Confidential

Page 1

1/27/2017

Redondo Beach Unified School District

Division of Special Education
Speech and Language Assessment Report
Students Name:

Justin Morgan

D.O.B.:

12/07/2001

Age:
Grade:
District:

Case Manager:

15:0
9
Redondo Beach
Unified School
District
Redondo Union High
School
1 Sea Hawk Way
Redondo Beach, CA
90277
Jessica Parmar

Referred by:

Triennial Assessment

School and
address:

Students primary
language:
Language of
assessment:
CELDT Results:
Assessment dates:
Speech Language
Pathologists
Name:
Speech Language
Pathologists Phone
Number:

English

Date of meeting:

01/27/2017

Reason for
referral/assessment
:

Speech Language
Concerns

English
N/A
10/18, 10/21/2016
Kat Grice M.A.,
C.C.C.-SLP
(310) 798-8665
x4060

Educationally-Relevant Background and History:

Justin is a 15-year-old male currently in the 9th grade at Redondo Union High School. Justin originally
qualified for special education services under the eligibility of Speech or Language Impairment (SLI) in
2007 at Greenfield Elementary in Arizona. Records indicate he was diagnosed with Autism at the age of
five and his eligibility was changed to Autistic-like characteristics in March 2010. Justin is currently
enrolled in a Specialized Day Class for Academic Instruction Group services 5 days a week for 250
minutes. He receives speech/language services for 45 minutes a week in a group setting. His services
include counseling for 30 minutes at a delivery of 18 sessions yearly.

Validity Statement
Justin was assessed across 3 sessions. Assessment sessions occurred in the morning and afternoon. Test
results are considered valid for the purposes of this assessment and do not appear to be due to
environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.

Morgan, Justin 2017

Confidential

Page 2

1/27/2017

Speech and Language Assessment Tools

Formal Assessment:
The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (4th edition)
The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (3rd edition; PPVT-III) is an individually administered, un-timed,
norm-referenced measure of receptive single word vocabulary. On this test the examiner read a word and
the student selects one of four black and white illustrations that he felt corresponded to the word just read.
The test has two parallel forms, requires no oral or written responses, and no reading by the examinee.
Justin received a standard score of 73 which is in the below average range.
Score Name

Raw Score

Standard Score

Percentile

147

73

Justin correctly identified 22/36 nouns, 6/12 verbs, and 7/12 attributes. He identified common and some
less salient nouns such as: pastry, beverage, trumpet, links, archeologist, fern, clamp, feline, florist,
carpenter, glider, valve, pillar, poultry, and cornea. He missed less salient nouns such as: mammal,
pedestrian, interior, garment, hedge, primate, hatchet, parallelogram, pentagon, appliance, peninsula,
porcelain, and syringe. He identified verbs including: interviewing, assisting, snarling, departing,
hovering, and reprimanding. He missed verbs including: inhaling, polluting, injecting, demolishing,
consuming, and submerging. He identified the following attributes: fragile, solo, puzzled, inflated,
aquatic, constrained, and hazardous. He could not identify the following attributes: weary, transparent,
dilapidated, cerebral, and perpendicular.
Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test (EOWPVT)
The EOWPVT is a norm-referenced test which provides an assessment of speaking vocabulary. This test
measured Justins ability to name objects, actions and concepts illustrated in pictures. Justin was asked to
look at a picture, and provide the word that best describes the object, action, or concept shown. The
EOWPVT requires the individual to retrieve words from their memory. The average range for the
standard score of the EOWPVT is 85-115 which puts Justin in the average range with a standard score of
96.
Score Name

Raw Score

Standard Score

Percentile

120

96

39

Justin successfully identified many nouns, verbs and categories including: measuring, windmill,
wheelbarrow, saddle, reptile, spring, tweezer, water, banjo, graph, boomerang, transportation, laptop,
stump, fractions, microscope, greenhouse, expressions, hexagon, clarinet, fungus, symbols, Africa,
stethoscope, and asparagus. Justin missed the following words: celery, directions, dock, hoof, scale,

Morgan, Justin 2017

Confidential

Page 3

1/27/2017

hammock, skyscraper, bulldozer, funnel, appliances, column, eclipse, thermostat, awning and tripod.
Justin often gave a semantically related item, such as signs for directions and measurer for
scales. Phonemic cues were often successfully used to retrieve a word. This is when the first sound(s) is
provided to help retrieve the targeted word. With this cue, he successfully retrieved: celery, directions,
hoof, scales, skyscraper, bulldozer, and eclipse. This indicates he may present with word finding
difficulties.

Comprehensive Assessment of Spoken Language (CASL)

The Comprehensive Assessment of Spoken Language (CASL) is a norm-referenced oral language
assessment. It provides a thorough evaluation regarding the processes of comprehension, expression, and
retrieval in four language categories: (1) lexical/semantic skills, (2) syntactic knowledge, (3)
supralinguistic knowledge, and (4) pragmatic abilities through use of fifteen subtests. Each subtest is
designed to measure a different area of oral language and each subsequent subtest increases in
complexity. The CASL is designed and used for evaluating children between the ages of 3 and 21 that
demonstrate language delays, specifically oral language disorders. The Core Language Score is reflective
of his overall receptive and expressive language skills. Justin received the following Core Language
Score:
Core Language Score

Standard Score
72

Percentile
3

His standard score of 72 is in the below average range. Bolded subtests are used to obtain his Core
Language Score. His performance on each subtest is as follows:
Subtest Name
Antonyms
Synonyms
Idiomatic Language
Sentence Expression
Nonliteral Language
Meaning from Context
Double Meaning
Pragmatic Judgment

Raw Score
31
23
16
31
14
12
13
43

Standard Score
87
71
82
83
66
82
88
83

Percentile
19
3
12
13
1
12
21
13

The Synonyms subtest is administered to assess word knowledge through the presentation of similar
words. The examinee is required to identify a word of similar meaning in relation to the presented word
(stimuli). The ability to recognize synonyms requires a clear understanding pertaining to the meaning of
each presented word. The subtest is administered using a multiple choice format and the examinee is
required to indicate their response either through verbal repetition of the chosen word or nonverbal
indication of their choice via pointing. Successful performance on this task requires knowledge of both
word meanings. Below average performance may be an indication that the meaning of one or both words
is unknown. A standard score of 71 was earned on this subtest corresponding with a percentile rank of 3
indicating that Justin scored as well or better than 3% of his same aged peers. These results indicate that
Justin has performed in the below average range on this subtest. He identified the following synonym
pairs: shock/stun, whimper/whine, utensil/tool, survey/examine and infant baby. He missed the following
synonym pairs: plunge/dive, tour/travel, evacuate/abandon, hoof/foot, and raffle/lottery.
Morgan, Justin 2017

Confidential

Page 4

1/27/2017

The Antonyms subtest was used to assess the examinees ability to identify and/or produce a the
dissimilar word in response to the orally presented word (stimuli). The subtest is designed to assess word
knowledge in a decontextualized setting to determine basic vocabulary knowledge. Successful
performance on the task requires not only the ability to know the antonym of the presented word, but also
the ability to retrieve and produce the antonym. A standard score of 87 was earned on this subtest
corresponding with a percentile rank of 19 indicating that Justin scored as well or better than 19% of his
same aged peers. These results indicate that Justin has performed in the average range on this subtest.
Justin could not provide an antonym for the following words: receive, sell, wide, victory, lengthen, guilty
and hazardless.
The Idiomatic Language subtest measures knowledge, retrieval, and oral expression of idioms, which
are defined as a group of words that produce a meaning different from the literal meaning of the
individual words. A standard score of 83 was earned on this subtest corresponding with a percentile rank
of 13 indicating that Justin scored as well or better than 13% of his same aged peers. He demonstrated
understanding of common idioms including raining cats and dogs, pulling my leg, and short end of
the stick. He missed idioms including light as a feather, walking on thin ice, and between a rock
and a hard place. He may have some difficulty understanding spoken and written language with idioms
if comprehension is not reviewed.
The Sentence Expression subtest measures oral expression of accurate syntax, including appropriate use
of grammatical morphemes, sentence structure, and word order. Early test items include repetition, using
phrases, answering questions that elicit specific syntactic forms, formulating sentences when telling a
story, and using a model sentence to generate a similar one or a reduction of the sentence. Later test items
assume knowledge of the basic sentence types and syntactic structures, focusing instead on use of
sentence structures that have more than a single phrase or clause, structures incorporating cohesive words
in a series of sentences, and sentences incorporating compound structures. A standard score of 83 was
earned on this subtest corresponding with a percentile rank of 13 indicating that Justin scored as well or
better than 13% of his same aged peers. These results indicate that Justin has performed in the slightly
below average range on this subtest. Justin had minimal difficulty with more complex items, such as
combining sentences without the overuse of and and combining sentences or creating complex
sentences with conjunctions such as although.
The Nonliteral Language subtest assesses the examinees ability to comprehend and interpret figurative
language (e.g., figurative speech, sarcasm) by providing an explanation of the intended meaning in
situations in which the literal and intended meanings do not necessarily match. The language forms are
presented orally with no supplemental pictures. A below normal score on this subtest suggests inability to
recognize nonliteral meanings of language and/or inability to use context clues and word knowledge to
aid in interpreting meaning. A standard score of 66 was earned on this subtest corresponding with a
percentile rank of 1 indicating that Justin scored as well or better than 1% of his same aged peers. These
results indicate that Justin performed in the below average range on this subtest. Justin will have difficulty
understanding language with various types of figurative speech without review and time to check for
comprehension.
The Meaning from Context subtest was included to assess the examinees ability to utilize context clues
to derive meaning from an unknown word presented in the sentence. Linguistic context found within the
stimulus set is required to infer meaning. The sentences were orally presented with no supplemental
pictures. A standard score of 82 was earned on this subtest corresponding with a percentile rank of 12
indicating that Justin scored as well or better than 12% of his same aged peers. These results indicate that
Justin performed in the slightly below average range on this subtest. He may have minimal detail
identifying the meaning of novel vocabulary using context clues.
Morgan, Justin 2017

Confidential

Page 5

1/27/2017

The Double Meaning subtest measures the ability to identify and express two possible meanings for a
single word or sentence that has multiple interpretations. Each item includes two meanings by using
either (a) a word that has a double meaning (semantic ambiguity) or (b) a syntactic structure that has two
interpretations (syntactic ambiguity). A standard score of 88 was earned on this subtest corresponding
with a percentile rank of 21 indicating that Justin scored as well or better than 12% of his same aged
peers. He performed better on items that asked him the two meanings of a word such as fan or
flour/flower. He had trouble understanding jokes or sentences that use sentence ambiguity and could
mean two different things. For instance, he could not provide two meanings of the sentence She went
into the store with toys.
The Pragmatic Judgment subtest was completed to assess the examinees ability to utilize appropriate
pragmatic language in social situations. Scenarios pertaining to real-life events were orally presented and
the appropriateness of language used was assessed during this subtest task. A standard score of 83 was
earned on this subtest corresponding with a percentile rank of 13 indicating that Justin scored as well or
better than 13% of his same aged peers. These results indicate that Justin performed in the slightly below
average range on this subtest. Justin answered many hypothetical situation/questions appropriately. These
include items that measure his ability to request help from an adult, request clarification from a teacher,
expressing regret to an adult, answering the telephone, evaluating nonverbal cues for discomfort, and
requesting information via telephone. He had difficulty on items that measured a polite decline on an
invitation, deflecting a personal question, making an introduction between peers, evaluating accuracy of
information from a peer, showing support of a peer, considering someones feelings when giving
feedback, relaying information to a teacher and requesting permission from a parent.
Informal:
Language Sample/Observations:
Oral Mechanism:
Although a formal oral motor examination was not completed, a cursory observation was completed to
measure structure/function of Justins articulators. Both the structures and function of Justins oral
mechanism were considered to be within normal limits.
Articulation:
Justin produces age appropriate speech sounds. He was 100% intelligible at the unstructured,
conversation level.
Voice:
His vocal quality, volume and pitch were appropriate for his age/gender.
Fluency:
No atypical disfluencies were noted.
Pragmatics:
The Pragmatics Profile from The Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals (CELF-5)
is a checklist of speech intentions that are typically expected skills for social and school interactions in
classrooms. It is used to identify verbal and nonverbal pragmatic deficits that may negatively influence
social and academic communication. This checklist was given to Justins case manager to informally rate
his abilities in the classroom setting.

Morgan, Justin 2017

Confidential

Page 6

1/27/2017

The student demonstrates culturally appropriate use of language when:

Never/A
lmost
Never
1.

Making/responding to greetings to/from others

2.
3.

Beginning/ending conversations
Observing turn-taking rules in the classroom or
in social situations
Maintaining eye contact/gaze
Introducing appropriate topics of conversation
Maintaining topics using typical responses
Making relevant contributions to a topic
Avoiding use of redundant information
Asking for/responding to requests for
clarification
Adjusting/modifying language based on the
communication situation
Telling/understanding jokes/stories that are
related to the situation
Showing sense of humor
Joining or leaving an ongoing communication
interaction
Participating/interacting in structured group
activities
Participating/interacting in unstructured group
activities
Responding to introductions and introducing
others
Using strategies to get attention
Using strategies for responding to interruptions
and interrupting others

4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.

Sometimes

Often

Always/Almost
Always

3
2-3
2
4
2
4
3
2
4
1
2
4
4- joining

2-leaving

4
3
3
3
1-2

Asks For, Gives and Responds to Information

The student demonstrates culturally appropriate use of language when:
Never/
Almost
Never
19.

Giving/Asking for Directions

20.
21.

Giving/Asking for the time of events

Giving/Asking for reasons and causes for
actions/conditions/choices
Asking for help from others
Offering help to others
Giving/Responding to advice or suggestions
Asking others for permission when required
Agreeing/Disagreeing
Asking for clarification
Accepting/rejecting invitations
Starting/responding to verbal/nonverbal negotiations
Reminding others/responding to reminders
Asking others to change their actions
Apologizing/Accepting apologies
Responding when asked to change his actions
Responding to teasing, anger, failure, disappointment
Offering/responding to expressions of affection
Knowing how someone is feeling based on nonverbal cues
Reading the social situation correctly and
behaving/responding
Understanding posted and implied group/school rules.

22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.

Morgan, Justin 2017

Sometimes

Often

Always/Almost
Always

2
4
4
4
3
3
3
4
4
2
4
4
3
2
2
2
4
1-2
1-2
2

Confidential

Page 7

1/27/2017

Nonverbal Communication Skills

The student reads and interprets the following nonverbal messages accurately:

39.
40.
41.
42.
43.

Facial cues/expressions
Making/Responding to greetings
Making/Responding to farewells
Beginning/ending conversations
Tone of voice

Never/
Almost
Never
1-2
1-2
1

Sometimes

Often

Always/Almost
Always

Often

Always/Almost
Always

2
1

The student demonstrates culturally appropriate use of the following nonverbal support:
Never/
Almost
Never
44.

Facial cues/expressions

45.
46.
47.

Body language/gestures
Voice intonation
Expresses messages by using gestures or facial
expressions
Uses gestures/facial expressions according to the
situation
Adjusts body language according to the situation
Presents matching gestures/facial expressions and
verbal messages

48.
49.
50.

Sometimes

4
4
3
2
1-2
2
1-2

Summary and Recommendations

Justins articulation (speech-sound production), fluency and voice are within normal limits. Overall,
Justin scored within the low average to below range for receptive and expressive language on
standardized testing. His relative strengths include expressive vocabulary, idiomatic language, using
context clues for vocabulary, and demonstrating understanding of words with multiple meanings. His
weaknesses include receptive vocabulary (may be impacted by attention) and non-literal language
(figurative language). He also would continue to benefit from pragmatic language activities to help him
understand others nonverbal cues and use appropriate nonverbal cues in a variety of social situations.
Justin continues to qualify for direct speech and language services based on his standardized scores and
performance during assessment.
It was a pleasure to work with Justin.

_______________________________
Kat Grice, M.A., CCC-SLP
Speech-Language Pathologist

Morgan, Justin 2017