1

SPED 425-001: Educational Achievement Report

Towson University
Leah Gruber
Dr. Fewster
4/30/15

Educational Achievement Report

Demographic Information
Name: Lola Thompson
Address: 8 Cromwell Dr.
Phone: 732-787-0091
Date of Birth: January 18, 1994
Date(s) of Testing: April 8, 2015
Chronological Age: (years, months): 21 years, 3
months
Primary Language of Student: English

School: Towson University

Teacher: Mrs. Smith
Grade/Educational Setting: College
Referred by: Mrs. Smith
Examiner: Leah Gruber
Date of Report: April 30, 2015
Primary Language of Test: English

Reason for Referral

Lola Thompson was evaluated on April 8th, 2015. At the time of the evaluation, Lola was 21
years and 3 months old. She had been preforming in her classes every day but seemed to be
having trouble at times. According to the academic history, interview with Lolas family, Lola
has been experiencing difficulty in many academic areas. For example, Lola has been
performing inconsistently in the areas of reading, mathematics, and written language. Based on
this information, Lola was referred for an educational achievement evaluation.
Examiner Criteria Statements
In the opinion of the examiner:
__X__ The scores obtained are valid representation of students current educational performance levels.
__X_ The test(s) selected is a valid tool for the stated purpose and is valid for the student.
__X__ Linguistic, cultural, and /or economic differences did not influence testing.
Note: If these criteria are not met, the examiner(s) should state which ones do not apply and why.

Background Information
Family History
Lola lives at home with her parents and her older sister. The primary language spoken at
home is English and her sister is 24 years old. Her home is in New Jersey but she lives in
Maryland for school. Lola has a lot of cousins and is close with her extended family. Lola
Thompson is in her Junior year of college at Towson University.
Lola has a lot of friends and they enjoy going out to eat, hanging out together and going
to the gym. She is friendly but competitive and is involved in a sorority on campus called Zeta
Tau Alpha. Growing up she never had a specific hobby or talent that she stuck with besides for
dancing. Lola is a Business major and said that the best decision she ever made was going away
for college.

3
Developmental History
Lola grew up and developed normally. When she was an infant, she wore a hip brace but
developed regularly after she had it taken off. Lola walked, talked, and potty trained all at regular
ages. Neither her nor her sister Jaimie had special needs or services growing up. Lola has always
had normal behavior patters such as eating three or more meals a day and sleeping normally
during the night. Last summer, Lola was diagnosed with ADD and was prescribed 5 milligrams
of Adderall a day- she now takes 20 milligrams.
Academic History
Lola has no learning disability. When she was younger she went to two different
Elementary Schools, Shalom Torah and McDivitt Elementary. For Middle School Lola went to
Snadburg Middle School and for High School she went to Old Bridge High School. During these
years of education Lola went to school regularly and never had any remedial services. She has
bad vision but now wears contacts and glasses to see in class. Growing up she had normal
attendance and only missed school if she was sick. So far, she has received grades Kindergarten
through her Junior year of college at Towson University. She has never had any educational or
psychological evaluations done and has never had a tutor for any subject.
Social HistoryLola grew up with a lot of friends and still has a lot of friends. She has always gotten
along with her peers and teachers and has been active. She took dance classes until High School
and was also involved in some clubs. She held a job at Harmons, Stewarts a tanning salon, and
babysitting on the side. Currently, she is in the sorority Zeta Tau Alpha at Towson University.
She goes out on the weekend with her friends, loves to shop, and go out to eat.
Classroom Observations
1. Initial Interview with the Child
Lola was acting normal during the interview. She was not anxious or nervous. Lola did
have to think back and hesitated a little bit while some questions were asked about her
previous involvement with clubs and what schools she went to. She seemed calm and
she cooperated with the interview.
2. Behavior during Testing
Lolas behavior during the test was normal and calm. She was confident most of the time
unless it had to do with remembering content. Most of the subtests Lola scored average
on or close to/above her age equivalence. During Tests 5, 6, and 10 Lola felt the most
confident because it was on problem solving and math equations. Lola struggles with
spelling and sentence structure more than anything. She was cooperative and
understanding when the test was tedious. Lola did not take her medication during this test
because she doesnt take it every day anymore and she forgot to. By not taking her
medication this caused her to lose focus at one point.

4
Test and Procedures Administered
During the timed Letter-Word Identification subtest, Test 1, Lola did pretty well. She scored
above her age equivalency level, but started having trouble pronouncing some of the words at the
end. Lola kept looking at me to see if I would help her sound out the word when she was
struggling. I told her to do the best she could
For Test 2, Reading Fluency, Lola did very well. She completed every page within the three
minute time period. This section was probably the easiest for Lola and the section she did the
best in. Although for Test 3, Story Recall, Lola did not do as well. At first she did not understand
that she had to focus on listening to the whole story. Lola would listen for a few seconds then
completely forget the end of the story that was being told. She preformed above her age
equivalency level for Reading Fluency, but below her age equivalency level for Story Recall.
Once I reminded her to really listen then repeat what she could remember back to me, she did
better.
During Test 4, Understanding Directions, Lola did better. Although she was below age
equivalency level, she seemed to understand the concept of the test. Again, Lola had trouble
remembering the order of what was being said a few times, or just point to the wrong object in
general.
I noticed for Test 5, Calculation, Lola was more excited about this subtest than the other subtests.
She was not tense, she appeared very confident. She did have to skip around a few times, but
would always re-try a problem. Lola tried as many math problems as she could, but did have to
not answer some of them because she did not understand. During Test 6, Math Fluency, Lola had
the same type of energy. She was confident and very quick to fill them out. Even though she did
not finish all of the problems in time, her score was above age equivalency level for Math
Fluency, she filled out most of the subtest with ease and was not worried.
During Test 7, Spelling, Lola had more trouble. Although she showed no signs of anxiousness,
her results proved otherwise. She had trouble spelling words such as acquaintance and
inflammation. She spelled these words acquitance and inflimation. She also scored below
her age equivalency level for this subtest.
After Test 7, Lola started to get antsy. We took a quick break, then got back to the test. On tests 8
and 9, Writing Fluency and Passage Comprehension, Lola did very well. She scored above age
equivalency for both and was very confident. On number 30, Lola wrote: You are on the table,
when there was a bowl on the table. There were times when she just wanted to be finished and
didnt look at the picture completely. There was another picture, number 35, where she wrote:
You are in my paper, and it was a person ripping a piece of paper. Test 9, Passage
Comprehension was also easy for Lola she preformed well on the subtest but did want to move
on.

5
Test 10, Applied Problems, Lola had more trouble on. She would keep asking me if she got
answers right but I just told her to keep going. She preformed below age equivalency level but
did try up to number 61. Lola seemed confident on this subtest because it was math, but did not
score very well. On Test 11, Writing Samples, this is where Lola had the most trouble. She
scored below age equivalency level, and some of her sentences did not make any sense. Some
sentences asked to list activities, or finish the sentence, and at times Lola completely disregarded
the question and just wrote the sentence that first came to mind.
On Test 12, Story Recall-Delayed, Lola did better than expected. She had an easier time
remembering the passages from the subtest later during the test than after she had first heard it.
Due to Lolas inconsistency with her grades, the Woodcock Johnson Test of Achievement III
(WJ-ACH III) was administered. The WJ-ACH III is an individually administered test of
achievement measuring five curricular areas- reading, mathematics, written language, oral
language, and academic knowledge. The test provides a comprehensive system for measuring
general intellectual ability, specific cognitive abilities, scholastic aptitude, oral language, and
academic achievement. The WJ-ACH III was selected to be administered to Edward to gain
more information about his general academic performance that include the following skills: (1)
reading skills that include broad reading, basic reading skills, and reading comprehension, (2)
oral language skills that include listening comprehension and oral expression, (3) math skills that
include broad math, math calculation skills, and math reasoning, (4) written language skills that
include broad written language, basic writing skills, and written expression, and (5) an academic
knowledge cluster that assesses academic skills, academic fluency, academic applications, and
phoneme/grapheme knowledge.
Results
Reading Assessment Results
The Broad Reading cluster provides a comprehensive measure of reading achievement
including basic reading skills and reading comprehension. The Standard Battery of the
Woodcock-Johnson includes the following subtests: (1) Letter-Word Identification, (2) Reading
Fluency, and (3) Passage Comprehension which were administered to Lola Thompson.
The Letter-Word Identification subtest measures word identification skills. Lola
Thompson was required to identify letters and to pronounce words correctly. Lolas performance
on this task was in the 30 years and above age equivalency level. The Reading Fluency subtest
measures the ability to quickly read simple sentences and decide if the sentences are true. Lolas
performance for this task was in the 30 years and above age equivalency level. The Passage
Comprehension subtest measures the ability to match the pictographic representation of a word
with an actual picture of the object. In addition, Lola was required to point to a picture
represented by a phrase. Then Lola was required to read a short passage and identify a missing
key word that makes sense in the content of that passage. Lolas performance on this subtest was

6
in the 30 years and above age equivalency level.
Mathematics Assessment Results
The Broad Math cluster provides a comprehensive measure of math achievement
including problem solving, numeration, fluency, and reasoning. For the Standard Battery, the
following subtests were administered: (1) Calculation, (2) Math Fluency, and (3) Applied
Problems.
The Calculation subtest is a measure of computational skills and automaticity with basic
math facts and provides a measure of basic mathematical skills. This subtest required Lola to
accurately perform mathematical computations. Also included are problems requiring
manipulation of fractions and more advanced calculations using algebra, geometry, trigonometry,
and calculus. Lolas performance on the Calculation section was in the 16 years and 6 months
age equivalency level. The Math Fluency subtest measures the ability to solve simple addition,
subtraction, and multiplication facts quickly. For this test, Lolas performance was in the 25
years and above age equivalency level. The Applied Problems test required Lola to understand
and solve practical mathematics problems that are presented orally. Pictures or the written
problem is available for the student to see. The problems required Lola to listen to the problem,
recognize the procedures to be followed, and them perform relatively simple calculations. Lolas
performance on this subtest was in the 18 years and 1 month age equivalency level.
Oral Language Assessment Results
The Oral Language cluster provides a comprehensive measure of oral expression and
listening comprehension. For the Standard Battery, two tests are administered, Story Recall and
Understanding Directions.
The Story Recall subtest measures aspects of oral language including language
development and meaningful memory. During this portion of the test, Lola was required to recall
increasingly complex stories that are presented on an audio tape and Lolas performance in this
area was in the 12 years and 2 months age equivalency level. On the Understanding Directions
subtest is an oral language measure. The task required Lola to listen to a sequence of audiotaped instructions and then follow the directions by pointing to various objects in a colored
picture. Lolas performance on this task was in the 13 years and 6 months age equivalency level.
Written Language Assessment Results
The Broad Written Language cluster provides a comprehensive measure of written
language achievement including spelling of single-word responses, fluency of production, and
quality of expression. The tests administered on the Standard Battery included Spelling, Writing
Fluency, and Writing Samples.
The Spelling subtest is a measure of the ability to write orally presented words correctly.

7
Test items measure prewriting skills and required Lola to produce uppercase and lowercase
letters, and to spell words correctly. Lola performance was in the 19 years age equivalency
level. The Writing Fluency subtest measures skill in formulating and writing simple sentences
quickly. Lolas performance on this subtest was in the range/level. Each sentence must include a
set of three stimulus words and describe an accompanying picture. . Lolas performance on this
subtest was in the 21 years and above age equivalency level. The Writing Samples subtest
measures skill in writing responses to a variety of demands. Lolas performance on this task was
in the 12 years and 11 months age equivalency level.
Interpretation of Assessment Findings
Lola Thompsons reading assessment results stayed within the classification of average to
high average scores. Her broad reading cluster, letter-word identification, passage
comprehension, and reading fluency age-level scores were all above 30 years. Lola did very
well in this section, and had the highest standard scores for this part of the assessment. She
classified as above average for both her broad reading cluster and her reading fluency scores.
Since Lolas age is 21 years and 3 months, her results showed that her age-equivalency level was
higher than her actual age. There are not significant discrepancies in her performance shown in
these results. All of the areas of testing within the broad reading cluster were similar and showed
that Lolas performance reflected her age equivalency level. The reading assessment results all
show the same patterns of scores. What can be inferred from these results is that Lola does very
well with reading, and is capable of doing what her peers can do if not better.
Lolas math assessment results were all average as well. Knowing Lola this did not
surprise me because she has always been good at math. Although, all of her age-equivalency
level scores were under her chronological age except for her math fluency score. Her age
equivalency level for her broad mathematics cluster was 19 years, her age equivalency level for
calculation was 16 years and 6 months, and her age equivalency level for applied problems was
18 years and 1 month. Math is Lolas favorite subject, but she is used to being able to use a
calculator which would explain the lower age equivalency levels for some of the subtests. Twice
during math fluency subtest she made errors while reading the signs when she was being timed,
but her age equivalency level was above 25 years. Since the examinee was not able to use a
calculator these scores do reflect expected performance because it makes it harder to remember
all of the equations and how to solve the answers unless they are memorized such as in math
fluency section. But overall for these math assessment scores, there is a similar pattern of
performance and it can be inferred that Lola is able to keep up with her peers and complete her
own work.
For Lolas oral language assessment results she also did average. Lola did express to me
how memorization was her weakest skill, which showed in her age equivalency scores. Her
overall oral language age equivalency level was 13 years and 1 month. Lolas results for story
recall, and understanding directions showed around the same age equivalency levels of 12 years
and 2 months, and 13 years and 6 months. Lola had more trouble remembering the subtests
because she was getting distracted. These scores do not reflect expected performance for her

8
chronological age. But, these results did follow a pattern of all being in the same age range,
although low, they all related. Its inferred that Lola is able to follow directions, but shortly after
they are given.
Lolas written language results showed one specific discrepancy. Even though her age
equivalency level was above 28 years in general, her writing samples scores were very low. She
received an age equivalency level of 12 years and 11 months for this subtest. This does not match
up with her chronological age and was an un-expected performance. In this subtest she scores
low average, whereas for writing fluency she scored a very superior. During the writing samples
Lola was not interested in taking the test anymore and was not focused. Its inferred from these
results that Lola has trouble with creating thoughtful sentences at times, and may need extra help
or someone to check her work when handing in assignments.
For most subtests Lola did average. There were some subtests that she preformed in the
high average range, but then one subtest she scored low average. Lolas scores depended on her
skill level and how focused she was. These results do reflect her performance and show patterns.
In general, Lola was comfortable for the reading assessment and mathematics assessment portion
of the test more than the other subtests- this shows in her results. It is clear that if Lola were
more focused when taking the WJ- III then she would have had age equivalency level scores
closer to her chronological age.
Summary/Discussion (Conclusion)
Lola Thompson is a 21 year 3 month old student who attends Towson University. Lola
was referred for an educational evaluation because she had been performing inconsistently in the
areas of reading, mathematics, and written language. Her strengths include calculation, reading
fluency, and math fluency. Lolas academic weaknesses include story recall, spelling, and
writing. Lolas scores reflect her academically, she has always had a hard time with Science and
Grammar, but Math is her strong suit. Since she is enrolled in Towson Universitys business
program she has a lot of classes dealing with Mathematics, and not so much English. I believe
that most of her low scores on the test come from her not focusing and letting herself get off task
if there wasnt a time limit.
In the future when I have to administer this teat, I will make sure that the student
understands every direction clearly and is comfortable and not nervous. I could tell that Lola was
unsure of herself at times because she could tell I was figuring out how to tell her the directions
properly. Next time, I will definitely work on encouraging the student to keep going more instead
of stopping each time she had a question, and trying to not react to it.
These assessment results will help in determining if Lola requires special education
services. These results should be used with other available information when making a decision.

Recommendations and/or Proposed I.E.P. Goals:

9
Lola Thompson is a Junior at Towson University and is an average student. Even though
Lola scored average for almost all of her results on the WJ III, there are some recommendations
that can be made. Lola could improve her performance in Broad Reading, Broad Mathematics,
Oral Language, and Broad Written Language. There are certain subtests results that prove to be
better than others. These recommendations are based off of Lolas WJ III test results and would
better her both in the classroom, a job, and in a social setting. She will work with her professors,
tutors, and advisor. The results that cannot be determined from a score will be kept in a log to see
how/if things have improved at all over time.
1. For the Passage Comprehension subtest, Lola Thompson scored average. It is
recommended that Lola work on summarizing and taking large portions of text and
breaking them down. When studying for a test she is expected to find key details, and
know how to make outlines for them. Lola will be assessed by her professors after every
exam and every three weeks to see if she needs extra help. Progress will be monitored by
her test results.
2. From her subtest score on the WJ III for Applied Problems, Lola Thompson is expected
to score at least 85% or higher on math equation word problems, without using a
calculator. She will be assessed by her math tutor and her professor every three weeks.
Her progress will be monitored in her test results, class work, and homework. If extra
intervention is needed Lola is expected to sign up for more tutoring hours.
3. From her subtest score on the WJ III for Writing Samples, Lola Thompson is expected to
build her sentence structure, grammar, and vocabulary. She will receive intensive
instruction on sentence structure and the basics of English. By using the writing center,
her professor, and an writing tutor if necessary, Lola will be assessed on her progress
once every two weeks. Success will be determined by looking at her papers that she
hands in, and her homework she completes.
4. From her subtest score on the WJ III for Understanding Directions, Lola Thompson is
expected to take notes thoroughly in order to better interpret what people are saying to
her by making a checklist or another form documentation thats easy to carry. Lola will
be assessed by her advisor who will be checking up on her and seeing what progress she
is making with her interpretation skills, once a month. Success will be determined by
how/if she continues to make the checklist or documentation, and how she communicates
with her professors and peer.

10
____Leah Gruber_____________________
Type your name and professional affiliation
Woodland County Public Schools

________4/30/14____________
Date

SUMMARY OF SCORES
WOODCOCK-JOHNSON III, FORM A TESTS OF ACHIEVEMENT
Name of Student: Lola Thompson

compuscore
BROAD READING CLUSTER
BASIC READING SKILLS
READING COMPREHENSION CLUSTER
Letter-Word Identification
Letter-Word Identification

Passage Comprehension
Reading Fluency
Word Attack
Reading Vocabulary
BROAD MATHEMATICS CLUSTER

Date Administer:

April 8th, 2015

Age
Equivalen
t (AE)

Grade
Equivalen
t (GE)

Standard
Score
(SS)

PR

classification

>30

>18.0

111

High Average

>30

15.4

106

Average

>30
>30

>18.0
>18.0

106
117

Average
High Average

19

13.0

98

Average

16-6
>25
18-1

11.0
13.9
12.5

98
103
98

Average
Average
Average

13-1
12-2
13-6
>28

7.7
6.7
8.1
13.1

93
94
94
105

Average
Average
Average
Average

19

13.0

99

Average

>21
12-11

>15.6
7.5

135
89

Very Superior
Low Average

MATHEMATICS CALCULATION CLUSTER

MATHEMATICS REASONING CLUSTER

Calculation
Math Fluency
Applied Problems
Quantitative Concepts
ORAL LANGUAGE
Story Recall
Understanding Directions
BROAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE
BASIC WRITING SKILLS
WRITTEN EXPRESSION CLUSTER
Spelling
Editing
Writing Fluency
Writing Samples

11
Reflection:
Administering this formal assessment enhanced my understanding of the CEC Standard 4
Assessment because as a beginning special educator I learned how to use multiple methods of
a formal assessment and new data-sources when making educational decisions. This was my first
formal assessment that I have given, and I have never taken the WJ III. Going into it I had no
idea what to expect, but when reflecting back on the CEC Standard 4 Key Elements I now
understand how to interpret test results and use multiple methods of assessment. Key element 4.1
states that beginning special education professionals select and use technically sound formal
and informal assessments that minimize bias I believe that by administering the WJ III I did
this. This test was made for a broad number of learners, and after interpreting the results I was
able to guide educational decisions for my examinee. Along with the CEC Standard 4, I was able
to understand the InTASC Standard 6 better. This also has to do with assessment, but it states that
the teacher understand and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own
growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide the teachers and learners decision making.
After reading more into this standard and reflecting I found that the WJ III does engage the
learner in their own growth and monitor the learner progress. This formal assessment enhanced
my understanding in both of these standards and gave me more of an insight into how they are
broken down and used while giving and taking assessments.
Generating the Educational Achievement Report has enhanced my understand of the
Psycho-Educational process because I now understand the umbrella. After experiencing giving
the assessment, and interpreting the scores, I have a better understand of cognitive functioning
what an Educational Achievement test is. There are many different kinds of assessment
measures, and the WJ III was an example of how this Psycho-Educational process was done.
First, there is the clinical interview which we did, then assessing the cognitive functioning and
educational achievement, and lastly if there needs to be medication prescribed. I think that by
administering the WJ III it helped me to understand how a formal educational assessment is
helpful and really does aid in the Psycho-Educational process.
In the future when giving the WJ III I am definitely going to do a few things differently.
For one, I think that I need to be more confident when giving the test. At first I wasnt sure how
the test was going to go and I was nervous about giving it. I learned half way through the test
that it wasnt hard to give, and I needed to relax. Before I gave the test to Lola, I gave it to a
younger student in middle school. When I was around a student I didnt know (which is going to
happen again) I didnt know how to sound professional and make it seem like I knew what I was
doing. Im happy that I got to practice ahead of time before giving Lola the test because that
made it easier. Next time when scoring the Woodcock Johnson I am going to familiarize myself
with all of the scores an read over every detail before trying to score all of the subtests at once. I
found myself going back a lot and getting discouraged when I wasnt sure what to score an
answer. I also had a problem interpreting the scores because I was at first confused by all of the
different numbers. When I give the Woodcock Johnson again I am going to make sure I look at
the Compuscore sheet for a while before writing my report. It was harder to interpret the results
when I didnt know what some of the signs meant, for example (>) this sign. Overall, I think that
administering the WJ III went well for my first time doing it. Im confident in giving it again, it

12
taught me a lot about myself, and my examinee.