Confidential Psychoeducational Report · Web viewThis test of achievement is composed of 9 subtests including Letter-Word Identification, Applied Problems, Spelling, Passage Comprehension,

Confidential Psychoeducational Report

Name: Ashley M. Date of Birth: Dec. 5, 1994Address: Long Island Date of Evaluation: April 29, 2013School: High School Chronological Age: 18 years, 5 months Grade: 12 Examiner: Jill Hutzel

Reason for Referral

Ashley was referred for a partial psychoeducational evaluation by her mother, Mrs. M, for the sole purpose of giving the examiner experience administering a test of cognitive and academic ability. The results of this evaluation are confidential, will not be used for any purpose except to grant the examiner experience, and will not be shared with the participant or their parent or legal guardians.

Background Information

Ashley is an 18 year old female of typical height and weight. She grew up on long island with both her parents and older brother Nelson. Ashley had a stable childhood growing up; reaching all her milestones on time. She attends High School where she is currently enrolled in a few honors courses including English and Math. She is reportedly an excellent student and enjoys being an athlete. Ashley is currently involved in Soccer and Cheerleading. She mentioned to the examiner that she takes school seriously because she wants to be accepted into a college of her choice (preferably a school away from home). Ashley’s parents told the examiner that she has impressed her family and friends with her positive attitude toward life and all of the goals she has already accomplished. Ashley reports that she is in good physical health and is not on any medication at this time.

Behavioral Observations

Ashley approached each testing session willingly, and in a cooperative manner. She appeared attentive and eager to succeed on many of the tasks presented to her. Rapport was easily established and maintained throughout both testing sessions. She was sometimes quick in responding but seemed confident in her answers. She would occasionally stop herself and use some time to think about her response before coming to a definite decision. Ashley seemed challenged on one of the subtests that required her to learn and recall a series of pictographic representations of words that eventually are combined into phrases and then sentences of increasing length and complexity. She seemed to have had some difficulties which resulted in a lack of effort. Besides the one subtest, Ashley appeared content with her responses, but she did remark being happy the assessments were complete. She did not seem nervous nor stressed at any point. Ashley presented herself with enthusiasm and maturity. Given the aforementioned, the present evaluation of Ashley’s current academic and cognitive functioning should be interpreted with caution.


Test AdministeredWoodcock – Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Ability (WJ III COG)

Assessment ProceduresWoodcock – Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Ability (WJ III COG)

Cognitive Test Results and Interpretations

Cluster Standard Score Percentile Rank 95% Confidence

Band

Qualitative Description

Comprehension Knowledge (Gc)

97 41st 89-104 Average

Long-Term Retrieval (Glr)

55 0.1st 45-65 Very Low

Visual-Spatial Thinking (Gv)

88 21st 79-96 Low Average

Auditory Processing (Ga)

114 83rd 102-126 High Average

Fluid Reasoning (Gf)

90 25th 83-97 Average

Processing Speed (Gs)

136 99th 125-147 Very Superior

Short-Term Memory (Gsm)

128 97th 120-137 Superior

General Intellectual Ability Extended (GIA-Ext)

101 54th 97-106 Average

Ashley was administered the Woodcock – Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Ability (WJ-III COG) in order to assess her overall cognitive functioning. Ashley earned a General Intellectual Ability—Extended (GIA-Ext) standard score of 101, which indicates her overall cognitive ability is in the “Average” range. This score suggests that Ashley scored as high as or better than 54% of peers her age (54th percentile). If retested, there is a 95% chance that Ashley would earn a GIA-Ext score between 97 and 106. The GIA-Ext consists of seven broad abilities: Comprehension-Knowledge, Long-Term Retrieval, Visual Spatial Thinking, Auditory Processing, Fluid Reasoning, Processing Speed and Short-Term Memory. Ashley’s performance across these seven factors ranged from “Very Low” to “Very Superior”.

Scores of Comprehension Knowledge, Long-Term Retrieval, Visual-Spatial Thinking, Auditory Processing, Fluid Reasoning, Processing Speed and Short-Term Memory are also measured in composite scores to indicate levels of performance across cognitive areas. Although Ashley’s GIA indicated that she had an “Average” score, there was significant variability of


scores between the clusters, therefore her overall cognitive scores should be interpreted with caution and may be better understood in terms of the individual cluster scores. Follow-up testing within the domains of Long-Term Retrieval (Glr) and Visual Spatial Thinking (Gv) were conducted with supplementary subtests of the WJ-III Achievement. To better understand Ashley’s individual cognitive function, reviews of her performance in each area are as follows.

Comprehension Knowledge (Gc) Composite Summary

Subtest Standard Score Percentile Rank 95% Confidence

Interval


Verbal Comprehension

97 42nd 88-106 Average

General Information


Comprehension Knowledge Cluster


The Comprehension – Knowledge (Gc) factor measures the breadth and depth of a person’s acquired knowledge, the ability to communicate one’s knowledge, mainly through verbal interaction, and to reason using previously learned experiences or procedures. Ashley earned a Gc standard score of 97. This score is at the 41st percentile and within the “Average” range. If retested, there is a 95% chance her Gc score would fall between 89 and 104. Due to minimal variability among the subtest scores, this composite is believed to be an accurate portrayal of Ashley’s total comprehension knowledge. Ashley was able to consistently and effectively identify pictures of familiar and unfamiliar objects, name synonyms and antonyms for words, and complete verbal analogies (Verbal Comprehension). Her score of 97 is within the “Average” range. Her ability to identify common locations and functions of familiar objects (General Information), produced a score of 97, which is also within the “Average” range.


Long-Term Retrieval (Glr) Composite Summary


Interval


Visual-Auditory Learning

37 <0.1 26-49 Very Low

Retrieval Fluency

116 86th 107-125 High Average

Long-Term Retrieval Cluster

55 0.1 46-65 Very Low

Long-Term Retrieval (Glr) Composite Summary with Supplemental Subtests

Subtest Standard Score Percentile Rank 95% Confidence Interval


Memory for Names

111 77th -------- High Average

Retrieval Fluency


Long-Term Retrieval Cluster

113 81st -------- High Average

The Long-Term Retrieval (Glr) factor measures the ability to store information and later retrieve it. Ashley’s Glr standard score of 55, is at the 0.1st percentile and within the “Very Low” range. There is a 95% chance that if administered this test again, her Glr score would be between 45 and 65. It should be of note that there was significant variability between the tasks that comprised this cluster; therefore, Ashley’s ability may best be understood in terms of the individual subtest scores and should be interpreted with caution. On a task where Ashley had to quickly name examples of common words from several different categories in one minute (Retrieval Fluency), her score of 116 is within the “High Average” range. On a task that required her to learn, store, and retrieve a series of visual-auditory associations (Visual Auditory Learning), her score of 37 is within the “Very Low” range. This subtest is not an accurate representation of Ashley’s reading, mathematics and writing abilities. When comparing the two subtests that comprise this cluster, Ashley seemed abnormally challenged when learning and recalling rebuses that are combined into phrases and then sentences of increasing length and complexity. Academically, Ashley may have difficulties when it comes to associative memory and/or paired learning, for example finding correlations and the importance of subjects at school. This seemed to be an area of significant weakness for Ashley and may suggest that this is an area she has difficulties in.

In addition, to better assess and understand Ashley’s functioning in this domain, she was administered a third test to better understand her paired-associative learning abilities. On a task were Ashley was required to learn associations between unfamiliar auditory and visual stimuli (Memory for Names), her score of 111 is within the “High Average” range. Analysis of the two


scores within the Cross-Battery framework indicates that a Long-Term Retrieval (Glr) cluster can be formed based upon both scores being within the “High Average” range. Ashley was able to produce a new Cluster score of 113 which is also within the “High Average” range. This now suggests that Ashley does well with associative memory which may lead to a better understanding of the importance of reading achievement.

Visual-Spatial Thinking (Gv) Composite Summary


Interval


Spatial Relations 73 4th 65-82 Low

Picture Recognition

103 58th 91-114 Average

Visual-Spatial Thinking Cluster


Visual-Spatial Thinking (Gv) Composite Summary with Supplemental SubtestBlock Rotation 100 50th -------- Average

Picture Recognition

103 58th 91-114 Average

Visual-Spatial Thinking Cluster

102 55th --------- Average

The Visual-Spatial Thinking (Gv) factor measures the ability to perceive, analyze, synthesize, and think with visual patterns and includes the ability to store and recall visual representations. Ashley’s Gv standard score of 88 is in the “Average” range, as high as or better than 21% of children her age. If administered the test again, there is a 95% chance her score for this ability would fall between 79 and 96. It should be of note that there was significant variability between the tasks that comprised this cluster; therefore, Ashley’s ability may be best understood in terms of the individual subtest scores and should be interpreted with caution. Ashley was asked to recognize previously presented pictures (Picture Recognition), she produced a score of 103, which is within the “Average” range. On a task were Ashley was asked to identify two or three pieces comprising a target shape (Spatial Relations), her score of 73 is within the “Low” range. Ashley may struggle when it comes to discriminating visual features, mentally manipulating visual images and matching. For example, Ashley may display academic difficulties when it comes to her organizational skills, evaluation of topics and finding the relationships between facts. This subtest seemed to be an area of significant weakness for Ashley and may suggest that this is an area she struggles with.

In addition, to better assess and understand Ashley’s functioning in this domain, she was administered a third test to better understand her ability to generate, perceive, analyze, synthesize, store, retrieve, manipulate, transform, and think with visual patterns and stimuli. On a


task were Ashley was required to match shapes visually (Block Rotation) her score of 100 is within the “Average” range. Analysis of the two scores within the Cross-Battery framework indicates that a Visual-Spatial Thinking (Gv) cluster can be formed based upon both scores being within the “Average” range. Ashley was able to produce a new Cluster score of 102 which is also within the “Average” range. This may suggest that Ashley has the potential to succeed when it comes to higher levels of mathematic achievement.

Auditory Processing (Ga) Composite Summary


Interval


Sound Blending 118 88th 107-129 High Average

Auditory Attention


Auditory Processing Cluster

114 83rd 102-126 High Average

The Auditory Processing (Ga) factor measures the ability to analyze, synthesize, and discriminate auditory stimuli and includes the ability to process and discriminate distorted speech sounds. Ashley earned a standard score of 114 on tasks measuring her Auditory Processing, which is in the “High Average” range. Her performance in this area was as high as or better than 83% of children her age. If administered the test a second time, there is a 95% chance her score for this cluster would be between 102 and 126. It should be of note that there was significant variability between the tasks that comprised this cluster; therefore, Ashley’s ability may be best understood in terms of the individual subtest scores and should be interpreted with caution. When Ashley was asked to effectively blend syllables and phonemes into words (Sound Blending), she attained a score of 118, which falls within the “High Average” range. On a task that required Ashley to discriminate between words in increasing background noise (Auditory Attention), her score of 94 falls within the “Average” range.

Fluid Reasoning (Gf) Composite Summary



Interval


Concept Formation


Analysis-Synthesis


Fluid Reasoning Cluster


The Fluid Reasoning (Gf) factor measures the ability to reason, form concepts, and solve problems using unfamiliar information or novel procedures. Ashley earned a Gf standard score of 90, which is in the “Average” range, as good as or better than 25% of children her age. There is a 95% chance that if administered the test a second time, her score would be between 83 and 97. Due to minimal variability among the subtest scores, this composite is believed to be an accurate portrayal of Ashley’s total comprehension knowledge. When asked to complete a series of miniature mathematics puzzles using color combinations (Analysis–Synthesis), Ashley’s score of 91 is within the “Average” range. Her performance on a task that required her to both derive and apply logical rules from a visual logic puzzle (Concept Formation), she attained a score of 90, which also falls within the “Average” range.

Processing Speed (Gs) Composite Summary


Interval


Visual Matching 136 99th 122-150 Very Superior

Decision Speed 122 93rd 111-134 Superior

Processing Speed Cluster


The Processing Speed (Gs) factor measures the ability to perform automatic cognitive tasks, an aspect of cognitive efficiency. Ashley’s Gs standard score of 136 is in the “Very Superior” range, and at the 99th percentile. There is a 95% chance that if she were administered this test again, her Processing Speed score would be between 125 and 147. Due to minimal variability among subtest scores, this composite is believed to be an accurate portrayal of Ashley’s processing speed abilities. Ashley appeared to do very well with tasks measuring processing speed, which may suggest that this is an area she excels in. When asked to locate and circle identical numbers in rows of distractions (Visual Matching), Ashley’s score of 136 is within the “Very Superior” range. On a task that required her to quickly locate conceptually similar pictures within a time limit (Decision Speed), Ashley produced a score of 122 and is within the “Superior” range.


Short-Term Memory (Gsm) Composite Summary


Interval


Numbers Reversed

122 93rd 114-129 Superior

Memory for Words


Short-Term Memory Cluster


The Short-Term Memory (Gsm) factor measures the ability to apprehend and hold information in immediate awareness and then use it within a few seconds. Ashley earned a Gsm standard score of 128, which is in the “Superior” range and is as high as or better than 97% of her same-age peers. There is a 95% chance that if administered the test again, Ashley’s score for this ability would fall between 120 and 137. Ashley appeared to do very well with tasks measuring short-term memory, which may suggest that this is an area she is skillful in. Due to minimal variability among the subtest scores, this composite is believed to be an accurate representation of Ashley’s short-term memory abilities. When required to remember a list of unrelated words in the correct sequence (Memory for words), she produced a score of 127, which falls within the “Superior” range. On a task that required her to mentally reorder a span of numbers read aloud by the examiner (Numbers Reversed), Ashley’s score of 122 is within the “Superior” range.

Test AdministeredWoodcock-Johnson III Test of Achievement


Test Results and Interpretations Woodcock-Johnson III Test of Achievement

Academic Test Results and Interpretations


Interval


BroadReading

103 57th 95-110 Average

Broad Mathematics

104 60th 99-109 Average

Math Calculation Skills

104 61st 99-109 Average

Broad Written Language


Written Expression


AcademicSkills

103 59th 99-108 Average

Academic Fluency


Academic Applications

114 82nd 108-120 High Average

Total Achievement


When using the Woodcock-Johnson III Test of Achievement, Ashley’s academic ability was measured. This test conveys a score that is an accurate calculation of Ashley’s academic capability. Ashley achieved a Total Achievement score of 115, which is at the 84th percentile and falls within the “High Average” range. If retested, there is a 95% chance that Ashley would score between 53 and 75. This test of achievement is composed of 9 subtests including Letter-Word Identification, Applied Problems, Spelling, Passage Comprehension, Calculation, Writing Samples, Reading Fluency, Math Fluency, and Writing Fluency. Further results show that Ashley falls within the “Average” range when it comes to applying Academic Skills. Ashley’s Academic Fluency falls within the “Superior” range, while her Academic Application score is within the “High Average” range. Ashley received a score of 103, which is at the 59th percentile for Academic Skills. She produced a score of 124, which is at the 95th percentile for Academic Fluency and she obtained a score of 114 which is at the 82nd percentile for Academic Applications. If retested, there is a 95% that she would score between 46 and 71 for Academic Skills, 89 and 98 for Academic Fluency and 70 and 91 on Academic Applications. Broad reading, math and written language skills are also measured; these scores are represented by cluster scores that reflect the levels of performance for specific academic areas. Due to


variability of scores between the clusters, Ashley’s overall achievement scores should be interpreted with caution and may be better understood in terms of the individual cluster scores. To understand her academic functioning in more detail, an interpretation of each performance follows.

Broad Reading Cluster


Interval


Letter-Word Identification


ReadingFluency


Passage Comprehension

106 66th 96-117 Average

Broad Reading Cluster

114 82nd 108-119 High Average

Ashley obtained a Broad Reading cluster score of 114, which is at the 82nd percentile and within the “High Average” range. A score such as this indicated Ashley achieved as well or better than 82% of her same age peers included in the standardized sample. If retested, there is a 95% chance that her score would fall between 71 and 90. It should be of note that there was variability between the tasks that comprised this cluster; therefore, Ashley’s ability may best be understood in terms of the individual subtest scores and should be interpreted with caution. The Broad Reading cluster provides a broad measure of reading achievements. This cluster is comprised of three tests, Letter-Word Identification, Reading Fluency and Passage Comprehension. Each test will give an overview of Ashley’s overall reading level. In Letter-Word Identification, Ashley received a score of 99 which is at the 49th percentile and within the “Average” range. There is a 95% that if Ashley retested, her score would fall between 33 and 65. Ashley’s score of 128 on Reading Fluency, falls within 97th percentile and is within the “Superior” range. If retested, there is a 95% chance that her score would fall between 92 and >99. Ashley appeared to do very well on a task were she is required to rapidly read and comprehend simple sentences, which may suggest that this is an area she excels in. In Passage Comprehension, Ashley achieved a score of 106, which is at the 66th percentile and is within the “Average” range. If retested, there is a 95% chance that her score would be between 39 and 86.

The Broad Math and Math Calculation Cluster

Subtest Standard Percentile Rank 95% Qualitative


Score Confidence Interval

Description

Calculation 100 50th 93-107 Average

MathFluency


AppliedProblems

106 66th 101-112 Average

Broad Math Cluster

106 65th 102-110 Average

Math Calculation Skills Cluster

104 61st 99-109 Average

Ashley achieved a score of 106 on the Broad Math cluster, which is at the 65th percentile and falls within the “Average” range. If retested, there is a 95% that her score would be between 54 and 75. It should be of note that there was significant variability between the tasks that comprised this cluster; therefore, Ashley’s ability may best be understood in terms of the individual subtest scores and should be interpreted with caution. The Broad Math cluster measures problem solving, number facility, automaticity, and reasoning. This cluster is composed of three tests including Calculation, Math Fluency and Applied Problems. The Math Calculation Skills cluster is comprised of two tests including Calculation and Math Fluency. Ashley achieved a score of 104 for this cluster, which is at the 61st percentile and is within the “Average” range. If retested, there is a 95% chance she would score between 99 and 109. Ashley’s score of 100 on Calculation is at the 50th percentile and falls within the “Average” range. If retested, there is a 95% chance Ashley would score between 93 and 107. For Math Fluency, Ashley produced a score of 135, which is at the 99th percentile and is within the “Very Superior” range. Ashley appeared to do extremely well on a task that requires rapid calculation of simple single-digit addition, subtraction and multiplication facts, which may suggest that this is an area she excels in. If retested, there is a 95% chance her score would fall between 130 and 140. For Applied Problems, Ashley’s score of 106, is at the 66th percentile and is within the “Average” range. If retested there is a 95% chance that her score would be between 101 and 112.

Broad Written Language and Written Expression Cluster


Qualitative Descriptions


IntervalSpelling 110 74th 102-118 Average

WritingFluency

121 92nd 108-134 Superior

WritingSamples


Broad Written Language Cluster


Written Expression Cluster


Ashley received a Broad Written Language cluster score of 122, which is at the 93rd percentile and within the “Superior” range. If retested, there is a 95% chance her score would fall between 115 and 130. This cluster provides a broad, comprehensive view of Ashley’s written language achievement. The tasks include spelling single-word responses, writing simple sentences quickly, and expressing ideas well. This cluster is comprised of three tests: Spelling, Writing Fluency, and Writing Samples. Ashley produced a score of 110 on Spelling, which is at the 74th percentile and is within the “Average” range. If retested, there is a 95% chance her score would be between 102 and 118. Ashley’s Written Expression cluster (comprises Writing Fluency and Writing Samples) score is 130, which is at the 98th percentile and within the “Advanced” range. If retested, there is a 95% chance her score would fall between 119 and 141. For Writing Fluency, Ashley achieved a score of 121, which is at the 92nd percentile and is within the “Superior” range. If retested, there is a 95% chance that Ashley would score between 108 and 134. Ashley achieved a score of 129 on Writing Samples. Her score is at the 97th percentile and is within the “Superior” range. If retested there is a 95% chance that her score would fall between the 116 and 141. Ashley seemed to do well when it came to tasks of written language and expression, which may suggest this is an area where she excels in. Due to minimal variability among subtests scores, this composite is believed to be an accurate representation of Ashley’s written language and written expression abilities.

Social Emotional Functioning:

Test Administered- Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), BASC-2 PRS, BASC-2 TRS, and Sentence Completion


Thematic Apperception Test (TAT)-

Ashley is a 18-year old female who is a senior in High School and has been evaluated to assess any social and/or emotional issues she may be having. Ashley was administered the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT). Ashley was presented with eight cards in which she had to describe and make up a different story for each picture. For the first card, Ashley described a few signs of frustrations and anger. From the description of her first card, the Import revealed, Try and see the brighter side in situations while taking life experiences as they come. Ashley also described signs of frustrations in her second card. From the description of her second card, the Import revealed, Self-determination will help to achieve your goals no matter what challenges stand in the way. In the third card Ashley described embarrassment and regret. The Import for her third card revealed, Be aware of the decisions you make now, they may determine your future. Ashley revealed signs of aggression and sadness in her fourth card. Her Import revealed, Love is forever evolving; even if is with someone else. Ashley described signs of submission, compliance and sadness in her fifth card. Her Import revealed, Understanding who you are will expose the truth about accepting your role in life. Ashley exposed feelings of sadness, and a sense of feeling “trapped” in a situation. Her sixth Import revealed, Helping yourself is important but helping others could be extremely rewarding as well. Ashley described anger, sadness and even jealous tendencies within her seventh card. Her Import revealed, Take responsibilities for the choices you make. On Ashley’s eighth and final card she exposed an awareness for death, sadness and helplessness. Her Import revealed, Accept the decisions of the past; learn to let go. Ashley expressed several levels of anger, sadness, and frustrations. She also conveyed an understanding of death, feeling embarrassed, trapped and jealousy. Although Ashley described each card from somewhat of a negative viewpoint, she was able to end majority of the stories on a positive note. She was able to reveal an honest opinion about each card and consider the consequences for each one. Ashley revealed through her imports that life involves emotions of many levels. At times Ashley can feel sadness, frustrations, jealousy and even anger. This could hinder relationships for Ashley because she might not have a strong sense of security to build upon social situations

BASC 2-SRP


Ashley was administered the BASC 2 SRP which is a multimethod, multidimensional system used to evaluate the behavior and self-perception of children and/or adults. The results to each test were as follows:

DOMAIN T-SCORESRP

DESCRIPTOR

Attitude to School 40 LowAttitude to Teachers 41 AverageSensation Seeking 42 Average

Atypicality 42 AverageLocus of Control 41 Average

Social Stress 45 AverageAnxiety 45 Average

Depression 43 AverageSense of Inadequacy 44 Average

Somatization 40 LowAttention Problems 54 Average

Hyperactivity 51 AverageRelations with Parents 63 At-RiskInterpersonal Relations 52 Average

Self-Esteem 55 AverageSelf-Reliance 55 Average

Ashley was asked to complete the Behavioral Assessment System for Children, Second Edition (BASC-2). This questionnaire assesses several maladaptive and adaptive behaviors often seen in children. Scores in the clinically significant range indicate a high level of maladaptive behavior. At-risk scores may signify the potential of developing problems that need to be monitored carefully.

According to the results to Ashley’s BASC-2 SRP (Self Rating Scale), her T-score was within the Low Level range for maladaptive/behavioral issues when it came to Attitude to School and Somatization (describing health-related problems). Scores within the Average range include Attitude to Teachers, Sensation (engaging in risky behaviors such as riding fast in a car), Atypicality (reporting having unusual thoughts or perceptions), Locus of Control, Social Stress, Anxiety, Depression, Sense of Inadequacy, Attention Problems, Hyperactivity, Interpersonal Relations, Self-Esteem and Self-Reliance. Ashley was At-Risk for only Relations with Parents. This may indicate that she has yet to establish a relationship with her parents. In order to maintain Ashley’s social and emotional stability, she should be monitored closely to prevent any specific intervention and/or treatment plans to reduce internalizing and externalizing concerns.

Sentence Completion-


Ashley was also given a Sentence Completion survey which is a number of unfinished sentences that she needs to complete by writing the first response she can think of. For the 50 items completed, Ashley showed 27 positive responses, 9 negative responses and 14 neutral responses. Ashley’s positive responses revealed a variety of details about her such as when she tries hard she feels as if she can succeed, she believes others thinks that she is sweet and easy to talk too, she is the best at given advice, she feels most loved when she is with her family and friends, she feels her clothes are cute and they make her feel good, and she believes she looks good when she goes out during the day and night. In addition, she believes her friends think of her as a calm and rational person, she feels as if she is a good writer, a hard worker and does well in school. On the other hand, Ashley seems to have negative connotations when it comes to doing well at math and succeeding in her future. She feels that when things get difficult, she tends to shut down and when she fails in school she becomes angry and disappointed in herself. She also mentioned that when she plays sports she feels as if she often fails. Ashley showed some neutral responses such as how she doesn’t have tolerance for unnecessary drama, “catty” girls, and that she feels as if her body is changing (which could always be both a positive or negative view of herself). She also believes that her peers think she is quiet and a very serious person. During this administration, Ashley seemed to have geared her thoughts on positive images of herself. Although Ashley had some negative views about things in her life, it is inspiring to see how many areas of her life make her happy and proud of her accomplishments. Ashley may benefit from working well with her classmates and succeeding academically. She may struggle when feeling frustrating and school which could lead to a lack of motivation and self-esteem. Overall, Ashley seemed to have positive feelings about her overall self but should be aware that she has the tendency to look down upon herself when things become difficult.

Summary:

Ashley is an 18 year old female of Average cognitive ability. Ashley’s overall cognitive ability was in the “Average” range. Even though her GIA indicated that she had an “Average” score, there was significant variability between the composites and subtests scores and should be interpreted with caution. Ashley’s Long-Term Retrieval (Glr) composite was within the “Very Low” range and can be considered a significant weakness when compared to the other composite scores. Ashley’s Process Speed (Gs) and Short-Term Memory (Gsm) composites were within the “Superior and Very Superior” range and can be considered a strength when compared to the other composite scores that comprise this test. Follow-up testing within the domains of Visual Spatial Thinking (Gv) and Long Term Retrieval (Glr) was conducted with supplementary subtests from the WJ-III COG.

Long-Term Retrieval (Glr) is within the “Very Low” range and should be interpreted with caution, this subtest is not an accurate representation of Ashley’s reading, mathematics and writing abilities. When comparing the two subtests that comprise this cluster, Ashley seemed abnormally challenged when learning and recalling rebuses that are combined into phrases and then into sentences of increasing length and complexity. On a task that required her to learn, store, and retrieve a series of visual-auditory associations (Visual Auditory Learning), her score of 37 is within the “Very Low” range and is a weakness compared to the other subtests that comprise this composite. Ashley may have academic difficulties when it comes to associative memory and/or paired learning. Ashley was provided with an additional subtest to determine a


better understanding of her abilities for this composite. On a task were Ashley was required to learn associations between unfamiliar auditory and visual stimuli (Memory for Names), her score of 111 is within the “High Average” range. Analysis of the two scores within the Cross-Battery framework indicates that a Long-Term Retrieval (Glr) cluster can be formed based upon both scores being within the “High Average” range. Ashley was able to produce a new Cluster score of 113 which is also within the “High Average” range. This now suggests that Ashley does well with associative memory which may lead to a better understanding of the importance of reading achievement.

Visual-Spatial Thinking (Gv) is within the “Low Average” range and should be interpreted with caution. On a task were she was asked to identify two or three pieces comprising a target shape (Spatial Relations), her score of 73 falls within the “Low” range which indicates an area of difficulties for her when compared to the other subtest scores that comprise this cluster. Ashley may struggle when it comes to discriminating visual features, mentally manipulating visual images and matching. Ashley was provided with an additional subtest to determine a better understanding of her abilities for this composite. On a task were Ashley was required to match shapes visually (Block Rotation) her score of 100 is within the “Average” range. Analysis of the two scores within the Cross-Battery framework indicates that a Visual-Spatial Thinking (Gv) cluster can be formed based upon both scores being within the “Average” range. Ashley was able to produce a new Cluster score of 102 which is also within the “Average” range. This may suggest that Ashley has the potential to succeed when it comes to higher levels of mathematic achievement.

Fluid Reasoning (Gf) and Comprehension Knowledge (Gc) are both within the “Average” range and are considered an accurate portrayal of Ashley’s abilities for these areas. Auditory Process (Ga) is within the “High Average” range and should be interpreted with caution. When comparing the two subtest scores, Ashley scored lower on a task that requires her to discriminate between words in increasing background noise, indicating a relative weakness on this particular subtest. Ashley did well with Short-Term Memory (Gsm) which falls within the “Superior” range and is also considered an accurate interpretation of her abilities for this area. This Composite may also suggest Ashley excels when it comes to reading, mathematics and writing. Her Processing-Speed (Gs) score is within the “Very Superior” range and is an accurate portrayal of her abilities in this area. Ashley did extremely well for this particular composite which may suggest skillful knowledge in reading, mathematics and writing.

Ashley’s overall academic ability was in the “High Average” range. Even though Ashley’s Total Achievement score indicated that she had a “High Average” score, there was significant variability between the composites and subtests scores and should be interpreted with caution. Ashley’s score for Broad Reading falls within the “Average” range. Although her score is within the “Average” range, on a task were she was required to rapidly read and comprehend simple sentences (Reading Fluency), her score falls within the “Superior” range and is considered a significant strength when compared to the other subtests that comprise this cluster. Ashley’s score for the Broad Math and Math Calculation cluster also falls within the “Average” range and should be interpreted with caution due to variability amongst the scores. On a task that required her to do rapid calculations of simple single-digit addition, subtraction and multiplication facts, Ashley performed extremely well which may indicate this is an area where she excels in. Ashley’s score falls within the “Superior” range for her Broad Written Language and Expression and Academic Fluency cluster and is a considered a strength when compared to the other clusters. On a task that required her to spell words that are presented to her orally


(Spelling), her score was within the “Average” range and can be considered a relative weakness within this composite. Overall, Ashley performed well when testing her overall academic abilities and produced scores that fell within the “Average” to “Very Superior” range.

When comparing Ashley’s cognitive and academic abilities, her Processing Speed and Math Fluency scores produced a comparable relationship to one another. Both these abilities were a significant strength for Ashley and are considered an area where she performs very well in. Her Processing Speed is determined by the ability to perform automatic cognitive tasks, it is an aspect of cognitive efficiency. The two tests that comprise this cluster include Visual Matching, which measures perceptual and decision speed of semantic processing. Similarly, when taking an Achievement test, the Math Fluency subtest which requires her to do rapid calculations of simple-digit addition, subtraction, and multiplication facts also shows her ability to excel under quick conditions. High performances on Math Fluency can also result from intelligence in basic mathematics, an abundance of automaticity, increased attention and fast processing speed. Her Processing Speed and Math Fluency relates because they are both timed tests and they both measure how well Ashley performs during rapid situations. These factors may relate to the way Ashley learns during school. She may show exceptional knowledge when it comes to reading, mathematics and writing because these tests are based on the speed of mental activity. Ashley demonstrated that her accuracy for speed and fluency for basic skills influenced her performance on a higher level.

Ashley was also provided with several tests to determine her social/emotional functioning for this present time. She was provided with a Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), a BASC 2-SRP and a Sentence Completion. For the results of Ashley’s TAT, she revealed several signs of emotions including anger, frustration, jealousy and sadness. Although Ashley touched upon these emotions, she was able to bring each story a positive ending. Based upon the results to this specific test, Ashley may struggle when building social relationships and tolerating others due to envious tendencies. Ashley was then given a BASC-2 SRP which is a questionnaire that assesses several maladaptive and adaptive behaviors often seen in children. Majority of Ashley’s results were Average responses indicating normal behaviors for children her age. Ashley produced Low responses for Attitude to School and Somatization. She was At-Risk for only Relations with Parents indicating that she may have not yet established a relationship with her parents. Ashley should still be monitored closely to prevent any internalizing/externalizing future concerns. In addition, Ashley filled out a Sentence Completion which is a number of unfinished sentences that she is asked to complete. For the most part, Ashley had a number of positive responses about herself. It seems as if she would work well with others in her class and that she is happy with her life and accomplishments. Ashley should be aware that she has the tendency to shut down with things become difficult and when she feels as if she will not succeed in the future.


Based on Ashley’s GIA-Ext, Total Achievement Composite scores, and Social-Emotional Functioning the following suggestions should be implemented to help improve her difficulties:

Ashley may benefit from active, successful learning experiences, rehearsals, overlearning, organizational strategies, mnemonics, illustrate and/or visual content

Ashley may benefit from interventions designed to develop skills in discriminating visual features mentally manipulating visual images and matching.

Ashley may benefit from multisensory teaching techniques that make use of multiple sensory pathways to introduce, and practice the information to be learned. Other multisensory teaching techniques that could be implemented to improve Ashley’s performance includes: private speech, controlling the amount of visual information presented at one time and supporting visual stimuli with auditory input.

Ashley may also benefit from setting specific goals for academic success, working with classmates to build a sense of reliance and tolerance for others, encouragement in participation to reduce stress when speaking in front of others, and social skills exercise’s to help build relationships and positive social expectations.

Documents

Confidential Psychoeducational Report · Web viewThis test of achievement is composed of 9 subtests including Letter-Word Identification, Applied Problems, Spelling, Passage Comprehension,