94–101) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 466 | 3.0 | 59/90 | limited | 94 (89–98) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 475 | 2.9 | 67/90 | limited | 92 (87–97) |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 492 | 3.7 | 89/90 | average | 99 (93–105) |
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Interpretation | ||||
| VARIATIONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Intra-Oral Language (Extended) Variations | ||||||
| ORAL EXPRESSION | 100 | 98 | 2 | 57 | +0.17 | — |
| LISTENING COMP | 100 | 100 | 0 | 53 | +0.07 | — |
| PHONETIC CODING | 100 | 99 | 1 | 53 | +0.06 | — |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 86 | 103 | −17 | 11 | −1.24 | — |
| Picture Vocabulary^ | 108 | 98 | 10 | 82 | +0.90 | — |
| Oral Comprehension^ | 102 | 100 | 2 | 58 | +0.19 | — |
| Segmentation^ | 104 | 100 | 4 | 62 | +0.30 | — |
| Rapid Picture Naming^ | 86 | 102 | −16 | 12 | −1.17 | — |
| Sentence Repetition | 94 | 98 | −4 | 37 | −0.34 | — |
| Understanding Directions | 99 | 100 | −1 | 46 | −0.09 | — |
| Sound Blending | 95 | 99 | −4 | 39 | −0.28 | — |
| Retrieval Fluency | 93 | 103 | −10 | 22 | −0.76 | — |
| ^Core test for calculation of intra-oral language variations. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Interpretation | ||||
| VARIATIONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 |
| Intra-Achievement (Extended) Variations | ||||||
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 83 | 87 | −4 | 31 | −0.49 | — |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 83 | 87 | −4 | 35 | −0.39 | — |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 82 | 87 | −5 | 29 | −0.55 | — |
| READING FLUENCY | 90 | 88 | 2 | 57 | +0.19 | — |
| READING RATE | 87 | 90 | −3 | 40 | −0.26 | — |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 91 | 86 | 5 | 68 | +0.45 | — |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 80 | 89 | −9 | 19 | −0.88 | — |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 89 | 86 | 3 | 66 | +0.40 | — |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 98 | 84 | 14 | 93 | +1.48 | — |
| Letter-Word Identification^ | 81 | 87 | −6 | 22 | −0.76 | — |
| Applied Problems^ | 80 | 90 | −10 | 18 | −0.90 | — |
| Spelling^ | 88 | 87 | 1 | 55 | +0.12 | — |
| Passage Comprehension^ | 80 | 87 | −7 | 21 | −0.80 | — |
| Calculation^ | 90 | 86 | 4 | 64 | +0.36 | — |
| Writing Samples^ | 98 | 86 | 12 | 85 | +1.03 | — |
| Word Attack | 89 | 89 | 0 | 48 | −0.06 | — |
| Oral Reading | 86 | 90 | −4 | 39 | −0.28 | — |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 94 | 88 | 6 | 69 | +0.49 | — |
| Math Facts Fluency | 92 | 89 | 3 | 62 | +0.31 | — |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 99 | 85 | 14 | 90 | +1.29 | — |
| Reading Recall | 93 | 90 | 3 | 60 | +0.26 | — |
| Number Matrices | 84 | 92 | −8 | 27 | −0.62 | — |
| Editing | 92 | 87 | 5 | 67 | +0.44 | — |
| Word Reading Fluency | 81 | 91 | −10 | 18 | −0.92 | — |
| Spelling of Sounds | 94 | 89 | 5 | 67 | +0.44 | — |
| Reading Vocabulary | 83 | 89 | −6 | 28 | −0.58 | — |
| ^Core test for calculation of intra-achievement variations. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Interpretation | ||||
| VARIATIONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Academic Skills/Academic Fluency/Academic Applications (Extended) Variations | ||||||
| ACADEMIC SKILLS^ | 84 | 89 | −5 | 24 | −0.71 | — |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY^ | 94 | 87 | 7 | 76 | +0.72 | — |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS^ | 84 | 91 | −7 | 21 | −0.80 | — |
| READING RATE | 87 | 89 | −2 | 43 | −0.17 | — |
| ^Core cluster for calculation of academic skills/fluency/applications variations. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Significant at | ||||
| COMPARISONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Oral Language/Achievement Comparisons* | ||||||
| READING | 79 | 102 | −23 | 2 | −1.98 | Yes (−) |
| BROAD READING | 85 | 102 | −17 | 8 | −1.42 | No |
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 83 | 102 | −19 | 6 | −1.60 | Yes (−) |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 83 | 103 | −20 | 6 | −1.55 | Yes (−) |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 82 | 103 | −21 | 3 | −1.84 | Yes (−) |
| READING FLUENCY | 90 | 102 | −12 | 19 | −0.88 | No |
| READING RATE | 87 | 102 | −15 | 13 | −1.11 | No |
| MATHEMATICS | 85 | 102 | −17 | 8 | −1.41 | No |
| BROAD MATHEMATICS | 87 | 102 | −15 | 11 | −1.24 | No |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 91 | 102 | −11 | 20 | −0.84 | No |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 80 | 102 | −22 | 3 | −1.83 | Yes (−) |
| WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 92 | 102 | −10 | 22 | −0.77 | No |
| BROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 93 | 102 | −9 | 27 | −0.62 | No |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 89 | 102 | −13 | 15 | −1.04 | No |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 98 | 101 | −3 | 41 | −0.24 | No |
| ACADEMIC SKILLS | 84 | 102 | −18 | 7 | −1.45 | No |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY | 94 | 102 | −8 | 27 | −0.61 | No |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS | 84 | 103 | −19 | 5 | −1.63 | Yes (−) |
| ACADEMIC KNOWLEDGE | 99 | 103 | −4 | 33 | −0.44 | No |
| PHONEME-GRAPHEME KNOWLEDGE | 90 | 102 | −12 | 18 | −0.93 | No |
| PHONETIC CODING | 100 | 102 | −2 | 46 | −0.11 | No |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 86 | 102 | −16 | 10 | −1.27 | No |
| *This procedure compares the WJ IV Broad Oral Language cluster score to selected achievement and cognitive-linguistic clusters. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Significant at | ||||
| COMPARISONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Academic Knowledge/Achievement Comparisons* | ||||||
| BRIEF ACHIEVEMENT | 82 | 99 | −17 | 8 | −1.43 | No |
| BROAD ACHIEVEMENT | 87 | 99 | −12 | 18 | −0.93 | No |
| READING | 79 | 99 | −20 | 6 | −1.53 | Yes (−) |
| BROAD READING | 85 | 99 | −14 | 14 | −1.09 | No |
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 83 | 99 | −16 | 11 | −1.24 | No |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 83 | 99 | −16 | 12 | −1.17 | No |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 82 | 99 | −17 | 9 | −1.36 | No |
| READING FLUENCY | 90 | 99 | −9 | 26 | −0.66 | No |
| READING RATE | 87 | 99 | −12 | 19 | −0.89 | No |
| MATHEMATICS | 85 | 99 | −14 | 12 | −1.20 | No |
| BROAD MATHEMATICS | 87 | 99 | −12 | 16 | −0.99 | No |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 91 | 99 | −8 | 26 | −0.63 | No |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 80 | 99 | −19 | 5 | −1.61 | Yes (−) |
| WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 92 | 99 | −7 | 29 | −0.56 | No |
| BROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 93 | 99 | −6 | 34 | −0.41 | No |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 89 | 99 | −10 | 22 | −0.77 | No |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 98 | 99 | −1 | 47 | −0.08 | No |
| ACADEMIC SKILLS | 84 | 99 | −15 | 12 | −1.19 | No |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY | 94 | 99 | −5 | 34 | −0.40 | No |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS | 84 | 99 | −15 | 11 | −1.23 | No |
| PHONETIC CODING | 100 | 99 | 1 | 53 | +0.08 | No |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 86 | 99 | −13 | 17 | −0.95 | No |
| *This procedure compares the WJ IV Academic Knowledge cluster score to selected achievement and cognitive-linguistic clusters. | ||||||
Educational Evaluation Report
Student: Evan Ray
Parents: Roger and Jeanette Ray
Date of Birth: 07/07/1996
Grade: 11.9
Age: 17-11
School: Walnut Cove High
Dates of Testing: 6/7, 6/10/2014
Reason for Referral
Evan was referred for his 3-year review of special education services. He has been receiving special education services under the category of learning disability since third grade. For the past 3 years, he has been receiving learning disability services in a resource setting at Walnut Cove High in Peoria, Wisconsin. The school team recommended an evaluation to help determine transition goals into postsecondary education. In addition, his parents expressed concerns to Ms. Elkins, the school psychologist, about Evan's continued difficulties in mathematics, his poor handwriting, and his general apathy about educational goals.
Background Information
Evan is the adopted son of Roger and Jeanette Ray. He currently lives with his parents and an older brother, Jeremy, who is also adopted. The Rays adopted Evan at birth. His biological mother was 14 years old and smoked during the pregnancy. Although little is known about prenatal care, concerns were also raised about his biological mother's possible drug and/or alcohol abuse during pregnancy. Although little is known about his biological father, information from a court interview indicated that Evan's biological father had struggled throughout school with mathematics.
Evan attended preschool for two years and then entered Walnut Cove Elementary for kindergarten. Based upon parental and teacher concerns regarding motor development, Evan was referred for an occupational therapy evaluation in first grade. Results from the Peabody Developmental Motor Scale indicated delays of up to 17 months in fine-motor development and up to 26 months in gross-motor development. He demonstrated weakness in his flexor muscles, particularly abdominals and hip flexors, toe walking, and weaknesses in visual-motor planning. Evan was unable to hop on one foot without losing his balance. On the Gardner Test of Visual-Perceptual Skills (nonmotor), Evan obtained average scores on measures of visual discrimination and visual-spatial relations, and a below average score in visual memory. Recommendations were made for occupational therapy with the goals of improving fine- and gross-motor skills, visual-perceptual motor planning, and muscle weaknesses. In addition, Evan began to receive resource support for reading, writing, and math.
The Rays report that although Evan tried to participate in team sports throughout elementary school (baseball, soccer, swimming, and karate), the experiences were not positive. During baseball games, Evan would often sit down in the outfield. On the soccer field, Evan tried to stay away from the ball. His mother reported that on several occasions when she picked Evan up from practice, he would be crying. In swimming he was also 20 strokes behind the other children, and in karate he could not keep his balance.
Delays were also noted in gross-motor development. At the age of 9, Evan was unable to ride a bike or tie his shoes with ease. He walked with an awkward gait and often tripped. Because of continued toe walking, Evan had casts put on both legs to stretch his heel cords and position his feet flat on the ground. Results from a brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) indicated subtle cortical dysplasia involving the cerebellar hemispheres (the area of the brain involving motor development and balance).
Evan is currently in the 11th grade. Since third grade, he has received special education services in a resource setting under the category of specific learning disability. Currently, he is also receiving occupational therapy services 30 minutes per week, with the goal of teaching him how to use technology to compensate for his writing difficulties. He currently uses a laptop in all of his classes to assist with lengthy writing assignments. Presently, in high school, Evan is not involved in any extracurricular activities. He notes that he likes to play video games and spends most of his free time in this way. Evan's parents note that he is creative and has a good vocabulary and sense of humor. When asked to write what he likes to do on the weekends, Evan wrote: “Watch TV, play video games, and fall down the stairs.”
Classroom Observation
Evan was observed for the first 20 minutes in his algebra class. He was sitting in the back of the room. He looked at the floor and his shoes, glancing up only occasionally. He appeared to be listening. Fifteen minutes into the discussion, Evan began digging into the tread of his shoe with a pencil. He then removed his shoe and continued to run the tip of his pencil through the shoe treads, until a nearby student, then a teacher's aide, prompted him to put his shoe back on and listen. When independent seatwork began, Evan did not understand what he was supposed to do. The classroom aide came over and re-explained the assignment to Evan. Evan then began to work but had only attempted one problem after 5 minutes.
Tests Administered
Evan was administered the Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (WJ IV ACH) and the Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language (WJ IV OL). In addition, he was observed in his high school algebra class and a writing sample was collected.
Behavior During Testing
Evan was tested through three sessions. In the first session, Evan complained of being tired, yawned, and kept his head down on the desk. He said that he did not get much sleep, then became teary-eyed and asked if he could please finish tomorrow. He completed two tests before he was dismissed to go back to class. Evan returned for testing the next morning and was once again mildly to moderately resistant. He complained that the examiner, while trying to get him engaged in the testing, was “annoying” him. When reminded that he agreed to come back to finish the test after being allowed to stop the day before, he became more cooperative. Nonetheless, he did not seem to have much stamina and struggled to maintain an adequate energy level. During oral language tests, he showed persistence and enthusiasm.
By the third session, Evan was cooperative. He was informed that he could earn coupons for “homework passes” by complying with requests and trying his hardest. He appeared at ease, comfortable, and attentive. He responded promptly but carefully to test questions and generally persisted with difficult tasks.
Test Results
The WJ IV OL and ACH were scored according to age norms. Because these two batteries are co-normed, direct comparisons can be made among his oral language and achievement scores. These comparisons can help determine the presence and significance of any strengths and weaknesses among his abilities. These tests provide measures of Evan's specific oral language abilities, as well as his current levels of academic achievement.
Evan's performance is compared to his age peers using percentile ranks (PR) and PR ranges:
| PR Range | 0.1–2 | 3–8 | 9–24 | 25–75 | 76–91 | 92–97 | 98–99.9 |
| Verbal label | Very low | Low | Low average | Average | High average | Superior | Very superior |
| Note. Percentile ranks (PR) are scores that indicate rank order within the norm group and range from <0.1 to >99.9. They also indicate the percentage of the population that scored the same or lower. | |||||||
His academic proficiency on specific tasks is described by the Relative Proficiency Index (RPI) levels:
| RPI Range | 0–3 | 3–24 | 24–67 | 67–82 | 82–95 | 95–98 | 98–100 | 100 |
| Level of proficiency | Extremely limited | Very limited | Limited | Limited to average | Average | Average to advanced | Advanced | Very advanced |
| Note. An RPI is expressed as a fraction with the bottom number (denominator) fixed at 90. The 90 represents the 90% proficiency level of average agemates. The top number (numerator) ranges from 0 to 100 and reflects the student's proficiency on the task. | ||||||||
A full set of scores is appended to the end of this report.
Oral Language
Evan's proficiency was average to very advanced on all measures of oral language. His vocabulary knowledge, ability to repeat back orally presented sentences, and ability to blend speech sounds together and push them apart (segmentation) were all advanced to very advanced. Evan has a solid foundation in the oral language skills that underlie both reading and writing.
| WJ IV OL Cluster/Tests | RPI | Proficiency | PR (±1 SEM) |
| Sentence Repetition | 100/90 | Very advanced | 94 (86–98) |
| Phonetic Coding | 100/90 | Advanced | 96 (93–98) |
| Sound Blending | 100/90 | Very advanced | 98 (94–99) |
| Segmentation | 99/90 | Advanced | 88 (81–94) |
| Broad Oral Language | 97/90 | Average to advanced | 90 (82–95) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 99/90 | Advanced | 94 (88–98) |
| Oral Comprehension | 97/90 | Average to advanced | 81 (66–91) |
| Understanding Directions | 95/90 | Average | 70 (48–86) |
Achievement
Evan's proficiency ranged from very limited (e.g., Calculation) to very advanced (e.g., Writing Samples) on various measures of achievement. In general, his proficiency in reading and written language was average but his proficiency in mathematics was limited.
Reading
As with oral language, Evan's proficiency with reading was mostly average to advanced. He was able to pronounce both real words and nonsense words with ease. He had average proficiency on measures of reading rate and fluency. His lowest score was on the Passage Comprehension test. This was somewhat surprising given his high score on the Oral Comprehension test, a test of listening comprehension in the same format.
| WJ IV Reading Cluster/Tests | RPI | Proficiency | PR (±1 SEM) |
| Word Attack | 97/90 | Average to advanced | 83 (66–93) |
| Reading Vocabulary | 98/90 | Advanced | 86 (76–93) |
| Reading Recall | 85/90 | Average | 33 (24–43) |
| Broad Reading | 94/90 | Average | 63 (53–72) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 99/90 | Advanced | 84 (75–91) |
| Passage Comprehension | 76/90 | Limited to average | 30 (20–41) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 93/90 | Average | 54 (42–66) |
| Phoneme–Grapheme Knowledge | 97/90 | Average to advanced | 83 (72–91) |
Written Language
Evan's responses on the Writing Samples test were highly sophisticated both in terms of writing style and use of vocabulary (see Figure 7.1 in Chapter 7). He wrote responses quickly and easily.
| WJ IV Written Language Cluster/Tests | RPI | Proficiency | PR (±1 SEM) |
| Broad Written Language | 98/90 | Advanced | 91 (84–96) |
| Spelling | 83/90 | Average | 39 (30–49) |
| Writing Samples | 100/90 | Very advanced | >99 (>99) |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 94/90 | Average | 68 (54–80) |
Evan also provided the first page of his first draft of a short story he was writing for his English class (see Figure 8.1). Several aspects about his writing can be gleaned from this sample: He has an excellent vocabulary; his story is cohesive; he uses both simple and complex sentence structures; and his handwriting is difficult but not impossible to read.
Figure 8.1 Evan's Draft of a Short Story for English Class
Translation:
The earth shook violently and the ground parted to make way for the mighty titans rising from the depths. It was as if nature itself feared their presence. Mouth gaping wide Eric could only watch as they emerged. Thunderous footsteps tore through the countryside, why were they here? He rode on horseback in their shadows. Was this all a dream? Or some elaborate hoax? He wondered what their end goal was and could not help but envy how gracefully they traversed the land despite their daunting size. Unsure of where they were leading him the one thing he knew for sure was that by the end of all this, the world would never be the same.
Mathematics
On the WJ IV ACH, Evan's proficiency was limited on all aspects of math performance. His performance on the Calculation test, a measure of computational skills, exceeded only 6% of his age peers. On the Calculation test, he was able to solve simple addition, subtraction, and multiplication problems but was unable to solve problems that involved division, addition and subtraction of fractions, or simple algebraic equations.
| WJ IV Mathematics Cluster/Tests | RPI | Proficiency | PR (±1 SEM) |
| Number Matrices | 59/90 | Limited | 20 (14–29) |
| Broad Mathematics | 51/90 | Limited | 14 (10–19) |
| Applied Problems | 77/90 | Limited to average | 31 (21–42) |
| Calculation | 20/90 | Very limited | 6 (4–10) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 59/90 | Limited | 70 (48–86) |
Academic Knowledge
Evan's proficiency was average regarding content area knowledge. This is somewhat surprising given his advanced oral language and vocabulary knowledge. However, Evan did demonstrate limited to average proficiency on Passage Comprehension even though his proficiency on other reading tasks was average to advanced. Because the majority of content area knowledge is acquired by reading texts, Evan's limits in comprehension of connected text may be related to the differences noted between his academic knowledge and his oral language. Another possible explanation may be that Evan was pulled out of the general education classroom to receive special education services during content area instruction in both elementary and middle school.
| WJ IV Knowledge Cluster/Tests | RPI | Proficiency | PR (±1 SEM) |
| Academic Knowledge | 85/90 | Average | 38 (30–47) |
| Science | 89/90 | Average | 48 (35–62) |
| Social Studies | 79/90 | Limited to average | 32 (21–45) |
| Humanities | 84/90 | Average | 38 (26–52) |
Variations
The WJ IV OL and WJ IV ACH have several variation procedures to summarize significant strengths and weaknesses that may be present for a student. On the Intra-Oral Language Variation procedure, Evan had a significant relative strength on the Sound Blending test. On the Intra-Achievement Variation procedure, Evan had significant relative strengths on the Basic Reading Skills cluster, the Written Expression cluster, and the Writing Samples test. In fact, when his score on the Writing Samples test was compared to his other areas of achievement, less than one out of 1,000 students with the same predicted score (SS = 96) would have an actual standard score (SS = 147) as high or higher.
Evan had significant relative weaknesses on the Math Calculation Skills cluster, the Math Problem Solving cluster, and the Calculation test. On the Math Calculation Skills cluster, only one of 100 students with the same predicted score of 107 had an actual standard score of 77 or lower.
Comparisons
The WJ IV OL and WJ IV ACH have two ability/achievement comparison procedures in which one score (Broad Oral Language or Academic Knowledge) is used to predict performance in achievement. When Evan's Broad Oral Language cluster score is compared to his achievement clusters, his Written Expression is significantly higher than predicted. In contrast, the following clusters are significantly lower than predicted: Reading Comprehension, Mathematics, Broad Mathematics, Math Calculation Skills, Math Problem Solving, and Academic Knowledge. When Evan's Academic Knowledge (orally administered tests of Science, Social Studies, and Humanities) standard score is compared to his achievement, his Basic Reading Skills cluster, Written Language clusters (except for Basic Writing Skills), and Phonetic Coding cluster (pushing together and pulling apart speech sounds) are all significantly higher than predicted. The fact that Reading Comprehension and Academic Knowledge are both significantly lower than predicted by Evan's Broad Oral Language ability should be noted. His strong oral language predicts equally strong reading skills, which isn't the case, especially for comprehension of connected text as is measured by the Passage Comprehension test. Also, the content knowledge measured by Academic Knowledge, composed of Science, Social Studies, and Humanities, is typically acquired through reading of connected text. There may be other factors, such as attention/concentration, working memory, or processing speed impacting Evan's ability to comprehend what he reads at a level that is in line with his oral language abilities. Limits in these types of cognitive abilities also may explain Evan's ongoing difficulties in mathematics.
Conclusion
Evan is a student with dysgraphia who has advanced oral language and superior writing skills in terms of content. He uses a laptop in most of his classes. Evan has received services as a student with an SLD in mathematics since third grade, but he continues to struggle with most areas of mathematics. The multidisciplinary team will determine Evan's continued eligibility for special education services, as well as further develop a postsecondary transition plan.
Recommendations
- Conduct further intellectual/cognitive assessment to help determine the specific factors that are inhibiting math development and performance. Administer measures of reasoning ability, working memory, visual-spatial thinking, and processing speed to determine if any of these abilities are affecting Evan's mathematical performance. Integrate these findings with the results from the present evaluation.
- Schedule a multidisciplinary conference in the fall to consider Evan's continued eligibility for special education services for math remediation and his need for accommodations and support during his senior year.
- Administer the KeyMath3 or do informal testing to determine additional relevant instructional goals.
- Based on the findings of the more comprehensive report, Evan and his parents should explore modified entrance requirements to the state university, as well as procedures for applying to the program for students with learning disabilities.
- If possible in a postsecondary setting, consider waiving any credit requirements in the mathematical area due to his extreme difficulty with mathematical calculation skills and provide an acceptable substitution.
- For the first semester, consider a reduced course load so that Evan has enough time and energy to devote to his courses.
- Provide Evan with ongoing assistance in vocational planning.
- Evan needs to continue receiving instruction in basic math skills.
- As part of math instruction, reteach and review procedures involved in computations with fractions, percentages, and decimals. Use manipulatives to demonstrate the meaning of fractions. Also review the concept of place value so that Evan can understand the meaning of a decimal point.
- Specifically teach strategies for translating word problems into computations. Help Evan learn to visualize what is happening in the problem.
- Encourage Evan to take a remedial class in functional mathematics. Review math skills needed for independent living, such as balancing a checkbook, figuring interest on a car loan, determining the amount of tip to leave at a restaurant, budgeting his salary, measuring for cooking, adjusting a recipe, and using map skills.
Woodcock-Johnson IV Score Report
| Name: Ray, Evan | Grade: 11.9 |
| Date of Birth: 07/07/1996 | |
| Age: 17 years, 11 months | |
| Sex: Male | |
| Dates of Testing: | |
| 06/07/2014 (OL) | |
| 06/10/2014 (ACH) |
TESTS ADMINISTERED
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement Form A
Woodcock-Johnson Online Scoring and Reporting Program, Release 1.0
TABLE OF SCORES
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language (Norms based on age 17–21)
| CLUSTER/Test | W | AE | RPI | Proficiency | PR (68% Band) |
| ORAL LANGUAGE | 533 | >30 | 98/90 | advanced | 92 (85-96) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 540 | >30 | 99/90 | advanced | 94 (88-98) |
| Oral Comprehension | 526 | >30 | 97/90 | avg to advanced | 81 (66-91) |
| BROAD ORAL LANGUAGE | 528 | >30 | 98/90 | avg to advanced | 90 (82-95) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 540 | >30 | 99/90 | advanced | 94 (88-98) |
| Oral Comprehension | 526 | >30 | 97/90 | avg to advanced | 81 (66-91) |
| Understanding Directions | 519 | >25 | 95/90 | average | 70 (48-86) |
| ORAL EXPRESSION | 550 | >30 | 99/90 | advanced | 96 (92-99) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 540 | >30 | 99/90 | advanced | 94 (88-98) |
| Sentence Repetition | 559 | >30 | 100/90 | very advanced | 94 (86-98) |
| LISTENING COMP | 522 | >30 | 96/90 | avg to advanced | 81 (66-91) |
| Oral Comprehension | 526 | >30 | 97/90 | avg to advanced | 81 (66-91) |
| Understanding Directions | 519 | >25 | 95/90 | average | 70 (48-86) |
| PHONETIC CODING | 539 | >30 | 100/90 | advanced | 96 (93-98) |
| Segmentation | 531 | >30 | 99/90 | advanced | 88 (81-94) |
| Sound Blending | 547 | >28 | 100/90 | very advanced | 98 (94->99) |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 521 | >30 | 93/90 | average | 61 (50-71) |
| Rapid Picture Naming | 535 | >30 | 97/90 | avg to advanced | 70 (59-80) |
| Retrieval Fluency | 508 | 13-11 | 86/90 | average | 36 (22-52) |
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (Norms based on age 17–21)
| CLUSTER/Test | W | AE | RPI | Proficiency | PR (68% Band) |
| READING | 534 | 24 | 94/90 | average | 63 (53-72) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 553 | >30 | 99/90 | advanced | 84 (75-91) |
| Passage Comprehension | 515 | 14-0 | 76/90 | limited to avg | 30 (20-41) |
| BROAD READING | 539 | 23 | 94/90 | average | 60 (51-68) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 553 | >30 | 99/90 | advanced | 84 (75-91) |
| Passage Comprehension | 515 | 14-0 | 76/90 | limited to avg | 30 (20-41) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 550 | 20 | 93/90 | average | 54 (42-66) |
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 539 | >30 | 98/90 | advanced | 86 (77-92) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 553 | >30 | 99/90 | advanced | 84 (75-91) |
| Word Attack | 525 | >30 | 97/90 | avg to advanced | 83 (66-93) |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 508 | 13-5 | 81/90 | limited to avg | 28 (20-37) |
| Passage Comprehension | 515 | 14-0 | 76/90 | limited to avg | 30 (20-41) |
| Reading Recall | 502 | 12-0 | 85/90 | average | 33 (24-43) |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 517 | 18-1 | 90/90 | average | 51 (42-59) |
| Passage Comprehension | 515 | 14-0 | 76/90 | limited to avg | 30 (20-41) |
| Reading Recall | 502 | 12-0 | 85/90 | average | 33 (24-43) |
| Reading Vocabulary | 534 | >30 | 98/90 | advanced | 86 (76-93) |
| READING FLUENCY | 542 | >30 | 95/90 | avg to advanced | 64 (53-74) |
| Oral Reading | 534 | >30 | 97/90 | avg to advanced | 77 (63-88) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 550 | 20 | 93/90 | average | 54 (42-66) |
| READING RATE | 542 | 17-8 | 90/90 | average | 49 (39-60) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 550 | 20 | 93/90 | average | 54 (42-66) |
| Word Reading Fluency | 533 | 15-9 | 85/90 | average | 45 (31-59) |
| MATHEMATICS | 507 | 11-4 | 47/90 | limited | 12 (9-17) |
| Applied Problems | 514 | 13-7 | 77/90 | limited to avg | 31 (21-42) |
| Calculation | 499 | 10-5 | 20/90 | very limited | 6 (4-10) |
| BROAD MATHEMATICS | 512 | 11-9 | 51/90 | limited | 14 (10-19) |
| Applied Problems | 514 | 13-7 | 77/90 | limited to avg | 31 (21-42) |
| Calculation | 499 | 10-5 | 20/90 | very limited | 6 (4-10) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 523 | 12-7 | 59/90 | limited | 23 (15-33) |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 511 | 11-5 | 37/90 | limited | 12 (8-16) |
| Calculation | 499 | 10-5 | 20/90 | very limited | 6 (4-10) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 523 | 12-7 | 59/90 | limited | 23 (15-33) |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 509 | 12-1 | 69/90 | limited to avg | 23 (16-30) |
| Applied Problems | 514 | 13-7 | 77/90 | limited to avg | 31 (21-42) |
| Number Matrices | 503 | 11-2 | 59/90 | limited | 20 (14-29) |
| WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 546 | >30 | 99/90 | advanced | 93 (86-97) |
| Spelling | 527 | 15-3 | 83/90 | average | 39 (30-49) |
| Writing Samples | 565 | >30 | 100/90 | very advanced | >99 (>99->99) |
| BROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 537 | >30 | 98/90 | advanced | 91 (84-96) |
| Spelling | 527 | 15-3 | 83/90 | average | 39 (30-49) |
| Writing Samples | 565 | >30 | 100/90 | very advanced | >99 (>99->99) |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 520 | >30 | 94/90 | average | 68 (54-80) |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 521 | 14-10 | 82/90 | limited to avg | 35 (28-43) |
| Spelling | 527 | 15-3 | 83/90 | average | 39 (30-49) |
| Editing | 516 | 14-5 | 79/90 | limited to avg | 33 (23-45) |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 542 | >30 | 99/90 | advanced | >99 (97->99) |
| Writing Samples | 565 | >30 | 100/90 | very advanced | >99 (>99->99) |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 520 | >30 | 94/90 | average | 68 (54-80) |
| ACADEMIC SKILLS | 526 | 14-10 | 82/90 | average | 38 (31-44) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 553 | >30 | 99/90 | advanced | 84 (75-91) |
| Spelling | 527 | 15-3 | 83/90 | average | 39 (30-49) |
| Calculation | 499 | 10-5 | 20/90 | very limited | 6 (4-10) |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS | 531 | >30 | 96/90 | avg to advanced | 75 (65-84) |
| Applied Problems | 514 | 13-7 | 77/90 | limited to avg | 31 (21-42) |
| Passage Comprehension | 515 | 14-0 | 76/90 | limited to avg | 30 (20-41) |
| Writing Samples | 565 | >30 | 100/90 | very advanced | >99 (>99->99) |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY | 531 | 15-10 | 87/90 | average | 44 (36-53) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 550 | 20 | 93/90 | average | 54 (42-66) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 523 | 12-7 | 59/90 | limited | 23 (15-33) |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 520 | >30 | 94/90 | average | 68 (54-80) |
| ACADEMIC KNOWLEDGE | 519 | 15-1 | 85/90 | average | 38 (30-47) |
| Science | 517 | 17-1 | 89/90 | average | 48 (35-62) |
| Social Studies | 521 | 14-3 | 79/90 | limited to avg | 32 (21-45) |
| Humanities | 518 | 14-9 | 84/90 | average | 38 (26-52) |
| PHONEME-GRAPHEME KNOWLEDGE | 522 | >29 | 97/90 | avg to advanced | 83 (72-91) |
| Word Attack | 525 | >30 | 97/90 | avg to advanced | 83 (66-93) |
| Spelling of Sounds | 519 | >22 | 97/90 | avg to advanced | 80 (65-91) |
| BRIEF ACHIEVEMENT | 531 | 20 | 92/90 | average | 55 (47-62) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 553 | >30 | 99/90 | advanced | 84 (75-91) |
| Applied Problems | 514 | 13-7 | 77/90 | limited to avg | 31 (21-42) |
| Spelling | 527 | 15-3 | 83/90 | average | 39 (30-49) |
| BROAD ACHIEVEMENT | 530 | 18-3 | 90/90 | average | 51 (45-57) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 553 | >30 | 99/90 | advanced | 84 (75-91) |
| Applied Problems | 514 | 13-7 | 77/90 | limited to avg | 31 (21-42) |
| Spelling | 527 | 15-3 | 83/90 | average | 39 (30-49) |
| Passage Comprehension | 515 | 14-0 | 76/90 | limited to avg | 30 (20-41) |
| Calculation | 499 | 10-5 | 20/90 | very limited | 6 (4-10) |
| Writing Samples | 565 | >30 | 100/90 | very advanced | >99 (>99->99) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 550 | 20 | 93/90 | average | 54 (42-66) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 523 | 12-7 | 59/90 | limited | 23 (15-33) |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 520 | >30 | 94/90 | average | 68 (54-80) |
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Interpretation | ||||
| VARIATIONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Intra-Oral Language (Extended) Variations | ||||||
| ORAL EXPRESSION | 127 | 111 | 16 | 91 | +1.37 | — |
| LISTENING COMP | 113 | 115 | −2 | 43 | −0.17 | — |
| PHONETIC CODING | 127 | 107 | 20 | 92 | +1.43 | — |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 104 | 111 | −7 | 31 | −0.50 | — |
| Picture Vocabulary^ | 124 | 110 | 14 | 87 | +1.10 | — |
| Oral Comprehension^ | 113 | 114 | −1 | 47 | −0.08 | — |
| Segmentation^ | 118 | 105 | 13 | 82 | +0.93 | — |
| Rapid Picture Naming^ | 108 | 109 | −1 | 47 | −0.08 | — |
| Sentence Repetition | 123 | 109 | 14 | 86 | +1.08 | — |
| Understanding Directions | 108 | 112 | −4 | 39 | −0.29 | — |
| Sound Blending | 131 | 108 | 23 | 94 | +1.58 | Strength |
| Retrieval Fluency | 95 | 111 | −16 | 12 | −1.18 | — |
| ^Core test for calculation of intra-oral language variations. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Interpretation | ||||
| VARIATIONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Intra-Achievement (Extended) Variations | ||||||
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 116 | 101 | 15 | 95 | +1.61 | Strength |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 91 | 105 | −14 | 8 | −1.43 | — |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 100 | 106 | −6 | 27 | −0.63 | — |
| READING FLUENCY | 106 | 101 | 5 | 68 | +0.46 | — |
| READING RATE | 100 | 104 | −4 | 37 | −0.34 | — |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 82 | 107 | −25 | 1 | −2.38 | Weakness |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 89 | 105 | −16 | 6 | −1.54 | Weakness |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 94 | 105 | −11 | 14 | −1.08 | — |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 137 | 95 | 42 | >99.9 | +3.96 | Strength |
| Letter-Word Identification^ | 115 | 101 | 14 | 93 | +1.49 | — |
| Applied Problems^ | 92 | 105 | −13 | 12 | −1.19 | — |
| Spelling^ | 96 | 104 | −8 | 21 | −0.81 | — |
| Passage Comprehension^ | 92 | 105 | −13 | 8 | −1.41 | — |
| Calculation^ | 77 | 107 | −30 | <0.1 | −3.10 | Weakness |
| Writing Samples^ | 147 | 96 | 51 | >99.9 | +4.12 | Strength |
| Word Attack | 114 | 101 | 13 | 87 | +1.14 | — |
| Oral Reading | 111 | 101 | 10 | 83 | +0.94 | — |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 101 | 104 | −3 | 41 | −0.22 | — |
| Math Facts Fluency | 89 | 106 | −17 | 9 | −1.37 | — |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 107 | 96 | 11 | 81 | +0.90 | — |
| Reading Recall | 93 | 104 | −11 | 21 | −0.81 | — |
| Number Matrices | 88 | 104 | −16 | 9 | −1.33 | — |
| Editing | 94 | 104 | −10 | 15 | −1.02 | — |
| Word Reading Fluency | 98 | 103 | −5 | 35 | −0.39 | — |
| Spelling of Sounds | 113 | 104 | 9 | 79 | +0.81 | — |
| Reading Vocabulary | 116 | 105 | 11 | 86 | +1.09 | — |
| ^Core test for calculation of intra-achievement variations. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Interpretation | ||||
| VARIATIONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Academic Skills/Academic Fluency/Academic Applications (Extended) Variations | ||||||
| ACADEMIC SKILLS^ | 95 | 104 | −9 | 13 | −1.14 | — |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY^ | 98 | 102 | −4 | 35 | −0.39 | — |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS^ | 110 | 97 | 13 | 92 | +1.41 | — |
| READING RATE | 100 | 102 | −2 | 44 | −0.15 | — |
| ^Core cluster for calculation of academic skills/fluency/applications variations. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Significant at | ||||
| COMPARISONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Oral Language/Achievement Comparisons* | ||||||
| READING | 105 | 113 | −8 | 26 | −0.65 | No |
| BROAD READING | 104 | 112 | −8 | 26 | −0.65 | No |
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 116 | 111 | 5 | 65 | +0.38 | No |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 91 | 111 | −20 | 6 | −1.55 | Yes (−) |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 100 | 112 | −12 | 15 | −1.06 | No |
| READING FLUENCY | 106 | 109 | −3 | 40 | −0.26 | No |
| READING RATE | 100 | 109 | −9 | 27 | −0.62 | No |
| MATHEMATICS | 83 | 110 | −27 | 2 | −2.15 | Yes (−) |
| BROAD MATHEMATICS | 84 | 110 | −26 | 2 | −1.96 | Yes (−) |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 82 | 108 | −26 | 3 | −1.92 | Yes (−) |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 89 | 110 | −21 | 3 | −1.87 | Yes (−) |
| WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 122 | 111 | 11 | 82 | +0.91 | No |
| BROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 120 | 110 | 10 | 78 | +0.78 | No |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 94 | 111 | −17 | 8 | −1.40 | No |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 137 | 108 | 29 | 98 | +2.05 | Yes (+) |
| ACADEMIC SKILLS | 95 | 111 | −16 | 10 | −1.28 | No |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY | 98 | 108 | −10 | 22 | −0.78 | No |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS | 110 | 112 | −2 | 43 | −0.17 | No |
| ACADEMIC KNOWLEDGE | 96 | 115 | −19 | 2 | −2.05 | Yes (−) |
| PHONEME-GRAPHEME KNOWLEDGE | 114 | 109 | 5 | 65 | +0.40 | No |
| PHONETIC CODING | 127 | 108 | 19 | 92 | +1.41 | No |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 104 | 110 | −6 | 33 | −0.43 | No |
| *This procedure compares the WJ IV Broad Oral Language cluster score to selected achievement and cognitive-linguistic clusters. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Significant at | ||||
| COMPARISONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Academic Knowledge/Achievement Comparisons* | ||||||
| BRIEF ACHIEVEMENT | 102 | 97 | 5 | 67 | +0.45 | No |
| BROAD ACHIEVEMENT | 100 | 97 | 3 | 63 | +0.33 | No |
| READING | 105 | 97 | 8 | 74 | +0.66 | No |
| BROAD READING | 104 | 97 | 7 | 70 | +0.54 | No |
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 116 | 97 | 19 | 94 | +1.55 | Yes (+) |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 91 | 97 | −6 | 32 | −0.46 | No |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 100 | 97 | 3 | 62 | +0.30 | No |
| READING FLUENCY | 106 | 97 | 9 | 73 | +0.62 | No |
| READING RATE | 100 | 98 | 2 | 56 | +0.15 | No |
| MATHEMATICS | 83 | 97 | −14 | 10 | −1.26 | No |
| BROAD MATHEMATICS | 84 | 97 | −13 | 14 | −1.10 | No |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 82 | 98 | −16 | 11 | −1.21 | No |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 89 | 97 | −8 | 23 | −0.73 | No |
| WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 122 | 97 | 25 | 98 | +2.00 | Yes (+) |
| BROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 120 | 97 | 23 | 96 | +1.80 | Yes (+) |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 94 | 97 | −3 | 42 | −0.21 | No |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 137 | 97 | 40 | 99.8 | +2.92 | Yes (+) |
| ACADEMIC SKILLS | 95 | 97 | −2 | 45 | −0.12 | No |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY | 98 | 97 | 1 | 52 | +0.04 | No |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS | 110 | 97 | 13 | 88 | +1.18 | No |
| PHONETIC CODING | 127 | 98 | 29 | 98 | +2.16 | Yes (+) |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 104 | 98 | 6 | 67 | +0.43 | No |
| *This procedure compares the WJ IV Academic Knowledge cluster score to selected achievement and cognitive-linguistic clusters. | ||||||
Educational Evaluation
Name: Veronica Jackson
Birth Date: 4/16/1992
Age: 22 Years, 3 Months
Grade: 16.9
School: University of Hampshire
Evaluation Dates: 7/27, 7/28/2014
Reason for Referral
Veronica, a recent graduate from the University of Hampshire with a BS in biomedical engineering, referred herself for an evaluation because of difficulties with reading comprehension, reading rate, time management, test taking, and studying. Although she reports that she does very well on projects, she has trouble absorbing information when it is delivered in a lecture format, as well as on exams that require a great deal of memorization or a considerable amount of reading. Veronica wanted to gain a deeper understanding of her strengths and weaknesses, and explore whether she has a learning disability and if she will need specific accommodations in graduate school to help her compensate for her reading difficulties.
Background Information
Veronica is currently living at her parents' home in Vermont with a roommate. For the next few years, both of her parents are residing in Sweden. Her father is an electrical engineer, and her mother is a research technician who does database/computer work from home. Veronica's younger brother Manuel, age 17, who is also in Sweden, has been diagnosed with dyslexia and ADHD.
Veronica attended elementary and middle school at Fountain Hills Academy, a private school. In first through third grade, Veronica was in the school's Gifted and Talented Education Program (GATE). In third grade, Veronica told her parents that she could not keep up with the other kids and it was too hard for her. Her parents then requested that she not attend the program anymore. From third to sixth grade, Veronica received private tutoring to help her build her reading skills. She completed all 12 steps of the Wilson Reading System with a Level II certified Wilson instructor.
Veronica attended Redfields High School, a private charter school in Sudbury, Vermont, and achieved high grades in all of her classes. Although she has never been evaluated for learning disabilities, she has received additional support at school throughout her educational career. Veronica noted that she has always had problems with her reading speed, and has always needed more time in her English and History classes. She felt that she didn't do well on the SATs because she did not have enough time to complete all of the items. Throughout her school years, she has always taken advantage of the extra help provided by teachers during their office hours or after school, and her teachers have always granted her additional time on tests when needed. She noted that she comprehends lectures much better when she has a copy of the notes or a study guide to take notes in as she listens.
As a student at the University of Hampshire, Veronica completed 13 credit hours a semester. In the fall of 2013, she had difficulty with Economics 214, a course that depended heavily on lecture notes and the textbook. She then applied for tutoring support and help with time management from the school's Alternative Learning Techniques (ALT) Center. In the spring of 2013, she started receiving tutorial help at the ALT Center and was then able to pass the class. Veronica graduated this summer, and has been accepted for graduate school at Gateway State to earn a master's degree in sustainability science, a program that focuses on ways to create a cleaner earth and a healthier environment. Presently, Veronica's main interests lie in mathematics, science, and art, particularly oil painting. She is a hard-working student who is willing to put in a great deal of effort to accomplish her goals. She is excited about beginning a graduate degree, but concerned that she will struggle with the requirements.
Tests Administered
- Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Cognitive Abilities (WJ IV COG)*
- Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language (WJ IV OL)
- Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (WJ IV ACH) Standard and Extended (scores are attached at the end of this report)
- Test of Word Reading Efficiency-2 (TOWRE-2)
The WJ IV tests were scored by both age (22-3) and grade norms (17.0). Grade norms were used to explore how her abilities would compare to students who are beginning their first year of graduate school. In almost every case, Veronica's relative standing (i.e., percentile rank) was lower when compared to grade peers than when compared to age peers. The age norm group includes individuals who did not attend college, whereas the grade norm group includes those who completed college and are in the first year of graduate school. It is this reference group that Veronica will be competing with when she attends graduate school.
Note. Veronica was also administered the WJ IV COG as part of a more complete evaluation. Because the focus of this book is on the use and interpretation of the WJ IV OL and WJ IV ACH, those results are not included here, although they were included and discussed in the final report. As an overview of the WJ IV COG results, many of her scores fell within the average range, but as with the WJ IV OL and WJ IVACH, a significant pattern of strengths and weaknesses was noted across the different types of abilities. Veronica excelled on tasks that required visual-spatial thinking, such as those involved in perceiving and recalling visual details and designs. She was able to quickly discern spatial relationships and visual patterns. Her score on the Visual Processing cluster exceeded 93% of her age peers. She also excelled on measures of reasoning ability. On the Fluid Reasoning cluster, her performance exceeded 83% of her age peers, and 77% of her grade peers. These findings suggest that Veronica is well suited for a career that involves visual-spatial thinking and reasoning abilities. In contrast, as with the WJ IV OL and the WJ IV ACH, Veronica had several significant weaknesses on timed measures. Her main area of weakness was perceptual speed, the ability to quickly complete symbolic tasks of a clerical nature. On this cluster, her performance exceeded only 27% of her age peers and 18% of her grade peers. These results were integrated to support the rationale for her need for extended time on tests.
Test Behavior
Veronica was extremely cooperative during two 1.5-hour long testing sessions. In both sessions, she was attentive and maintained interest and effort throughout.
Oral Language
Veronica had both strengths and weaknesses on measures of oral language. For example, on a measure of vocabulary knowledge, Picture Vocabulary, her performance exceeded 98% of her age peers and 97% of her grade peers; on a listening comprehension measure, Oral Comprehension, her performance exceeded 83% of her age peers and 74% of her grade peers. Her performance was average on tests involving more memory (e.g., Understanding Directions and Sentence Repetition) as well as on the Segmentation test, in which she was asked to break words into sounds. Her performance on the Sound Blending test, the ability to push speech sounds together to form words, exceeded only 20% of her age peers, and 16% of her grade peers. This weakness in blending is somewhat unusual in light of the intensive reading tutoring she received.
Her weakest area was in speed of lexical access, which measures how quickly she could retrieve words. On the Rapid Picture Naming test, which required the quick naming of pictures of common nouns, her performance exceeded only 9% of age peers and only 6% of grade peers. Her performance on Retrieval Fluency, which required the rapid recall of words in a given category (such as types of transportation), exceeded 21% of age peers and 16% of grade peers. Thus, her performance on speeded oral language tasks was far below her levels of vocabulary knowledge, as were her listening abilities, which is a common finding among individuals with dyslexia.
Achievement
On the Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (WJ IV ACH), Veronica obtained scores in the average to high average range on most of the reading and written language tests with the exception of timed measures of reading and math computation. On untimed mathematical measures (Calculation and Applied Problems), Veronica worked carefully, but required a significant amount of time to complete computations and solve word problems.
Reading
On the Letter-Word Identification test, Veronica's ability to read real words exceeded 90% of age and grade peers; on the Word Attack test, a measure of her ability to use phonic skills to read nonsense words aloud, Veronica exceeded 52% of her age peers and 39% of her grade peers. On the Passage Comprehension test, Veronica's performance exceeded 77% of her age peers and 71% of her grade peers. Veronica's lowest scores were on the timed reading tests. On the Sentence Reading Fluency test that requires the reading of simple sentences quickly and determining if the sentence is true or false (e.g., A cat has nine legs: yes or no), her performance exceeded only 15% of her age and grade peers. On the timed Word Reading Fluency test, which required reading rows of four words and marking the two that go together (e.g., apple can tree orange), her performance exceeded only 8% of her age peers and 5% of her grade peers.
Towre-2
On the Test of Word Reading Efficiency-2 (TOWRE-2), Veronica's score was in the average range for Sight Word Efficiency, a timed measure of real-word reading (her performance exceeded 47% of her peers), but in the below average range for Phonemic Decoding Efficiency, a timed measure that requires reading nonsense words aloud. Forms A and B were given to substantiate the results. On these measures, her performance exceeded only 19% and 14% of her age peers. These findings suggest that Veronica has difficulty applying the rules of phonics to pronounce unfamiliar words quickly. This difficulty with word pronunciation then affects her reading speed, as well as her comprehension.
TOWRE-2: Sight Word Efficiency
| Age Equivalent | Grade Equivalent | Percentile Rank | Standard Score | Descriptive Rating |
| 17-0 | 11.2 | 47 | 99 | Average |
TOWRE-2: Phonemic Decoding Efficiency, Forms A and B
| Age Equivalent | Grade Equivalent | Percentile Rank | Standard Score | Descriptive Rating |
| Form A: 10-3 Form B: 9-6 |
4.2 3.8 |
19 14 |
87 84 |
Below average Below average |
Written Language
Overall, Veronica's written language scores fell in the average to high average range. Her performance on the Writing Samples test, which required writing responses to various prompts, exceeded 88% of her age peers and 84% of her grade peers. Her spelling skills were comparable to age and grade peers; her score on the Spelling test exceeded 51% of her age peers and 40% of her grade peers. A few of her misspellings were unusual for an adult, as the sounds in the word were out of order, such as spelling the word garden as graden. Although a longer sample, such as an essay, was not analyzed, Veronica commented that she has some difficulties with spelling, grammar, and organization when she writes longer papers.
Mathematics
Veronica's math calculation skills were in the average range, exceeding 43% of her age peers and 30% of her grade peers. A significant difference existed, however, between her scores on the Calculation test (a measure of computational skills) and her Math Facts Fluency test (a timed measure of simple addition, subtraction, and multiplication facts). On the Calculation test, although she worked very slowly, Veronica was able to complete more difficult problems involving fractions, decimals, negative numbers, and algebraic equations. Her performance exceeded 70% of her age peers and 60% of her grade peers. On the WJ IV Applied Problems test (untimed), Veronica's performance exceeded 68% of her age peers and 58% of her grade peers, and on the Number Matrices test, her score exceeded 67% of her age peers and 61% of her grade peers. In contrast, on the Math Facts Fluency test, her score exceeded only 20% of her age peers and 12% of her grade peers. As with oral language and reading, her rate of performance was also slower on a timed math test. Although Veronica showed good conceptual understanding of mathematics, she worked extremely slowly when solving all types of mathematical problems.
Variations and Comparisons
The WJ IV OL and WJ IV ACH provide several variation procedures that evaluate a student's strengths and weaknesses among abilities and two comparison procedures in which two different abilities (oral language and academic knowledge) can be used to predict present achievement levels.
Variations
When Veronica's scores among the oral language measures were compared in the Intra-Oral Language-Extended Variation procedure, she had significant weaknesses on Rapid Picture Naming and Retrieval Fluency, both of which are timed measures. She had a significant strength in vocabulary. In fact, when her Picture Vocabulary test was compared to her predicted standard score of 100, only four out of 1,000 agemates with the same predicted score would obtain an actual standard score of 132 or higher.
When Veronica's achievement areas were compared in the Intra-Achievement-Extended Variation procedure, she had significant weaknesses on three timed tests (Sentence Reading Fluency, Math Facts Fluency, and Word Reading Fluency) and a significant strength on Letter-Word Identification.
When Veronica's Academic Skills, Academic Fluency, Academic Knowledge, and Reading Rate clusters were compared, she had a significant strength in Academic Skills and weaknesses in both Academic Fluency and Reading Rate (both containing timed measures). In fact, only one out of 100 agemates with a predicted standard score of 108 would obtain an actual standard score of 80 or lower on the Reading Rate cluster. Thus, her slow reading rate is quite unusual in light of her other abilities (e.g., superior vocabulary knowledge) but consistent with her low performance on timed measures.
Comparisons
When Veronica's Broad Oral Language cluster standard score (SS = 116) was compared to her obtained achievement scores, her oral language performance was significantly higher than her scores on the Reading Rate and Speed of Lexical Access clusters. When Veronica's Academic Knowledge score (SS = 126) was compared to her achievement scores, her knowledge was significantly higher than her scores on the Reading Rate, Academic Fluency, and Speed of Lexical Access clusters, all of which have timed measures.
Conclusions
Veronica is a hardworking, capable young woman who has a compromised reading rate despite 3 years of intensive reading tutoring. Although she has never been diagnosed with a specific learning disability, she exhibits a specific pattern of strengths and weaknesses that suggests the presence of a specific learning disability, primarily a rate disability. In regard to her strengths, her oral language and mathematical abilities (with the exception of speed) were comparable to or exceeded her age and grade peers. In contrast, her performances on all timed oral language, reading, and math measures were significant weaknesses. As a result of intensive tutoring, her word reading ability is exceptionally accurate, but her compromised reading rate has contributed to difficulties with reading comprehension. Veronica is very personable and responsible, and she wants to complete graduate school. With the proper support and accommodations, she should be able to succeed in her coursework at Gateway State.
DSM-5 Diagnosis
- 315.00 Impairment in reading rate or fluency
- Additional difficulties: fluent calculation
Recommendations
- Veronica should apply to receive supplemental tutorial support from the disability service center at Gateway State.
- Whenever possible, provide Veronica with visual supports, such as a copy of the PowerPoint lectures or a visual summary of class notes. In tutoring situations, drawings and concrete examples can help Veronica understand more complex concepts.
- Because of her slow reading rate in contrast to her more advanced oral language and mathematical abilities, Veronica will need extended time on all examinations, including courses involving mathematics; in most instances, double time should be a sufficient time extension. Although she has the conceptual knowledge, she works very slowly when solving mathematical problems. On examinations, Veronica will only be able to demonstrate her knowledge adequately when time is not a significant factor; thus, the emphasis should be placed on what Veronica knows and can do, rather than how fast she can take a test.
- Veronica should continue to work on her study skills, using available YouTube videos and other resources to support her learning.
- Veronica should provide a copy of this evaluation report to the Disability Resource Center at Gateway State so that she is able to receive extended time on all of her exams and support from the disability services office.
Woodcock-Johnson IV Score Report
Name: Jackson, Veronica
Date of Birth: 04/16/1992
Age: 22 years, 3 months
Sex: Female
Dates of Testing:
07/27/2014 (OL)
07/28/2014 (ACH)
TESTS ADMINISTERED
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement Form A
Woodcock-Johnson Online Scoring and Reporting Program, Release 1.0
TABLE OF SCORES
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language (Norms based on age 22–23)
| CLUSTER/Test | W | AE | RPI | SS (68% Band) | PR (68% Band) |
| ORAL LANGUAGE | 542 | >30 | 99/90 | 126 (120-131) | 96 (91-98) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 552 | >30 | 100/90 | 132 (125-138) | 98 (95->99) |
| Oral Comprehension | 531 | >30 | 98/90 | 114 (107-122) | 83 (68-93) |
| BROAD ORAL LANGUAGE | 529 | >30 | 97/90 | 116 (112-121) | 86 (78-92) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 552 | >30 | 100/90 | 132 (125-138) | 98 (95->99) |
| Oral Comprehension | 531 | >30 | 98/90 | 114 (107-122) | 83 (68-93) |
| Understanding Directions | 505 | 12-1 | 79/90 | 91 (85-96) | 27 (16-40) |
| ORAL EXPRESSION | 542 | >30 | 98/90 | 116 (110-121) | 85 (75-92) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 552 | >30 | 100/90 | 132 (125-138) | 98 (95->99) |
| Sentence Repetition | 531 | >30 | 92/90 | 101 (95-107) | 54 (38-69) |
| LISTENING COMP | 518 | >30 | 92/90 | 104 (98-110) | 60 (45-74) |
| Oral Comprehension | 531 | >30 | 98/90 | 114 (107-122) | 83 (68-93) |
| Understanding Directions | 505 | 12-1 | 79/90 | 91 (85-96) | 27 (16-40) |
| PHONETIC CODING | 510 | 16-10 | 88/90 | 98 (94-102) | 45 (34-56) |
| Segmentation | 518 | >30 | 96/90 | 107 (103-111) | 68 (57-78) |
| Sound Blending | 502 | 10-8 | 68/90 | 87 (82-93) | 20 (11-32) |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 503 | 10-3 | 58/90 | 80 (75-84) | 9 (5-15) |
| Rapid Picture Naming | 499 | 9-4 | 32/90 | 80 (75-85) | 9 (5-16) |
| Retrieval Fluency | 506 | 12-4 | 80/90 | 88 (82-94) | 21 (11-35) |
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (Norms based on age 22–23)
| CLUSTER/Test | W | AE | RPI | SS (68% Band) | PR (68% Band) |
| READING | 554 | >30 | 99/90 | 119 (114-124) | 90 (82-95 |
| BROAD READING | 543 | >30 | 94/90 | 103 (99-107) | 59 (48-69) |
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 541 | >30 | 98/90 | 114 (109-120) | 83 (73-91) |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 522 | >30 | 94/90 | 106 (102-110) | 65 (54-75) |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 529 | >30 | 96/90 | 112 (109-115) | 79 (71-85) |
| READING FLUENCY | 530 | 15-10 | 78/90 | 94 (90-99) | 35 (25-46) |
| READING RATE | 508 | 11-3 | 13/90 | 80 (75-85) | 9 (5-15) |
| MATHEMATICS | 539 | >23 | 97/90 | 108 (105-111) | 70 (63-77) |
| Applied Problems | 534 | >30 | 96/90 | 107 (103-111) | 68 (57-78) |
| Calculation | 544 | >21 | 97/90 | 108 (104-112) | 70 (61-78) |
| BROAD MATHEMATICS | 534 | >30 | 91/90 | 101 (98-103) | 52 (44-59) |
| Applied Problems | 534 | >30 | 96/90 | 107 (103-111) | 68 (57-78) |
| Calculation | 544 | >21 | 97/90 | 108 (104-112) | 70 (61-78) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 523 | 12-6 | 53/90 | 88 (83-92) | 20 (13-30) |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 534 | 15-7 | 86/90 | 97 (94-101) | 43 (35-52) |
| Calculation | 544 | >21 | 97/90 | 108 (104-112) | 70 (61-78) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 523 | 12-6 | 53/90 | 88 (83-92) | 20 (13-30) |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 531 | >27 | 96/90 | 107 (104-111) | 69 (60-77) |
| Applied Problems | 534 | >30 | 96/90 | 107 (103-111) | 68 (57-78) |
| Number Matrices | 528 | >24 | 95/90 | 107 (101-112) | 67 (53-79) |
| WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 535 | >30 | 96/90 | 109 (105-113) | 73 (64-81) |
| BROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 530 | >30 | 95/90 | 109 (105-113) | 73 (64-80) |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 537 | >30 | 95/90 | 106 (102-109) | 65 (56-73) |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 528 | >30 | 97/90 | 115 (110-120) | 84 (75-91) |
| ACADEMIC SKILLS | 549 | >30 | 98/90 | 112 (108-115) | 78 (71-84) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 567 | >30 | 100/90 | 123 (115-130) | 93 (84-98) |
| Spelling | 535 | 23 | 90/90 | 100 (96-104) | 51 (40-61) |
| Calculation | 544 | >21 | 97/90 | 108 (104-112) | 70 (61-78) |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS | 537 | >30 | 98/90 | 113 (110-117) | 81 (75-87) |
| Applied Problems | 534 | >30 | 96/90 | 107 (103-111) | 68 (57-78) |
| Passage Comprehension | 542 | >30 | 97/90 | 111 (106-117) | 77 (66-87) |
| Writing Samples | 535 | >30 | 98/90 | 118 (112-123) | 88 (78-94) |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY | 521 | 13-0 | 63/90 | 88 (85-92) | 22 (16-29) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 520 | 12-0 | 23/90 | 85 (80-90) | 15 (9-25) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 523 | 12-6 | 53/90 | 88 (83-92) | 20 (13-30) |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 520 | >30 | 93/90 | 106 (100-111) | 65 (50-77) |
| ACADEMIC KNOWLEDGE | 552 | >30 | 99/90 | 126 (122-129) | 96 (93-97) |
| Science | 544 | >30 | 99/90 | 120 (115-125) | 91 (84-95) |
| Social Studies | 560 | >30 | 100/90 | 124 (119-130) | 95 (90-98) |
| Humanities | 553 | >30 | 99/90 | 125 (119-131) | 95 (89-98) |
| PHONEME-GRAPHEME KNOWLEDGE | 514 | >29 | 91/90 | 102 (97-106) | 55 (42-66) |
| Word Attack | 516 | 24 | 91/90 | 101 (95-107) | 52 (36-68) |
| Spelling of Sounds | 512 | >22 | 92/90 | 102 (97-108) | 56 (41-71) |
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Interpretation | ||||
| VARIATIONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Intra-Oral Language (Extended) Variations | ||||||
| ORAL EXPRESSION | 116 | 100 | 16 | 91 | +1.31 | — |
| LISTENING COMP | 104 | 106 | −2 | 43 | −0.18 | — |
| PHONETIC CODING | 98 | 104 | −6 | 32 | −0.47 | — |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 80 | 111 | −31 | 1 | −2.27 | Weakness |
| Picture Vocabulary^ | 132 | 100 | 32 | 99.6 | +2.64 | Strength |
| Oral Comprehension^ | 114 | 106 | 8 | 77 | +0.75 | — |
| Segmentation^ | 107 | 103 | 4 | 62 | +0.31 | — |
| Rapid Picture Naming^ | 80 | 109 | −29 | 2 | −2.10 | Weakness |
| Sentence Repetition | 101 | 100 | 1 | 53 | +0.08 | — |
| Understanding Directions | 91 | 104 | −13 | 14 | −1.08 | — |
| Sound Blending | 87 | 104 | −17 | 12 | −1.18 | — |
| Retrieval Fluency | 88 | 110 | −22 | 5 | −1.64 | Weakness |
| ^Core test for calculation of intra-oral language variations. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Interpretation | ||||
| VARIATIONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Intra-Achievement (Extended) Variations | ||||||
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 114 | 109 | 5 | 75 | +0.67 | — |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 106 | 110 | −4 | 33 | −0.44 | — |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 112 | 111 | 1 | 56 | +0.14 | — |
| READING FLUENCY | 94 | 107 | −13 | 10 | −1.26 | — |
| READING RATE | 80 | 108 | −28 | 1 | −2.25 | Weakness |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 97 | 110 | −13 | 11 | −1.25 | — |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 107 | 110 | −3 | 40 | −0.26 | — |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 106 | 113 | −7 | 22 | −0.77 | — |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 115 | 109 | 6 | 74 | +0.64 | — |
| Letter-Word Identification^ | 123 | 109 | 14 | 94 | +1.56 | Strength |
| Applied Problems^ | 107 | 111 | −4 | 35 | −0.37 | — |
| Spelling^ | 100 | 112 | −12 | 13 | −1.13 | — |
| Passage Comprehension^ | 111 | 110 | 1 | 56 | +0.14 | — |
| Calculation^ | 108 | 110 | −2 | 41 | −0.23 | — |
| Writing Samples^ | 118 | 107 | 11 | 80 | +0.85 | — |
| Word Attack | 101 | 107 | −6 | 27 | −0.60 | — |
| Oral Reading | 112 | 107 | 5 | 67 | +0.45 | — |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 85 | 108 | −23 | 2 | −1.98 | Weakness |
| Math Facts Fluency | 88 | 108 | −20 | 5 | −1.69 | Weakness |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 106 | 107 | −1 | 46 | −0.10 | — |
| Reading Recall | 95 | 108 | −13 | 15 | −1.05 | — |
| Number Matrices | 107 | 108 | −1 | 46 | −0.11 | — |
| Editing | 111 | 111 | 0 | 49 | −0.02 | — |
| Word Reading Fluency | 78 | 107 | −29 | 2 | −2.15 | Weakness |
| Spelling of Sounds | 102 | 110 | −8 | 24 | −0.69 | — |
| Reading Vocabulary | 121 | 110 | 11 | 88 | +1.18 | — |
| ^Core test for calculation of intra-achievement variations. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Interpretation | ||||
| VARIATIONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Academic Skills/Academic Fluency/Academic Applications (Extended) Variations | ||||||
| ACADEMIC SKILLS^ | 112 | 101 | 11 | 94 | +1.53 | Strength |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY^ | 88 | 109 | −21 | 2 | −2.00 | Weakness |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS^ | 113 | 100 | 13 | 93 | +1.46 | — |
| READING RATE | 80 | 108 | −28 | 1 | −2.28 | Weakness |
| ^Core cluster for calculation of academic skills/fluency/applications variations. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Significant at | ||||
| COMPARISONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Oral Language/Achievement Comparisons* | ||||||
| READING | 119 | 111 | 8 | 77 | +0.73 | No |
| BROAD READING | 103 | 110 | −7 | 27 | −0.61 | No |
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 114 | 110 | 4 | 65 | +0.40 | No |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 106 | 109 | −3 | 39 | −0.27 | No |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 112 | 111 | 1 | 55 | +0.14 | No |
| READING FLUENCY | 94 | 108 | −14 | 15 | −1.04 | No |
| READING RATE | 80 | 108 | −28 | 2 | −2.01 | Yes (−) |
| MATHEMATICS | 108 | 109 | −1 | 48 | −0.05 | No |
| BROAD MATHEMATICS | 101 | 108 | −7 | 27 | −0.62 | No |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 97 | 107 | −10 | 24 | −0.72 | No |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 107 | 109 | −2 | 44 | −0.14 | No |
| WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 109 | 109 | 0 | 51 | +0.03 | No |
| BROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 109 | 108 | 1 | 52 | +0.04 | No |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 106 | 110 | −4 | 37 | −0.34 | No |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 115 | 107 | 8 | 73 | +0.61 | No |
| ACADEMIC SKILLS | 112 | 109 | 3 | 58 | +0.19 | No |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY | 88 | 107 | −19 | 7 | −1.46 | No |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS | 113 | 110 | 3 | 61 | +0.28 | No |
| ACADEMIC KNOWLEDGE | 126 | 112 | 14 | 93 | +1.45 | No |
| PHONEME-GRAPHEME KNOWLEDGE | 102 | 108 | −6 | 30 | −0.52 | No |
| PHONETIC CODING | 98 | 107 | −9 | 25 | −0.67 | No |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 80 | 109 | −29 | 1 | −2.22 | Yes (−) |
| *This procedure compares the WJ IV Broad Oral Language cluster score to selected achievement and cognitive-linguistic clusters. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Significant at | ||||
| COMPARISONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Academic Knowledge/Achievement Comparisons* | ||||||
| BRIEF ACHIEVEMENT | 112 | 116 | −4 | 36 | −0.37 | No |
| BROAD ACHIEVEMENT | 104 | 114 | −10 | 19 | −0.89 | No |
| READING | 119 | 115 | 4 | 63 | +0.34 | No |
| BROAD READING | 103 | 113 | −10 | 22 | −0.76 | No |
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 114 | 113 | 1 | 54 | +0.09 | No |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 106 | 111 | −5 | 34 | −0.40 | No |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 112 | 114 | −2 | 44 | −0.16 | No |
| READING FLUENCY | 94 | 109 | −15 | 13 | −1.14 | No |
| READING RATE | 80 | 108 | −28 | 3 | −1.96 | Yes (−) |
| MATHEMATICS | 108 | 115 | −7 | 27 | −0.62 | No |
| BROAD MATHEMATICS | 101 | 113 | −12 | 14 | −1.09 | No |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 97 | 112 | −15 | 13 | −1.13 | No |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 107 | 115 | −8 | 25 | −0.68 | No |
| WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 109 | 113 | −4 | 38 | −0.32 | No |
| BROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 109 | 113 | −4 | 38 | −0.30 | No |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 106 | 114 | −8 | 22 | −0.76 | No |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 115 | 110 | 5 | 64 | +0.37 | No |
| ACADEMIC SKILLS | 112 | 115 | −3 | 39 | −0.28 | No |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY | 88 | 108 | −20 | 7 | −1.50 | Yes (−) |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS | 113 | 115 | −2 | 44 | −0.14 | No |
| PHONETIC CODING | 98 | 109 | −11 | 20 | −0.85 | No |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 80 | 110 | −30 | 1 | −2.19 | Yes (−) |
| *This procedure compares the WJ IV Academic Knowledge cluster score to selected achievement and cognitive-linguistic clusters. | ||||||
| WOODCOCK-JOHNSON IV SCORE REPORT | |
| (Scored by grade norms, 17.0) | |
| Name: Jackson, Veronica | Grade: 17.0 |
| Date of Birth: 04/16/1992 | |
| Age: 22 years, 3 months | |
| Sex: Female | |
| Dates of Testing: | |
| 07/27/2014 (OL) | |
| 07/28/2014 (ACH) |
TESTS ADMINISTERED
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement Form A
Woodcock-Johnson Online Scoring and Reporting Program, Release 1.0
TABLE OF SCORES
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language (Norms based on grade 17.0 [4-year university])
| CLUSTER/Test | W | GE | RPI | SS (68% Band) | PR (68% Band) |
| ORAL LANGUAGE | 542 | >18.0 | 98/90 | 124 (118-131) | 95 (88-98) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 552 | >18.0 | 99/90 | 129 (121-136) | 97 (92->99) |
| Oral Comprehension | 531 | >18.0 | 96/90 | 110 (102-117) | 74 (55-88) |
| BROAD ORAL LANGUAGE | 529 | >18.0 | 95/90 | 113 (107-119) | 81 (68-90) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 552 | >18.0 | 99/90 | 129 (121-136) | 97 (92->99) |
| Oral Comprehension | 531 | >18.0 | 96/90 | 110 (102-117) | 74 (55-88) |
| Understanding Directions | 505 | 6.7 | 73/90 | 87 (82-93) | 19 (11-31) |
| ORAL EXPRESSION | 542 | >18.0 | 96/90 | 111 (104-117) | 76 (62-87) |
| Picture Vocabulary | 552 | >18.0 | 99/90 | 129 (121-136) | 97 (92->99) |
| Sentence Repetition | 531 | 13.0 | 86/90 98 | (91-104) | 44 (29-60) |
| LISTENING COMP | 518 | 15.2 | 89/90 | 99 (93-105) | 47 (32-63) |
| Oral Comprehension | 531 | >18.0 | 96/90 | 110 (102-117) | 74 (55-88) |
| Understanding Directions | 505 | 6.7 | 73/90 | 87 (82-93) | 19 (11-31) |
| PHONETIC CODING | 510 | 11.4 | 80/90 | 93 (90-97) | 33 (25-42) |
| Segmentation | 518 | >18.0 | 94/90 | 105 (100-109) | 62 (49-73) |
| Sound Blending | 502 | 5.2 | 57/90 | 85 (80-90) | 16 (9-25) |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 503 | 4.8 | 51/90 | 74 (68-79) | 4 (2-8) |
| Rapid Picture Naming | 499 | 3.9 | 26/90 | 76 (71-82) | 6 (3-11) |
| Retrieval Fluency | 506 | 6.9 | 76/90 | 85 (79-91) | 16 (8-28) |
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement (Norms based on grade 17.0 [4-year university])
| CLUSTER/Test | W | GE | RPI | SS (68% Band) | PR (68% Band) |
| READING | 554 | >18.0 | 98/90 | 118 (111-125) | 88 (76-95) |
| BROAD READING | 543 | 14.7 | 88/90 | 99 (95-102) | 46 (37-56) |
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 541 | >18.0 | 96/90 | 111 (104-117) | 76 (61-88) |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 522 | >18.0 | 90/90 | 101 (95-107) | 52 (37-67) |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 529 | >18.0 | 95/90 | 112 (107-116) | 78 (67-86) |
| READING FLUENCY | 530 | 10.4 | 65/90 | 91 (87-95) | 28 (20-37) |
| READING RATE | 508 | 5.8 | 7/90 | 80 (76-84) | 9 (5-14) |
| MATHEMATICS | 539 | >16.0 | 93/90 | 103 (100-107) | 59 (49-68) |
| Applied Problems | 534 | >18.0 | 93/90 | 103 (98-108) | 58 (45-70) |
| Calculation | 544 | >15.0 | 94/90 | 104 (99-109) | 60 (48-72) |
| BROAD MATHEMATICS | 534 | 13.0 | 82/90 | 94 (91-97) | 35 (27-43) |
| Applied Problems | 534 | >18.0 | 93/90 | 103 (98-108) | 58 (45-70) |
| Calculation | 544 | >15.0 | 94/90 | 104 (99-109) | 60 (48-72) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 523 | 7.1 | 36/90 | 83 (78-87) | 12 (7-20) |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 534 | 10.2 | 76/90 | 92 (88-96) | 30 (22-39) |
| Calculation | 544 | >15.0 | 94/90 | 104 (99-109) | 60 (48-72) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 523 | 7.1 | 36/90 | 83 (78-87) | 12 (7-20) |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 531 | >18.0 | 93/90 | 104 (100-109) | 61 (49-72) |
| Applied Problems | 534 | >18.0 | 93/90 | 103 (98-108) | 58 (45-70) |
| Number Matrices | 528 | >16.0 | 94/90 | 104 (98-110) | 61 (46-74) |
| WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 535 | >18.0 | 94/90 | 106 (101-110) | 65 (53-76) |
| BROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 530 | >18.0 | 93/90 | 106 (102-110) | 66 (54-76) |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 537 | >18.0 | 91/90 | 101 (97-105) | 53 (42-64) |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 528 | >18.0 | 95/90 | 113 (107-119) | 81 (68-90) |
| ACADEMIC SKILLS | 549 | >18.0 | 95/90 | 108 (103-112) | 70 (59-79) |
| Letter-Word Identification | 567 | >18.0 | 99/90 | 120 (111-129) | 90 (76-97) |
| Spelling | 535 | 13.0 | 85/90 | 96 (91-101) | 40 (28-52) |
| Calculation | 544 | >15.0 | 94/90 | 104 (99-109) | 60 (48-72) |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS | 537 | >18.0 | 96/90 | 110 (106-115) | 76 (66-84) |
| Applied Problems | 534 | >18.0 | 93/90 | 103 (98-108) | 58 (45-70) |
| Passage Comprehension | 542 | >18.0 | 95/90 | 108 (101-115) | 71 (53-85) |
| Writing Samples | 535 | >18.0 | 98/90 | 115 (109-121) | 84 (72-92) |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY | 521 | 7.5 | 51/90 | 86 (83-89) | 18 (13-24) |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 520 | 6.6 | 11/90 | 84 (80-88) | 15 (9-22) |
| Math Facts Fluency | 523 | 7.1 | 36/90 | 83 (78-87) | 12 (7-20) |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 520 | >18.0 | 92/90 | 103 (96-110) | 58 (40-74) |
| ACADEMIC KNOWLEDGE | 552 | >18.0 | 99/90 | 123 (119-127) | 93 (89-96) |
| Science | 544 | >18.0 | 98/90 | 116 (111-122) | 86 (77-93) |
| Social Studies | 560 | >18.0 | 99/90 | 120 (114-125) | 91 (83-95) |
| Humanities | 553 | >18.0 | 99/90 | 121 (115-128) | 92 (83-97) |
| PHONEME-GRAPHEME KNOWLEDGE | 514 | 13.0 | 87/90 | 96 (91-102) | 40 (27-54) |
| Word Attack | 516 | 13.0 | 86/90 | 96 (89-102) | 39 (24-56) |
| Spelling of Sounds | 512 | 13.0 | 89/90 | 98 (92-105) | 45 (29-63) |
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Interpretation | ||||
| VARIATIONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Intra-Oral Language (Extended) Variations | ||||||
| ORAL EXPRESSION | 111 | 98 | 13 | 84 | +1.01 | — |
| LISTENING COMP | 99 | 103 | −4 | 38 | −0.31 | — |
| PHONETIC CODING | 93 | 102 | −9 | 24 | −0.69 | — |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 74 | 105 | −31 | 2 | −2.13 | Weakness |
| Picture Vocabulary^ | 129 | 98 | 31 | 99 | +2.27 | Strength |
| Oral Comprehension^ | 110 | 102 | 8 | 71 | +0.56 | — |
| Segmentation^ | 105 | 103 | 2 | 54 | +0.09 | — |
| Rapid Picture Naming^ | 76 | 103 | −27 | 4 | −1.79 | Weakness |
| Sentence Repetition | 98 | 98 | 0 | 49 | −0.03 | — |
| Understanding Directions | 87 | 102 | −15 | 14 | −1.06 | — |
| Sound Blending | 85 | 103 | −18 | 9 | −1.33 | — |
| Retrieval Fluency | 85 | 106 | −21 | 7 | −1.47 | — |
| ^Core test for calculation of intra-oral language variations. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Interpretation | ||||
| VARIATIONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Intra-Achievement (Extended) Variations | ||||||
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 111 | 105 | 6 | 71 | +0.54 | — |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 101 | 107 | −6 | 29 | −0.57 | — |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 112 | 108 | 4 | 63 | +0.34 | — |
| READING FLUENCY | 91 | 105 | −14 | 14 | −1.08 | — |
| READING RATE | 80 | 106 | −26 | 2 | −2.00 | Weakness |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 92 | 107 | −15 | 12 | −1.15 | — |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 104 | 107 | −3 | 40 | −0.25 | — |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 101 | 109 | −8 | 24 | −0.72 | — |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 113 | 105 | 8 | 76 | +0.70 | — |
| Letter-Word Identification^ | 120 | 106 | 14 | 91 | +1.35 | — |
| Applied Problems^ | 103 | 107 | −4 | 35 | −0.38 | — |
| Spelling^ | 96 | 108 | −12 | 15 | −1.02 | — |
| Passage Comprehension^ | 108 | 107 | 1 | 56 | +0.15 | — |
| Calculation^ | 104 | 106 | −2 | 43 | −0.18 | — |
| Writing Samples^ | 115 | 104 | 11 | 80 | +0.83 | — |
| Word Attack | 96 | 104 | −8 | 26 | −0.65 | — |
| Oral Reading | 108 | 104 | 4 | 65 | +0.38 | — |
| Sentence Reading Fluency | 84 | 108 | −24 | 3 | −1.83 | Weakness |
| Math Facts Fluency | 83 | 105 | −22 | 5 | −1.66 | Weakness |
| Sentence Writing Fluency | 103 | 104 | −1 | 47 | −0.08 | — |
| Reading Recall | 91 | 104 | −13 | 17 | −0.97 | — |
| Number Matrices | 104 | 105 | −1 | 48 | −0.04 | — |
| Editing | 109 | 108 | 1 | 53 | +0.07 | — |
| Word Reading Fluency | 75 | 104 | −29 | 2 | −2.10 | Weakness |
| Spelling of Sounds | 98 | 107 | −9 | 24 | −0.72 | — |
| Reading Vocabulary | 119 | 107 | 12 | 86 | +1.07 | — |
| ^Core test for calculation of intra-achievement variations. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Interpretation | ||||
| VARIATIONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Academic Skills/Academic Fluency/Academic Applications (Extended) Variations | ||||||
| ACADEMIC SKILLS^ | 108 | 98 | 10 | 85 | +1.04 | — |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY^ | 86 | 106 | −20 | 5 | −1.69 | Weakness |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS^ | 110 | 98 | 12 | 88 | +1.15 | — |
| READING RATE | 80 | 105 | −25 | 3 | −1.93 | Weakness |
| ^Core cluster for calculation of academic skills/fluency/applications variations. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Significant at | ||||
| COMPARISONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD |
| Oral Language/Achievement Comparisons* | ||||||
| READING | 118 | 108 | 10 | 79 | +0.81 | No |
| BROAD READING | 99 | 107 | −8 | 27 | −0.61 | No |
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 111 | 106 | 5 | 63 | +0.34 | No |
| READING COMPREHENSION | 101 | 107 | −6 | 32 | −0.46 | No |
| READING COMP (Ext) | 112 | 108 | 4 | 63 | +0.32 | No |
| READING FLUENCY | 91 | 105 | −14 | 16 | −1.00 | No |
| READING RATE | 80 | 104 | −24 | 5 | −1.64 | Yes (−) |
| MATHEMATICS | 103 | 105 | −2 | 44 | −0.15 | No |
| BROAD MATHEMATICS | 94 | 105 | −11 | 22 | −0.76 | No |
| MATH CALCULATION SKILLS | 92 | 104 | −12 | 21 | −0.81 | No |
| MATH PROBLEM SOLVING | 104 | 106 | −2 | 46 | −0.11 | No |
| WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 106 | 103 | 3 | 57 | +0.17 | No |
| BROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE | 106 | 106 | 0 | 51 | +0.03 | No |
| BASIC WRITING SKILLS | 101 | 107 | −6 | 33 | −0.44 | No |
| WRITTEN EXPRESSION | 113 | 104 | 9 | 72 | +0.59 | No |
| ACADEMIC SKILLS | 108 | 106 | 2 | 54 | +0.10 | No |
| ACADEMIC FLUENCY | 86 | 104 | −18 | 10 | −1.26 | No |
| ACADEMIC APPLICATIONS | 110 | 107 | 3 | 60 | +0.25 | No |
| ACADEMIC KNOWLEDGE | 123 | 109 | 14 | 90 | +1.27 | No |
| PHONEME-GRAPHEME KNOWLEDGE | 96 | 106 | −10 | 26 | −0.65 | No |
| PHONETIC CODING | 93 | 105 | −12 | 17 | −0.97 | No |
| SPEED of LEXICAL ACCESS | 74 | 104 | −30 | 1 | −2.20 | Yes (−) |
| *This procedure compares the WJ IV Broad Oral Language cluster score to selected achievement and cognitive-linguistic clusters. | ||||||
| STANDARD SCORES | DISCREPANCY | Significant at | ||||||
| COMPARISONS | Actual | Predicted | Difference | PR | SD | + or – 1.50 SD | ||
| Academic Knowledge/Achievement Comparisons* | ||||||||
| BRIEF ACHIEVEMENT | 107 | 115 | −8 | 29 | −0.56 | No | ||
| BROAD ACHIEVEMENT | 100 | 111 | −11 | 21 | −0.82 | No | ||
| READING | 118 | 112 | 6 | 66 | +0.40 | No | ||
| BROAD READING | 99 | 109 | −10 | 23 | −0.72 | No | ||
| BASIC READING SKILLS | 111 | 111 | 0 | 51 | +0.02 | No | ||
| READING COMPREHENSION | 101 | 109 | −8 | 30 | −0.53 | No | ||
| READING COMP (Ext) | 112 | 112 | 0 | 48 | −0.04 | No | ||
| READING FLUENCY | 91 | 105 | −14 | 16 | −0.99 | No | ||
| READING RATE | 80 | 104 | −24 | 5 | −1.62 | Yes (−) | ||
| MATHEMATICS | 103 | 112 | −9 | 24 | −0.69 | No | ||
| BROAD MATHEMATICS | 94 | 110 | −16 | 13 | −1.11 | No | ||
| *This procedure compares the WJ IV Academic Knowledge cluster score to selected achievement and cognitive-linguistic clusters. | ||||||||