Help!!! Need tests!!

I like using some of the subtests on the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests to assess decoding, particularly Word Identification and Word Attack. Word Identification asks students to read real words in isolation and Word Attack uses nonsense words. Students error responses can be really revealing….

Hope this helps!

Have them give the Gray Oral Reading Test; it looks at decoding(accuracy), rate, comprehension and will give a much more “real” testing of reading passages than the others.

And one more thing, Sue, with that kind of brilliant analysis of his test scores (“just fine”???), I would very strongly suggest that you find a private tutor experienced in Phono-Graphix, Lindamood-Bell, etc. to help your son. Not only are they not helping him, they are totally in denial about his scores!

You might ask them to also do a CTOPP (Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing) as well. I’d like to try that one for my own child. That might identify where the breakdown in decoding is occuring.

Janis

The Lindamood Auditory Conceptualization Test (LAC Test) will not help you understand his reading skills—or word attack skills, or anything.

I use the Star (good going on that one!) and observations to judge who need an IRI (Reading Inventory. There are many: Johns, Silveroli, Flynt-Cooter, and more.) Sometimes the context readers still get by the Star/Observe pre-screen method for a little bit.

Be sure that the tester (ask for a copy of the whole protocol—not just face-sheet!) administers words in isolation and graded passages, as well as rates fluency and does listening comprehension piece. On isolated words, the tester should do an error analysis on the phonics piece.

I’m not against the GORT-3 or other standardized tests; however, their more limited forms don’t allow us to test students as frequently as IEP’s should require. A good reading inventory can give teachers valuable instructional information and they don’t take a lot of time to administer or to score.

I only care about Standard Scores and %iles when I’m qualifying for services. The rest of the time, I want to know where to begin instruction.

I’d tell you to have them do a phonics test like the Wilson Language or Galistell-Ellis Test of Coding Skills, but if their phonics aren’t exceptional, then they won’t know how to administer the test. You might ask them about this area, though. :-) Don’t let them confuse phonics with P.A.

Let us know how it turns out!

Susan or anyone else…..What is your opinion of my son’s standard scores and %’s? Good, bad, okay, low. The sped head kept saying they are “good”….but he still qualifies. As a matter of fact they said he didn’t “need” services last year. I am getting tired of the teacher saying he may NEVER learn to read better, he might learn later. Well he won’t improve unless he receives appropriate INSTUCTION!!! Right now they hand the kids pre-done class notes, read to the kids or have the the kids read text out loud. The kids do some worksheets. In HS they don’t have time to teach the kids to improve their reading skills…they just try to read to them what they need to pass and earn credits. The more they read the better their skills will become, but if they still have skills to aquire to become better readers they will not receive the instruction to do so.

His IQ Verbal is 99… 47%…Performance 102…55%…..Full Scale….100…50%.–I realize IQ doesn’t play a part if you can read or not, but it is part of qualifing for sped.

Also on the Wiat-II on the Supplemental Scores raw scores are 85….Standard Score Quartile 1** Target words raw score 19…standard quartile 1**
Word Fluency (under written Expression) raw sacore 9……standard quartile 1
**Represents quartile scores using grade based normative data

Also on the Wiat-II for written lang. his standard raw score in spelling was 80…9% written expression 72…3% Composite standard score 74…4%

On his last STAR his IRL was a 5….done last week, same as last Jan.

Thanks everyone!!!
PS…anyone know where I can go to learn how to interpret these scores better??~~Thanks again

If this is still part of a 3yr eval, ask the school to do the Gray Oral Reading Test; then have your child tutored privately…at 8th grade, the school will not be able to do enough to teach your child to read better! I wouldn’t stew and waste time interpreting scores…if he already qualifies for special ed., so be it. It’s the remediation that you need, not the label, and do the remediation yourself(outside of school).

I can’t tell what is what without you posting all SS scores on the WIAT, supplementals, too, if available. I also think you’re saying raw score for SS (standard score).

Okay on the WISC scores, but gotta repost on the achievement battery or I can’t be of any help. Sorry.

Sorry Susan…here’s what I have: This as a 7th grader’s test done last Spring 5/8 He was 13 years 11 months old

Word Reading SS 72 3%
Reading Comp SS 85 16%
Pseudoword Decoding SS 87 19%
Composite Score SS 244 79%
(Sum of subtest SS)

(Math….no problems)

Written Lang.
Spelling SS 80 9%
Written Expression SS 72 3%
Composite Score SS 74 4%
(Sum of Subtest SS)

Supplemental Score Scores
Reading Comp Raw Score 85* Standard Score Quartile 1**
Target Words Raw Score 19 Standard Score Quartile 1**

Written Expression
Word Fluency Raw Score 9 Standard Score Quartile 1

* Represents standard score ** Represents scopres using grade bases normative data.

Wechsler Individual Acheivement Test-II
Word Reading SS 72 3%
Reading Comp SS 85 16%
Reading Composite SS 79 8%

Adverse Impact–has a signifigant discrepency–-Comp is higher than basic word reading……Word reading involves reading words in isolation using a variety of decoding strategies….more successful reading short passages and answering questions about his reading….may have difficulty reading and gaining meaning from his reading if there are a large percentage of new of ufamiliar words……may have difficuties reading matherials at grade level.

Need for specialy designed instructional program…….Goals & objectives should be written to assist him closing the gap……while maintaining involvement in gen ed curriculum…….Adapations that may be helpful….pre-teach vocab words, opportunity to hear the material read aloud as he follows along and if test taking is impacted, he may benefit from having tests read aloud……these are only a few examples that may be considered

Written Language–-Wechsler

Written Ex SS 72 3%
Witten Lang Composite SS 74 4%

Adverse impact……not demonstrating writing skills at age level or within expectations given his cognitive ability……disability in this area will have negative impact on his success in all areas of when written responses are required…thoughts, ideas and knowledge of a subject may not be expressed successfully if writing alone is the method of evaluation…..developement of his ideas and limited use of vocabulary is weak and does not reflect his cognitive ability.

Need for specaily designed instructional program…..continues to need support….development of vocab. will come with increased reading and exposure to vocabulary…..he should continue to use editing skills and if necesary have additional opportunities for editing with a teacher….Long assignements may need to be completed in smaller segments.

This is a child who has been in sped since the 2nd grade…first serviced in the area of written lang…3 yrs tested out of written language…qualified for reading…2 years later I requested he be re-evaluated in the area of written lang…he tested back in when they used the Wechsler…exact same scores 5/02 as in 5/01…. New sped teacher said there was NO problem and would NOT write an IEP for written lang Oct of last year…..this year she has written an IEP for written lang. after his 3 yr eval in the Spring
All progress reports I have received were made by the teacher’s opinions that he was achieving his goals set in his IEP–—3 yr down the road with his eval there isn’t much growth–—That’s when they say “he didn’t test well”.

They stated in the meeting that they put more credit in teacher observation than in testing.

This was also a SD that used nothing but a Whole Language curriculum …with a bit of Phonics thrown in depending what teacher you had until 1999

His IRL on the STAR says he is comprehending on the 5th grade level…is that the level I should be looking at?…No change in the IRL from 1/02 to 9/02…still 5th

On our State tests he tests at the 5% in reading.

We don’t have another meeting until 10/16. They will have the fall state tests done and the decoding tests. I hope they choose a good test to use.

Thank you Susan for your time.

Sorry Susan…here’s what I have: This as a 7th grader’s test done last Spring 5/8 He was 13 years 11 months old

Word Reading SS 72 3%
Reading Comp SS 85 16%
Pseudoword Decoding SS 87 19%
Composite Score SS 244 79%
(Sum of subtest SS)

(Math….no problems)

Written Lang.
Spelling SS 80 9%
Written Expression SS 72 3%
Composite Score SS 74 4%
(Sum of Subtest SS)

Supplemental Score Scores
Reading Comp Raw Score 85* Standard Score Quartile 1**
Target Words Raw Score 19 Standard Score Quartile 1**

Written Expression
Word Fluency Raw Score 9 Standard Score Quartile 1

* Represents standard score ** Represents scopres using grade bases normative data.

Wechsler Individual Acheivement Test-II
Word Reading SS 72 3%
Reading Comp SS 85 16%
Reading Composite SS 79 8%

Adverse Impact–has a signifigant discrepency–-Comp is higher than basic word reading……Word reading involves reading words in isolation using a variety of decoding strategies….more successful reading short passages and answering questions about his reading….may have difficulty reading and gaining meaning from his reading if there are a large percentage of new of ufamiliar words……may have difficuties reading matherials at grade level.

Need for specialy designed instructional program…….Goals & objectives should be written to assist him closing the gap……while maintaining involvement in gen ed curriculum…….Adapations that may be helpful….pre-teach vocab words, opportunity to hear the material read aloud as he follows along and if test taking is impacted, he may benefit from having tests read aloud……these are only a few examples that may be considered

Written Language–-Wechsler

Written Ex SS 72 3%
Witten Lang Composite SS 74 4%

Adverse impact……not demonstrating writing skills at age level or within expectations given his cognitive ability……disability in this area will have negative impact on his success in all areas of when written responses are required…thoughts, ideas and knowledge of a subject may not be expressed successfully if writing alone is the method of evaluation…..developement of his ideas and limited use of vocabulary is weak and does not reflect his cognitive ability.

Need for specaily designed instructional program…..continues to need support….development of vocab. will come with increased reading and exposure to vocabulary…..he should continue to use editing skills and if necesary have additional opportunities for editing with a teacher….Long assignements may need to be completed in smaller segments.

This is a child who has been in sped since the 2nd grade…first serviced in the area of written lang…3 yrs tested out of written language…qualified for reading…2 years later I requested he be re-evaluated in the area of written lang…he tested back in when they used the Wechsler…exact same scores 5/02 as in 5/01…. New sped teacher said there was NO problem and would NOT write an IEP for written lang Oct of last year…..this year she has written an IEP for written lang. after his 3 yr eval in the Spring
All progress reports I have received were made by the teacher’s opinions that he was achieving his goals set in his IEP–—3 yr down the road with his eval there isn’t much growth–—That’s when they say “he didn’t test well”.

They stated in the meeting that they put more credit in teacher observation than in testing.

This was also a SD that used nothing but a Whole Language curriculum …with a bit of Phonics thrown in depending what teacher you had until 1999

His IRL on the STAR says he is comprehending on the 5th grade level…is that the level I should be looking at?…No change in the IRL from 1/02 to 9/02…still 5th

On our State tests he tests at the 5% in reading.

We don’t have another meeting until 10/16. They will have the fall state tests done and the decoding tests. I hope they choose a good test to use.

Thank you Susan for your time.

Sue, I’m confused about some things so I’m going to intersperse some of your text and then post a question after it. Your text will have a >at the beginning of the line.

> Sorry Susan…here’s what I have: This as a 7th grader’s
> test done last Spring 5/8 He was 13 years 11 months old
>
> Word Reading SS 72 3%
> Reading Comp SS 85 16%
> Pseudoword Decoding SS 87 19%
> Composite Score SS 244 79%
> (Sum of subtest SS)

These subtest scores do not appear to be from the WIAT (Wechsler Individual Achievement Test). From what test are they taken?

> Written Lang.
> Spelling SS 80 9%
> Written Expression SS 72 3%
> Composite Score SS 74 4%
> (Sum of Subtest SS)

These tests could be from the Wechsler, howver, I’ve not seen a “sum of the subtest SS” done like this. Are these your words? Did the tester show a written langauge composite of 74?

> Supplemental Score Scores
> Reading Comp Raw Score 85* Standard Score
> Quartile 1**
> Target Words Raw Score 19 Standard Score
> Quartile 1**

I’m not familiar with “Target Words” subtest on the WIAT. From what test are these scores?

> Written Expression
> Word Fluency Raw Score 9 Standard Score
> Quartile 1
>
> * Represents standard score ** Represents scopres using
> grade bases normative data.
>
> Wechsler Individual Acheivement Test-II
> Word Reading SS 72 3%
> Reading Comp SS 85 16%
> Reading Composite SS 79 8%
>
> They stated in the meeting that they put more credit in
> teacher observation than in testing.

An assessment combines qualitative and quantatative data.

> This was also a SD that used nothing but a Whole Language
> curriculum …with a bit of Phonics thrown in depending what
> teacher you had until 1999
>
> His IRL on the STAR says he is comprehending on the 5th grade
> level…is that the level I should be looking at?…No change
> in the IRL from 1/02 to 9/02…still 5th
>
> On our State tests he tests at the 5% in reading.

You have some excellent data. I’m not sure what state you are in, however, even with questions, he’s not showing progress by these test scores.

I’m not quite sure what to tell you, because you can write a terrific IEP and then still not make progress. It’s about horses and leading and water and drinking, basically.

It is clear that your child isn’t measuring up in reading and writing. Where are you? What are your choices other than fighting school for a great IEP that no one will implement? Private school? Tutoring?

You clearly have a right to be very concerned. As a mom, I’m sure you listen to your child read and know where the strengths and weaknesses lie.

What questions have you?

I posted a response to this last night, but my explorer or email was messing up and I guess it didn’t get here.

> Word Reading SS 72 3%
> Reading Comp SS 85 16%
> Pseudoword Decoding SS 87 19%
> Composite Score SS 244 79%
> (Sum of subtest SS)

Are the words in parentheses () your words or on the report. A composite score is not generally a sum of the Ss scores and this one doesn’t appear to be either.

These subtests (above) don’t look like the WIAT. From what test are they?

> Written Lang.
> Spelling SS 80 9%
> Written Expression SS 72 3%
> Composite Score SS 74 4%
> (Sum of Subtest SS)

These (above) could be from the WIAT. Are they?

> Supplemental Score Scores
> Reading Comp Raw Score 85* Standard Score
> Quartile 1**
> Target Words Raw Score 19 Standard Score
> Quartile 1**

These (above) don’t look like the WIAT? From what test do they come?

> Written Expression
> Word Fluency Raw Score 9 Standard Score
> Quartile 1
>
> * Represents standard score ** Represents scopres using
> grade bases normative data.
>
> Wechsler Individual Acheivement Test-II
> Word Reading SS 72 3%
> Reading Comp SS 85 16%
> Reading Composite SS 79 8%

> This is a child who has been in sped since the 2nd
> grade…first serviced in the area of written lang…3 yrs
> tested out of written language…qualified for reading…2
> years later I requested he be re-evaluated in the area of
> written lang…he tested back in when they used the
> Wechsler…exact same scores 5/02 as in 5/01…. New sped
> teacher said there was NO problem and would NOT write an IEP
> for written lang Oct of last year…..this year she has
> written an IEP for written lang. after his 3 yr eval in the
> Spring
> All progress reports I have received were made by the
> teacher’s opinions that he was achieving his goals set in his
> IEP–—3 yr down the road with his eval there isn’t much
> growth–—That’s when they say “he didn’t test well”.
>
> They stated in the meeting that they put more credit in
> teacher observation than in testing.
>
> This was also a SD that used nothing but a Whole Language
> curriculum …with a bit of Phonics thrown in depending what
> teacher you had until 1999
>
> His IRL on the STAR says he is comprehending on the 5th grade
> level…is that the level I should be looking at?…No change
> in the IRL from 1/02 to 9/02…still 5th
>
> On our State tests he tests at the 5% in reading.
>
> We don’t have another meeting until 10/16. They will have the
> fall state tests done and the decoding tests. I hope they
> choose a good test to use.

They’ve already used a good test if they used the WIAT. What’s the hold up here? This child appears—from the testing—to meet criteria if the testing is valid. (In other words: tested in quiet place, rapport with tester, etc.)

Observations may be important to teachers, but judges like to see that empirical data (Standard scores) back-up that subjective data (observations). This is a cop out.

You can fight till you’re blue in the face, though, and if they have no one trained to teach your child to decode words, you can write a Jim-Dandy IEP that no one will implement. (I guess you know that already.)

Do you have the means to hire a tutor? That is the easiest way, however, there is no incentive for school to change if everyone just pays for it themselves.

In what state are you? Do you know what it takes to qualify for LD in your state?

Assessment of Children: Cognitive Applications (4th Ed) says about the WIAT in its comments (pp591-92):

The WIAT has acceptabe reliability and validity, but it has some limitations. First, although the scoring criteria are clea and ened for subjectivity has been minimized, four of the subtests require some subjective judgment in scoring. Second, the BASIC Reading subtest does not assess phonics or other word-attack skills, areas that are important to reading ability (Ferrara, 1998). Third, the Oral Expressions subest calls for some fairly complex descriptions (however, they are liberally scored). Fourth, the test does not have a sufficient floor for young examinees or sufficient ceiling for older examinees. Overall, the scores provided for high-scoring older children are not satisfactory.

It goes on to discuss the advantages (comparing Listening Comp to Reading Comp and comparing to Wecshler IQ test—basically.)

As a member of the IEP team, you have a right to suggest testing. I would suggest these tests from the Woodcock Diagnostic Reading Battery:

Letter-Word Identification
Word Attack

Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised has a Word Attack subtest, too, and would get at the decoding problem.

Now, as a member of the diagnostic team, you have a right to know what test they’ve chosen and to have input. Post the selected testing instrument and collect responses. We’ll give you the ammunition from Sattler and others that will have them thinking twice about some crummy test with no validity.

One step at a time!