Artifact 1 Rationale

Formal Education Achievement Report

The Formal Education Achievement Report required me to administer a formal
assessment to a child with exceptional learning needs; conduct a parent and student interview;
interpret and summarize assessment findings; and develop an educational report. This connects
to CEC Standards 1 (Learning Development and Individual Learning Differences), 4
(Assessment), and 6 (Professional Learning and Ethical Practice).
I gained knowledge and skills in learning development and individual differences (CEC
Standard 1) while completing this artifact. Through the administration of the Woodcock Johnson
III, I was able to identify the specific learning needs of my student. Based on the results of the
assessment, I recommended various developmentally appropriate instructional strategies to
support her learning development and learning differences. Strategies that were recommended
included breaking down work tasks as well as the use of manipulatives and visuals.
My knowledge and skills in understanding assessment (CEC Standard 4) were developed
and mastered throughout the completion this artifact. In order to make education decisions about
the student, I used multiple methods of assessment and data sources. First, I completed the
formal assessment, the Woodcock Johnson III. This formal assessment provided insight in the
following academic areas: reading, math, and writing. Also, I conducted a parent and student
interview, where I learned about the students interests, areas of strength, as well as overall
attitude about school. These different forms of assessment helped me provide the most
appropriate educational recommendations for the student. Further, my knowledge of assessment
principles provided me with the skills needed to interpret the students assessment results.
In addition, this artifact enhanced my understanding of CEC Standard 6, Professional
Learning and Ethical Practice. Throughout the completion of this artifact, I was able to maintain
a high level of professional competence and integrity with the student and family. I used ethical
principles by first obtaining parental permission prior to the administration of the assessment.
Also, I kept all gained knowledge about the student confidential throughout the completion of
this artifact. The information gained from administering the Woodcock Johnson III assessment
was used to guide my recommendations for instruction. Based on the assessment results, I was
able to advocate for resources that would improve the students learning outcomes. For example,
I recommended the use of visuals when solving applied math problems. Additionally, I
recommended the strategy of breaking tasks into smaller chunks as an attempt to minimize the
students frustration. The completion of this artifact allowed me to provide support to the
students specific areas of need.
The student I assessed was positively affected by my mastery of the CEC Standards.
After completing this artifact, the student was able to receive the appropriate academic support in
which she needed. As I continue my career in special education, future students will be
positively affected in the same way. Completing this formal education achievement report has
increased both my knowledge and confidence of administering a formal assessment as well as
developing a formal education achievement report.

Initial Assessment
Other
Re-evaluation Assessment

Towson University
SPED 525
EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT

Name: Molly Smith (pseudonym)

Date of Referral (IEP Team Request): 04/30/2014

Birthdate: 04/25/2006

C.A.

Date Parent Signature Obtained: 03/30/2014

School: Rodgers Forge

Grade: 1

Date Assessment Completed: 03/30/2014

Primary Language: English

Date Written Reports Completed: 04/26/2014

Primary Language of Test: English __

Examiner: Cara Culotta

Report Includes:
1.
2.
3.
4.

5.
6.
7.
8.

Statement of deviation from milestones/objectives

Statement of eligibility criteria
Recommendations
Examiners signature, title, and date

Behavioral observations
Assessment instrument used
Results (including subtest scores)
A descriptive summary of strengths and
identified needs

Reason for Referral:

Molly was referred for evaluation by members of the Rodgers Forge Elementary School Team
in order to determine current levels of performance as appropriate in:

Reading

Mathematics

Spelling-written language

In the opinion of the examiner:

Linguistic, cultural, and/or economic differences did not influence testing.

The test(s) selected is a valid tool for the stated purpose and is valid for the student.
The scores obtained are valid representations of students current educational performance levels.

Educational testing is intended to provide approximate performance levels based on

national norms and to profile strengths and needs.

Towson University
SPED 525
EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT (CONTINUED)
Name: Molly Smith

D.O.B. 04/25/2006

ASSESSMENTS USED:
I. Review of Records
II. Teacher/Student Interview
III. Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement: Form A
Norms based on age 7 years; Compuscore Version 3.0.
Standard scores have a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.
Standard
Battery Tests

Standard
Score

Grade
Equivalent

Instructional Range

Letter-Word
Identification
Passage
Comprehension
Reading Fluency

128

3.9

3.4 3.9 4.6

127

4.3

3.1 4.3 6.3

125

3.5

2.3 3.5 5.8

Word Attack

117

3.5

2.7 3.5 4.6

Calculation

114

2.3

1.7 2.3 3.0

Applied Problems

104

1.9

1.4 1.9 2.4

Math Fluency

110

2.2

<K.0 2.2 4.3

Spelling

119

2.7

2.2 2.7 3.4

Writing Samples

121

>3.4

>2.3 - >3.4 - >5.5

Writing Fluency

139

4.5

3.2 4.5 6.1

Story Recall

123

7.1

1.6 7.1 - >13.3

Understanding
Directions

Battery Clusters

128

5.7

3.2 5.7 13.0

Standard Score

Grade Equivalent

Broad Reading

128

3.9

Broad Mathematics

109

2.1

Broad Written Language

127

3.4

Oral Language

129

6.1

Academic Skills

127

3.1

Academic Fluency

133

3.6

Academic Applications

122

2.8

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Molly appeared to be a very shy and quiet child, initially. She often refrained from
elaborating on many of the interview questions. Her responses were mostly short and to
the point, often consisting of 2-3 word phrases. It appeared as if Molly was extremely
nervous during the student interview, which was conducted prior to completing the
assessment. Molly would frequently look to her mother, who was in the room, for
comfort. Molly began by describing herself as a young girl who lives in a very busy
neighborhood with a lot of friends. When asked what she liked, Molly described herself
as an animal lover. She discussed her love for her pets, which includes 2 dogs, 1 hamster,
and 1 goldfish. Molly said she likes her school. When asked if she had a lot of friends at
school, Molly responded with a yes. She specifically stated how she liked the fact that
her school is in such close proximity to her home. Molly said that she sometimes walks to
school with her older brother, when the weather is warm. She also mentioned that she
loved all the snow days they have had this past winter. Molly said she wishes it would
keep snowing, all year around. When asked about her favorite subject, Molly first did not
have much of a response. It appeared that she liked all subjects. When asked again, she
said she would choose reading or language arts as her most preferred academic subject.
Molly stated that her favorite specials subject (e.g., gym, art, music) was gym. When
asked about her morning and nightly routines, Molly stated that she eats breakfast with her
brother before going to school every morning. She reported her bedtime as 8:00 P.M. on
school nights.

It should be noted that prior to completing the student interview, Mollys mother
mentioned that she was very excited to complete the assessment. Her mother said Molly
was eager and excited to help out. Mollys mother and father described Molly as a
wonderful student who seems to really like school. There was no discussion of previous
formal assessments.
BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATIONS:
Throughout the interview and administration of the assessment, it appeared that Molly was
a quiet, yet very mature young lady. She appeared to be extremely shy and, at times, a bit
fearful. It appeared that Molly was unsure of what to expect. Her mother remained in the
next room during the testing situation. Molly often looked to her mother for comfort
during the test. When offered reinforcers, such as M&Ms, Molly quickly turned to her
mother for approval. That being said; however, Molly was also extremely pleasant
throughout the administration of the assessment. She did not complain, nor did she protest
during the test. Molly did not once ask to stop for the day; the full assessment was
administered in one day. Prior to the beginning the assessment, Molly ran upstairs to her
bedroom to get her stuffed blanket. Throughout the entire administration of the test,
Molly had her blanket wrapped around her. After handing Molly the student response
booklet, she seemed a little overwhelmed. However, Molly continued to cooperate and
did not mention that she was overwhelmed. Molly completed tests 1-3 before needing a
break. She then decided to take a break after test 4, test 6, test 8, test 10, and once more
after test 11. Molly did not usually ask for a break, but would agree when asked if she
needed one. As test items progressed in difficulty, Molly continued to work hard. She
remained attentive to test materials as well as focused. At times, however, it appeared that
Molly was a little overwhelmed. The tests in which required the response booklet, such as
Math Calculation, seemed to overwhelm Molly. Molly, also, appeared to be a little more
anxious during the timed tests, such as Math Fluency. When completing test items that
involved math calculations Molly occasionally counted aloud. When completing test
items that required writing, Molly frequently erased her responses to correct her spelling.
She would often correct her handwriting to make it neater. When completing test items
that involved reading, Molly read familiar words quickly and fluently with confidence.
When presented with unfamiliar words, Molly attempted to sound out the unknown words
phonetically. She appeared to be less confident when reading unfamiliar or nonsense
words. At times, Molly would look up to the examiner for assistance. In addition,
throughout the testing situation, when unsure of the answer, Molly would simply state, I
dont know that one or This is getting too hard. She refrained from becoming
frustrated and continued to be very calm. As the end of the assessment approached, Molly
appeared to be less nervous and began to initiate more conversations. Molly waited
patiently for the test examiner to read the directions of each test; she also was very good at
waiting for the examiner to say go.
RESULTS AND INTERPRETATIONS:
The Woodcock-Johnson III: Tests of Achievement was presented to provide information
regarding the development of academic, application, and fluency skills in the areas of

reading, mathematics, and written language. A detailed description of Mollys

performance in each of these areas is included in the following narrative.
The Broad Reading Cluster was administered as a comprehensive measure of reading
achievement. Within the Broad Reading Cluster, a total of four subtests were
administered, including: Letter-Word Identification, Reading Fluency, Passage
Comprehension and Word Attack. The Letter-Word Identification subtest assessed
Mollys ability to identify letters and words automatically. Mollys performance on the
Letter-Word Identification subtest was in the superior range. Molly demonstrated the
ability to accurately and fluently read words at the third grade level. She was able to
independently read a total of 48 words, including but not limited to, because; knew; own;
against; sentence; and decide. The Reading Fluency subtest assessed Mollys ability to
read quickly and understand simple sentences. Molly was given a three-minute time
period to read and respond to simple sentences by circling YES or NO. Within the
Reading Fluency subtest, Molly scored in the superior range. She was able to correctly
respond to a total of 33 sentences, within the three-minute time frame. The Passage
Comprehension subtest assessed Mollys ability to fill in missing information from a text.
Molly was required to read a sentence or short passage and identify a missing word that
made sense in the context of the passage. Molly also scored within the superior range on
the Passage Comprehension subtest. The Word Attack subtest assessed Mollys ability to
apply phonic and structural analysis skills to read unfamiliar, nonsense words. The first
few test items required Molly to produce sounds for single letters. As the test progressed,
Molly was required to read aloud letter combinations. Test items became more difficult as
the complexity of words increased. Molly scored within the high average range within
this subtest. Molly was able to read the following words: dright, gusp, goy, snirk, yosh, as
well as tayed. Mollys errors were due to lack of automaticity and lack of code
knowledge. At this time, Molly demonstrates high average and superior achievement in
all areas of reading. Reading is a great strength for Molly. Reading instruction should
continue to focus on reading unfamiliar, nonsense words automatically.
The subtests of the Broad Written Language Cluster were administered as a
comprehensive measure of written language achievement. The three subtests included:
Spelling, Writing Fluency, and Writing Samples. The Spelling subtest assessed Mollys
ability to spell words correctly. Each word was presented to Molly in isolation. Within
the Spelling subtest, Molly scored in the high average range. She demonstrated the ability
to correctly spell a total of 27 words, such as house, green, rain, cooked, and sixteen.
Mollys errors consisted of spelling words phonetically versus their traditional spelling.
The Writing Fluency subtest measured Mollys skills in forming and writing simple
sentences quickly. In this subtest, Molly was presented with three words as well as a
picture and was asked to form a sentence based on the given words and picture. For
example, given the words good, cake, and is, as well as a picture of a cake, Molly
was expected to write the sentence the cake is good. Within the seven- minute time
frame, Molly demonstrated the ability to correctly write a total of 16 sentences. Her
performance on this subtest scored in the very superior range. The skill of writing simple
sentences is a great strength of Mollys. The Writing Samples subtest required Molly to
write sentences that were evaluated with respect to the quality of content and expression.

This subtest measured the skill of writing responses to a variety of demands. Test item
difficulty progressed by increasing passage length, level of vocabulary, and grammatical
complexities. Mollys performance within this subtest scored in the superior range. She
demonstrated knowledge of basic sentence structure and the use of initial capitalization
and final marks of punctuation. Most written sentences began with The or A, and
used is as a linking verb. Mollys overall writing performance suggests that the skill of
formulating sentences is a strength. Instruction should focus on identifying irregular word
patterns, as this will improving Mollys spelling abilities.
The subtests of the Broad Math Cluster were administered as a comprehensive measure of
math achievement, including math calculation skills, problem solving, and the ability to
solve simple addition and subtraction facts quickly. The three subtests of the Broad Math
Cluster were: Math Calculation, Math Fluency, and Applied Problems. The Math
Calculation section of the test measured Mollys ability to perform mathematical
computations. Molly scored in the high average range on the Math Calculation subtest.
She was able to correctly answer a total of 10 math problems. Molly was able to respond
automatically to many of the initial test items in this section, such as 2 + 2. As the
problems progressed in difficulty, Molly began using strategies, such counting aloud, to
perform the calculation. The Math Fluency subtest measured Mollys ability to solve
simple addition and subtraction problems quickly. She was given a three-minute time
frame to solve as many as problems as possible. Molly demonstrated the ability to
correctly solve a total of 29 problems, within three minutes. Her performance scored in
the average range. Molly was able to answer addition problems more accurately and
quickly than subtraction problems. The Applied Problems subtest required Molly to
analyze and solve math problems. To solve the problems, Molly had to carefully listen to
the problem; recognize the procedure to be followed; decide which information was
relevant and which was extraneous; and perform the calculation. Molly scored within the
average range on the Applied Problems subtest; she demonstrated the ability to correctly
solve 24 problems. She was able to solve one-step addition and subtraction word
problems and tell time to the hour and half-hour. Overall, Mollys math strength is in the
area of Calculation. Instruction should focus on solving single-digit subtraction problems
as well as solving applied problems, such as multiple-step word problems.
The subtests of the Oral Language Cluster were administered as a comprehensive measure
of oral language achievement. The two subtests included: Story Recall and Understanding
Directions. The Story Recall subtest measured Mollys aspects of oral language,
including language development and meaningful memory. Test items on this subtest
required Molly to recall increasingly complex stories that were presented to her orally.
After listening to a passage, Molly was asked to recall as many details of the story as
possible. Molly scored within the superior range on the Story Recall subtest. She was
able to recall key ideas and phrases from each of 6 different passages. The Understanding
Directions subtest also measured Mollys oral language. She was required listen to a
sequence of instructions and then follow the directions by pointing to various objects in a
colored picture. Molly scored within the superior range on the Understanding Directions
subtest. She was able to carefully listen to the instruction, wait until the examiner said
go, and point to the desired item for a total of 47 instructions. Overall, Mollys oral

language strengths are in the areas of understanding directions and story recall.
Instruction should continue to focus on understanding complex directions.
SUMMARY OF STRENGTHS, NEEDS, RECOMMENDATIONS:
The results of this educational evaluation indicate that Mollys academic skills, within the
areas of reading; math; and written language, range from average to very superior,
according to age level expectations. Mollys overall reading performance suggests that
the skills of identifying words automatically and reading fluently are strong strengths of
hers. Mollys reading performance also suggests that reading instruction should continue
to focus on applying phonic and structural analysis skills in order to read unfamiliar
printed words. Mollys overall writing performance suggests that her writing skills, such
as forming simple sentences, are relative strengths. Her writing performance also suggests
that written language instruction should focus on spelling unfamiliar words that do not
have traditional, phonetic spelling. Mollys overall math performance suggests that her
calculation skills are a relative strength. Her performance on the math section also
suggests that math instruction should focus on solving math computations at a quicker
pace as well as solving applied problems, such as word problems.
Relative areas of weakness include: Applied Problems; Math Fluency; and Spelling.
Relative areas of strength include: Letter-Word Identification, Passage Comprehension,
Reading Fluency, Writing Fluency, Writing Samples, Understanding Directions, and Story
Recall.
Throughout the administration of this assessment, Molly displayed various positive
learning behaviors, such as attentiveness, concentration, and cooperation.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The following are suggested strategies and/or techniques to use.

Provide direct instruction in strategies to solving applied math problems (i.e., word
problems)
Use of visuals when solving applied math problems
Calculator Use
Provide direct instruction in strategies for spelling unfamiliar words (i.e., words
that do not have phonetic spelling or words with unusual spelling)
Use of cover sheets to minimize amount of questions
Instruction in smaller chunks

__________________________________
Signature of Evaluator
Date

Woodcock-Johnson III Reflection

Throughout this semester, our class discussions have enhanced my understanding
of CEC Standard 8. That being said; however, administering the Woodcock Johnson
enhanced my understanding of Standard 8 even further. By giving the assessment, I was
able to put my learned knowledge, from class, into practice. I was able to apply what I
learned in class to a real-life testing situation. In my opinion, learning by doing is one of
the best ways to learn. CEC Standard 8 outlines the skills and knowledge needed to
complete the assessment process in special education. When administering the Woodcock
Johnson, I was able to practice many of those skills. First and foremost, I was able to
practice assessing various development areas of a young student. I was able to gain an
understanding of the specific language and instructions required for the WoodcockJohnson. Also, I was able to gain a better understanding of the specific skills and subtests
within each academic cluster. In my opinion, having the experience of administering the
Woodcock Johnson helped me gain a deeper, more thorough understanding of CEC
Standard 8. Assessment plays a critical role in special education; therefore, it is extremely
important that educators, especially young educators, feel confident in administering
assessments. I believe I am better prepared to not only administer the assessment but,
also, support my future students and families during the educational assessment process. I
will use my knowledge of CEC Standard 8 as I begin my career in special education.
My understanding of the psycho educational process as well as the information
presented was also greatly enhanced, after generating the Educational Achievement
Report. While typing up the achievement report, I realized how much information and
data is included throughout the report. I learned how in depth the psycho educational

process is and that there are many steps involved. It is important for educators to
recognize this and take the appropriate amount of time to complete the assessment
process. In addition, after completing the report, I am able to recognize how results of the
assessment aid the IEP development process. The students strengths and weaknesses,
which are revealed in the report, are used to form an appropriate IEP. Areas of
weaknesses should be addressed in the goals and objectives of the IEP. Also, special
educators use assessment information to identify instructional supports and adaptations
required for students with exceptional learning needs. Furthermore, I am now able to
interpret standard scores more accurately. I have gained a much better understanding of
what the scores mean. After reviewing my students scores and discussing her strengths
and weaknesses in the report, I am aware of which skills are needed to score in the
different ranges. For example, in order to score well, or above average, on the Word
Attack subtest, the student should demonstrate knowledge of phonics and code knowledge.
In addition, in order to score well on the Applied Problems subtest, the student should
demonstrate good listening skills.
As you can see, this education evaluation assignment has been a tremendous
learning experience. After the completion of this assignment, I now feel more confident
with the psycho educational assessment process and believe I will use the knowledge I
have gained in my future classroom. However, there are a few changes I would make next
time I administer an assessment. First, I will remember to take more notes throughout the
administration of the assessment. Although I did take some notes this time, I realized, as I
was typing up my evaluation, that more information would have been helpful. Because I
had administered the assessment a few weeks before completing the write up, it was

somewhat difficult to remember some of the little details, such as behavioral observations
of the student. Further, I will try to set up an initial meeting with the student to get to
know him or her, prior to the test. I believe this would make the student feel more
comfortable and relaxed throughout the administration of the assessment, which in my
opinion is very important. As noted in the behavioral observations, the student I chose to
assess was a very shy, anxious young girl. Meeting with her prior to the assessment
would have most likely made her feel less nervous. After going through this process, I
believe I will first meet the student, observe the student in their school environment,
interview the student, and finally assess the student. The assessment, especially the
Woodcock Johnson, can be lengthy and very time consuming; therefore, it is important for
the educator to recognize that the whole process may not be completed in just one visit.
Lastly, I believe I will spend more time practicing the assessment before administering it.
To my surprise, the student I chose scored very high on many sections of the test. This
allowed me to continue to the higher questions of the test. As the questions became more
complex, I felt that it was evident to the student I had never practiced some of the
questions. Next time I will make sure to practice more so that the administration process
can occurs more fluently and smoothly.
Overall, I am grateful for this opportunity. I believe I have a much better
understanding of the assessment process. As I continue my career in special education, I
will use the knowledge and skills in which I have gained from this assignment in my daily
life as a teacher.