Ben Smith 1 Report of Educational Assessment Student: Parents: Address: Ben Smith Kim Smith 1234 Apple View

Brighton, MI 48116 Phone: 517-672-2731 Primary Language: English Referral Source: Second Grade Teacher REASON FOR REFERRAL: Ben Smith, a 9-year-old male, is being re-evaluated by Melissa Stevenson to ensure that he is receiving all the necessary accommodations needed to succeed in the general education curriculum. SIGNIFICANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Background information was gathered from a student interview on September 12, 2012, a parent interview on October 1, 2012, and a CA60 review on September 12, 2012. Family History: Ben and his family have always lived in Michigan. Currently, they reside in Brighton, Michigan. Ben lives at home with his mother, 13-year-old brother, 11-year-old sister and 7-year-old brother. Unfortunately, Bens biological father passed away when Ben was a young boy. There is a family history of learning disabilities in the Smith family; his 7-year-old brother has Down Syndrome and his older sister receives special education services in school due to a learning disability. Bens mom owns a clothing boutique and is always out of the house for her business. Consequently, most of his help comes from his older sister who also struggles in school, rather than his mom. Birth, Medical and Developmental History: According to his mother, Ben was born September 15, 2003 in Detroit, Michigan. No birth or developmental complications were reported. His mother stated that Ben met all his developmental milestones of walking and talking, but suggested that he struggled slightly in language and speech. Mrs. Smith reported that he has not had any major medical concerns. No hearing or vision issues were reported. Furthermore, Mrs. Smith stated that Ben is able to follow simple directions, but he struggles to follow complex directions and gets frustrated when he has to. In addition, Ben has difficultly pronouncing certain sounds, but they do not affect his word pronunciation. Academic and Intervention History: His speech and language therapist, Mrs. Miller, and his second grade teacher, Mrs. Foley, initially referred Ben for special education in second grade. He was referred because of concerns with his academic progress, despite receiving intensive interventions, including RTI and Title I. According to his CA.60, Ben struggles in all academic areas but especially with reading comprehension, reading fluency, basic reading, and math reasoning. Ben has ID#: 3235522 Birth Date: 9-15-2003 Test Dates: 9-11-2012 to 11-8-2012 Age: 9-2 Grade: 3.3 Examiner: Melissa Stevenson

Ben Smith 2 obtained speech and language therapy since preschool, but it has not been enough support to help him succeed academically. According to his files, Ben was diagnosed with a specific learning disability (SLD) in basic reading, comprehension and math last year. Social/Emotional History: According to Ben, his interests include his friends, superheroes and football. According to Mrs. Smith, Ben is very social. He spends a lot of time with friends on his football team and students from his classes. His mother describes him as a happy, talkative, cooperative, polite, friendly and stubborn child. FILE REVIEW: A file review was conducted on September 12, 2012 to gather all pertinent information on Ben. According to the file, Ben was administered the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test- III (WIAT-III) on February 15, 2012 to assess his current strengths and weaknesses in comparison to others his age. His standard score was 95 out of 160, which falls within the average range of 85 to 115, however, his basic reading, reading comprehension, fluency and mathematics fell below average. He exhibits a pattern of strengths in verbal reasoning, listening comprehension/receptive vocabulary, and math computations. His weaknesses include reading, spelling, and math reasoning areas in comparison to age/grade level standards and development. According to his second grade teacher, Bens developmental reading assessment (DRA) level is a 16, which places him approximately at a first grade level. Furthermore, he has difficulty in comprehending what he reads even though he does not struggle with listening comprehension. Because his receptive language is stronger than his expressive language, it was reported that Ben is able to take in more information than he can put out. In writing, Ben has shown difficulty in putting his ideas on paper in a logical order. He can verbalize his imaginative ideas, but he has trouble getting his thoughts together in sentence format. SOLO software is being incorporated into Bens schedule every Monday to help him organize his ideas and form a story easier. In math, Ben struggles with telling time, place value and number sense. Ben has always attended Brighton area schools and his attendance record is almost perfect, having only missed a couple of days per year. In kindergarten, Ben was retained for an additional year of schooling because his teacher said that he made great progress throughout the year, but with an extra year of social and academic experiences he would improve. According to Bens CA60, in addition to academic concerns in kindergarten, he had difficulties with attention, staying on task, and excessive talking to his peers. Ben has a few accommodations in the general educational classroom to ensure his success in meeting his individualized education plan (IEP) goals. The accommodations Ben receives are small group settings, manipulatives, reduced assignments, repeated directions, and adapted tests. Currently, Ben receives four to ten hours of resource room support per week, and speech and language support for 20 to 30 minutes, three to eight times a month. His special education teacher recommended that Ben participate in the general education setting 80% of the day or more. According to Bens report card comments in second grade, Ben needs support in all content areas. His

Ben Smith 3 second grade teacher reported on his report card that Ben comes to school working hard every day. Ben achieved 3 (area of concern) comments in the following areas: follows directions, listens attentively, uses time effectively, organizes self and materials, completes work on time, understands place value to 999, compares and orders numbers to 10,000 using symbols <,>, knows addition and subtraction facts fluently, reads at grade level, reads fluently, reads and identifies grade level sight words, writes in complete sentences, uses punctuation, revises own writing, and speaks clearly when sharing information. TEACHER INTERVIEW: An interview was conducted with Bens resource room teacher, Mrs. Smeal, on September 18, 2012 to receive more relevant information about Ben. According to Mrs. Smeal, Ben seeks attention from adults. She said that Ben often disrupts classroom activities because he is overly active. In addition, Ben avoids tasks if he knows it is hard for him. Bens teacher also stated that he struggles the most in reading, comprehension, and fluency. When discussing his weaknesses, Mrs. Smeal referred back to his WIAT-III raw and standard scores, saying that he is two standard deviations from the mean in the areas of word reading and comprehension. To help Ben succeed academically, he has to be motivated through attention and care from his teachers and classmates. Once Ben has the acceptance from his class, he is able to succeed in the classroom through the help of the staff and the accommodations that are provided for him. CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS: Ben was observed in his third grade classroom on September 11th, 12th, and 13th for one hour each day during his literacy block of reading, writing, and spelling. He appeared to be a very pleasant, happy, sociable, and hardworking individual. Ben always needed help from one of the classroom helpers. During silent reading, Bens teacher assessed Bens reading level to get a DRA level for him this year. Based on this assessment she determined that Bens DRA level is at a 20 instructionally. This places Bens reading level at about the beginning of second grade. During the assessment he was trying extremely hard to decode and read accurately, however, he was not reading with the appropriate expression, or speed. Currently, Ben is reading a just right short chapter book series called, Nate the Great, because it is at a DRA level of 20. During spelling, Ben was turning his head from side to side looking around the room, not exactly sure what to do. Ben was able to copy the spelling words down on his paper, but he struggled when writing his spelling words into sentences. Ben also struggled on the maze-like assessment. During this assessment, the teacher provides the students with a paragraph that has about 15 words cut out. The students have the responsibility of filling in each blank with the proper spelling word based on what the teacher reads. Ben was accommodated in the classroom because he could not keep up with the class. In order to accommodate him the paraprofessional that was in the room had to repeat every word to him for him to spell. During writing, Ben was writing a story on his special person. He was writing about his younger brother. He struggled to sequence his thoughts and ideas in his paper effectively. As a result, his paper read choppy. He would benefit from a graphic organizer so he could get his thoughts organized. Ben was able

Ben Smith 4 to write a whole page about his special person during writing, but it did not make sense when read because punctuation was not used. Assessment Techniques and Analysis: The following assessment tools were administered to measure Bens basic reading skills:
TEST The Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement Second Edition (KTEA-II) SUBSCALE Table 1 RAW SCORE STANDARD SCORE PERCENTILE 90% CONFIDENCE INTERVAL 102-118 84-92 80-90 86-98 78-90 74-90 80-94

Phonological Awareness Decoding Composite Letter and Word Recognition Nonsense Word Decoding Reading Fluency Composite Word Recognition Fluency Decoding Fluency

24 44 11 21 11 RAW SCORE Words Read Correct (WRC)/ Errors

110 88 85 92 84 82 87 Percent Accuracy

75 21 16 30 14 12 19 Percentile (according to 2nd grade benchmarks)

TEST

SUBSCALE

Academic Improvement Monitoring System web (AIMSweb)

Oral Reading Fluency (Second grade passages) Progress Monitoring Probe 2P04 Progress Monitoring Probe 2P06 Progress Monitoring Probe 2P08 Progress Monitoring Probe 2P10 SUBSCALE Pre-test Post-test 55/2 96% 42% (Average Range) 36% (Average Range) 42% (Average Range) 44% (Average Range)

49/3

92%

55/2

96%

57/2 Mean WRC 44 57

97% Mean Percent Accuracy 93% 97%

TEST Dynamic Assessment Fluency

Ben Smith 5 The Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement Second Edition (KTEA-II): Ben was administered the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement Second Edition (KTEA-II) on October 29, 2012 to evaluate his basic reading skills in greater depth. The KTEA-II is comprised of 14 subtests that are aligned with the national and professional standards all of the seven achievement areas. The achievement areas are oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skills, reading comprehension, mathematics calculation, and mathematics reasoning. The test is presented in an easel format, which is when the students see the stimulus words, text, or pictures and the examiner sees the directions and the questions to ask the student. The KTEA-II is a norm-referenced test (NRT) that compares students academic achievement to the average performance of either same-age or same-grade peers. The KTEA-II uses Standard Scores (SS), which are based on a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15, thus following the normal bell curve. When computing Bens achievement scores, the data were derived from his agebased scores. Overall Results of Decoding Composite from KTEA-II: In the area of decoding from the KTEA-II, Bens standard score was 88 and his percentile rank was 21. Ben obtained a percentile rank of 21, which means that Ben scored as well as or better than 21% of his same-age peers on October 29, 2012. A 90% confidence interval was used to estimate Bens true score to be in the standard score range of 84-92. This confidence interval means that the examiner is 90% confident that Bens true score would fall within that range if the test was administered under standard conditions. When compared to others his age, Bens decoding skills are average. Overall Results of Reading Fluency Composite from KTEA-II: In the area of reading fluency from the KTEA-II, Bens standard score was 84 and his percentile rank was 14. Ben achieved a percentile rank of 14, which means that Ben scored as well as or better than 14% of his same-age peers on October 29, 2012. A 90% confidence interval was used to estimate Bens true score to be in the standard score range of 78-90. This confidence interval means that the examiner is 90% confident that Bens true score would fall within that range if the test was administered under standard conditions. When compared to others his age, Bens reading fluency skills are below average. The following subtests from the KTEA-II were administered to measure Bens basic reading skills: Letter and Word Recognition: This subtest is used to measure reading letter knowledge and vocabulary. This subtest is a good predictor of reading proficiency. On the first 18 test items of this 99-item subtest, the student points to the letters that the examiner names. Starting on item 19, the student reads increasingly difficult words. The raw score is then calculated by subtracting the errors from the total number of responses. Ben obtained a raw score of 44 items correct on this subtest (please refer to Table 1). Because the KTEA-II is a standardized test, the score translates to a standard score of 85. Ben achieved a percentile rank of 16, which means that Ben scored as well as or better than 16% of his same-age peers on October 29, 2012. A 90% confidence interval was used to estimate Bens true score to be in the standard score range of 80-90. This confidence interval means that the examiner is 90% confident that Bens true score would fall within that range if the test was administered under any other standard conditions. Ben scored

Ben Smith 6 an age equivalence of 7-9, which means that his raw score is equivalent to the average raw score obtained by children that are 7 years, 9-months-old in the normative sample. This does not indicate that he performs at the same level as a child of 7 years, 9 months-old. His score is within the average range, because his standard score falls within one standard deviation from the mean of 85-115. At first, when Ben was reading each word he did so mostly by chunking, but when he got to words that were more difficult, he was unable to decode each chunk to sound out the word. His scores and test observations suggest that Ben would benefit from instruction on decoding and fluency. Phonological Awareness: This subtest, consisting of 39 items, measures the students ability to hear and manipulate sounds. Items on this subtest include rhyming, blending, segmenting and deleting sounds. To perform this subtest, Pepper the Puppet is used in order for students to manipulate the puppets mouth while blending and segmenting words. The difficultly of this task increases with each section. After the subtest is completed, the raw score is then calculated by adding up the total number of correct responses. On this subtest, Ben obtained a raw score of 24 items correct. Because the KTEA-II is a standardized test, this translates into a standard score of 110 (see Table 1). Ben achieved a percentile rank of 75, which means that Ben scored as well as or better than 75% of his same-age peers on October 29, 2012. A 90% confidence interval was used to estimate Bens true score to be in the standard score range of 102-118. This confidence interval means that the examiner is 90% confident that Bens true score would fall within that range if the test was administered under any other standard conditions. On this subtest, Ben scored an age equivalence of 10-8, which means that his raw score is equivalent to the average raw score obtained by children that are 10 years, 8-months-old in the normative sample. This does not indicate that he performs at the same level as a child of 10 years, 8 months-old. Bens score on this subtest indicates that he is well within the average range of 85-115 because his standard score fell within one standard deviation from the mean of 100. Ben did not struggle with this task, except for when he tried to break apart the word lamp; he said, l/am/p instead of l/a/m/p. Bens score on this subtest suggests phonological awareness is a strength of his. Nonsense Word Decoding: This subtest is used to measure the students ability to apply structural analysis and phonics to nonsense words. During the test, the student reads a series of nonsense words aloud to the examiner. The student starts at question one. Questions one and two are teaching questions, which means if the student were to get the word wrong the teacher is allowed to tell the student the word. Starting on number three the student will read across the rows left to right. The words will become increasingly difficult as the student works their way through the subtest. After the student has reached four consecutive errors, the test is stopped. The raw score is then calculated by subtracting the errors from the ceiling items. Ben achieved a raw score of 11 items correct on this subtest. Because the KTEA-II is a standardized test, the score translates to a standard score of 92 (please refer to Table 1). Ben obtained a percentile rank of 30, which means that Ben scored as well as or better than 30% of his same-age peers on October 29, 2012. A 90% confidence interval was used to estimate Bens true score to be in the standard score range of 86-98. This confidence interval means that the examiner is 90% confident that Bens true score would fall within that range if the test was administered under any other standard conditions. Ben scored an age equivalence of 8-0, which means that his raw score is equivalent to the average raw score achieved by be children that are 8 years, 0-months-old in the normative sample. This does not indicate that he performs at the same

Ben Smith 7 level as a child of 8 years, 0 months-old. Bens score is within the average range of 85-115, because his standard score falls within one standard deviation from the mean of 100. Ben identified many of the words he read correctly, although he required increased attention to diphthong vowel patterns because he struggled with the words mawl and trowful. Ultimately, Ben could benefit from instruction on reading diphthong patterns to increase his decoding skills. Word Recognition Fluency: This subtest is used to measure how quickly the student can recognize words. The student reads as many words as possible in one minute. The student started at number one and read across each row left to right. Once the one minute mark is hit, the administer draws a line to show where the student read to. The raw score is then calculated by subtracting the errors and/or skips from the last item reached. Ben obtained a raw score of 21 items correct on this subtest. Because the KTEA-II is a standardized test, the score translates to a standard score of 82 (see Table 1). Ben achieved a percentile rank of 12, which means that Ben scored as well as or better than 12% of his same-age peers on October 29, 2012. A 90% confidence interval was used to estimate Bens true score to be in the standard score range of 74-90. This confidence interval means that the examiner is 90% confident that Bens true score would fall within that range if the test was administered under any other standard conditions. Ben identified many of the words correctly, but he did struggle with a few; Ben read table as taple, toothpaste as touthpaste, shut as shoot, chain as chined and cent as went. Ultimately, Ben struggled with vowel teams decoding and fluency speed. Overall, Bens score is below the average range of 85-115, because his standard score falls outside of one standard deviation from the mean. Decoding Fluency: This subtest is used to measure the students ability to apply structural analysis and phonics to nonsense words. During the test, the student reads as many nonsense words as possible in one minute. The student starts at the top of the list and reads the words from left to right until the time runs out. The raw score is then calculated by subtracting the errors and/or skips from the last item reached. Ben obtained a raw score of 11 items correct on this subtest. Because the KTEA-II is a standardized test, the score translates to a standard score of 87 (please refer to Table 1). Ben achieved a percentile rank of 19, which means that Ben scored as well as or better than 19% of his same-age peers on October 29, 2012. A 90% confidence interval was used to estimate Bens true score to be in the standard score range of 80-94. This confidence interval means that the examiner is 90% confident that Bens true score would fall within that range if the test was administered under any other standard conditions. Even though Ben identified many of the words he read correctly, he requires increased attention to reading fluently with speed. Overall, Bens score is within the average range of 85-115, because his standard score falls within one standard deviation from the mean of 100. Based on the data retrieved from the KTEA-II his scores indicated that Ben needed extra support in reading fluency to help him succeed academically. INFORMAL READING INVENTORY: The Ekwall/Shanker Reading Inventory (ESRI) was administered on September 14, 2012. The ESRI is an instrument used for the assessment of individual students reading abilities. The ESRI consist of 39 different tests, however, the informal reading inventory (IRI) only includes the graded word list (GWL)

Ben Smith 8 test and the reading passage test. The reading passage test is broken into three subtests, which include oral reading, silent reading and listening comprehension. The ESRI contains a GWL and reading passages for emergent readers all the way to students reading at grade nine. The GWL is the first test administered in the ESRI because it is used to determine which level to have the students begin reading the reading passage section of the IRI. The GWL quickly estimates the students independent, instruction, and frustration reading levels. The criteria for determining these levels are based on the number of words missed per word list. The ESRI states that if a student missed one or no words on a given list the student is at their independent level. The instructional level is the level at which the student missed two words. If a student missed three or more words on any given list then testing is stopped because the students frustration reading level has been reached. On the GWL, Ben pronounced increasingly difficult words that are listed by grade level until he reached his frustration level. Ben was able to identify 9 out of 10 pre-primer words, 9 out of 10 primer words, 9 out of 10 first grade words, and 5 out of 10 second grade words. Therefore, with these results, Bens independent level for the GWLs was at the first grade level, his frustration level was at the second grade level and his instructional level was not determined due to his scores obtained on the assessment (see Table 2). Bens errors on the second grade word list included substitutions of to for town, ear for early, seed for send, cue for quietly, and care for carefully. For the most part, Bens errors were words similar in appearance. It appeared that Ben was reading only the first syllable of some of the words rather than the whole word. Table 2: Graded Word List (GWL) Reading Level Grade Level Independent Reading 1st Level Instructional Reading NOT DETERMINED Level Frustration Reading 2nd Level Bens performance on the GWL placed him independently at the first grade level. Because of this, the examiner started the oral and silent reading passage at the pre-primer level so Ben could experience success. On the oral reading passage, Ben read the passage aloud and his miscues were recorded. The criteria for determining the reading level is based on the number of word recognition errors and the number of questions missed. On the scoring sheet, a table follows each passage to find the place where the number of questions missed and the number of word recognition errors intersect (see Table 3). The place where the number of questions missed and the number of word recognition errors intersect is the marked with a symbol to determine the students reading level.

Ben Smith 9 Table 3: Example of 1st Grade Table Number of Questions Missed 0-1 + + * * * X 2 * * * * X X Number of Word Recognition Errors 3-4 * * * X X X 5 * * X X X X 6 * X X X X X 7 X X X X X X

0 1 2 3 4 5+

+ * X

Independent Reading Level Instructional Reading Level Frustration Reading Level

Orally, Ben could read a pre-primer passage at the instructional level and reached the frustration level with the first grade passage (please refer to Table 4). The independent level was not determined with this data. On the pre-primer passage, Ben read with one word recognition error and answered one of the comprehension questions wrong. Bens word recognition error on the pre-primer passage occurred when Ben substituted the word came while attempting to read name. On the ESRI a primer level passage is not administered, so the examiner moves from the pre-primer passage to the first grade passage. On the first grade oral reading passage, Ben read with six word recognition errors and answered two of the comprehension questions wrong. On the first grade passage, Ben made six word recognition errors. Three of his word recognition errors included omissions of the words a, liked, and table. The other three word recognition errors occurred when Ben substituted the word beard for bread, there for they, and the for their. Table 4: Oral Reading Passage Level Number of Word Number of Questions Recognition Errors Missed NOT DETERMINED NOT DETERMINED NOT DETERMINED (Independent) Pre-Primer 1 1 (Instructional Level) First Grade (Frustration 6 2 Level) Once Ben was finished reading the silent reading passage, he was asked a series of comprehension questions. The criteria for determining the silent reading level is based on the number of questions missed. The timing of the students reading rate is also considered to see how long it takes the student to read a passage. For instance, Ben took 150 seconds to complete the third grade silent reading passage. A slow reading rate is equated to 120 seconds. According to the ESRI, if the student takes more than two minutes to read the passage silently, silent reading testing should be stopped and considered to have been read at the frustration level, even if they have answered enough

Ben Smith 10 questions correctly for the passage. For the silent reading passages, Ben placed at the first grade level for his independent level, the second grade for his instructional level and the third grade level for his frustration level (see Table 5). Passage Level First Grade Level (Independent Level) Second Grade (Instructional level) Third Grade (Frustration Level) Table 5: Silent Reading Time to complete passage (in seconds) 100 120 150 Number of Questions Missed 1 3 6

The final portion of the ESRI assessment given to Ben assessed his listening comprehension skills. The examiner read a passage aloud to Ben and then asked him a series of ten comprehension questions afterward. In order for a student to pass, they need to achieve 70% correct on the comprehension questions. When Ben was assessed using a third grade passage, he only scored 60% correct on the listening comprehension questions, thus receiving a failing score at his grade level placement. The results from the IRI suggest that Bens reading difficulties may be related to his oral fluency and comprehension, which may have been negatively influencing Bens education. Overall, Ben should be instructionally placed at a second grade level for silent reading. Academic Improvement Monitoring System Web (AIMSweb): The Academic Improvement Monitoring System Web (AIMSweb) is a system of curriculum-based measurement (CBM) tools used for screening and progressmonitoring students academic skills in reading, math and writing. AIMSweb is administered school-wide, as a response to intervention (RTI) screener, for screening purposes (benchmarking)three times per year. Ben is struggling particularly with fluency according to his word recognition fluency score on the KTEA-II, AIMSweb assessments are used to progress monitor him. Ben was progress monitored using the AIMSweb Reading-Curriculum Based Measurement (RCBM) probes-2P04, 2P06, 2P08, 2P10 in the resource room. The R-CBM assesses the students ability to read orally accurately and fluently. Figure 1: Oral Reading Fluency Peer Referent

AIMSweb Progress Monitoring (R-CBM)

60 WRC 40 20 0 2P04 2P06 2P08 2P10 Probe Number Ben Peer

Ben Smith 11 Figure 2: Ben (Grade 3) Figure 3: Peer (Grade 3)

\\\\\\

10/31

11/1

11/5

11/7

Figure 3:

Peer (Grade 3)

10/31

11/1

11/5

11/7

AIMSweb is comprised of R-CBM passages for each grade level. The students progress monitoring is measured by having the student read a passage aloud for one minute. The scoring criterion is reported as the number of words read correct (WRC)/ Errors. A word is read correctly if the student correctly pronounces the word within context or if the student self corrects a word within 3-seconds. An error is a mispronunciation, substitution, omission, or 3-second word delay. To find a students accuracy, the WRC is divided by the total words read.

Ben Smith 12 Ben was administered the R-CBM progress monitoring probes at the second grade level, which is his instructional level as determined by his special education teacher and his DRA level. On the first of the four probes, Ben read 55 words correct and had 2 errors (55/2) achieving 96% accuracy. On the remaining three probes Ben scored a 49/3 with 92% accuracy, 55/2 with 96% accuracy, and 57/2 with 97% accuracy (see table 8). The progress monitoring probes were administered in the resource room on the following dates: 10-3012, 11-01-12, 11-05-12, and 11-07-12. Ben read a mean of 54 WRC, which places him at the 41st percentile according to the fall second grade AIMSweb norms. This means that Ben scored as well as or better than 41% of the second grade peers on November 7, 2012. A same-aged peer who also receives resource support in the same setting as Ben was administered the AIMSweb progress monitoring probes. While the sameaged peer was tested with the same probes that Ben was tested with, the peer obtained scores of 51/6 with 89% accuracy, 29/8 with 78% accuracy, 50/5 with 90% accuracy, and 48/6 with 89% accuracy. On the four probes that were given, the peer fell below Ben (see Figure 1). The peer read a mean of 45 WRC, which places the peer at the 33rd percentile according to the fall second grade AIMSweb norms. This means that the peer scored as well as or better than 33% of the second grade peers on November 7, 2012. During the assessment, Ben decoded most of the words he read correctly and made few errors. However, Ben did struggle to decode two to three words he was not familiar with in each passage. Ben struggled to decode these unfamiliar words within the three-second time period, forcing me to tell him the words. Ben tried extremely hard to decode the words syllable by syllable, but struggled on some of the vowel patterns. Ben was reading on average about 95% accurate for each passage. When Bens peer came to a word he did not know, he did not take time to break it apart, but instead sat there until the examiner told him the word. The strategy that his peer used forced him to receive a much lower accuracy, which ranged from 78% to 90%. Looking at the data it is evident that both peers struggled more with probe 2p04, which suggests that the probe is at a higher second grade level because CBM probes are assigned randomly. The passages are not sequentially more challenging as the progress monitoring probes increase, but rather the content of the probes vary in difficult randomly (including beginning, middle, and end of the year second grade reading levels). In comparison to peer referent, it is evident on the AIMSweb progressmonitoring graph above that Bens starting WRC of 55 is higher than his peers 52 WRC. Both Ben and his peer demonstrate a similar small increasing trend, on average, over the two-weeks of progress monitoring probes that were administered. Ben and his peer had a discrepancy between their average WRC; Bens peer read about 45 WRC and Ben read on average 54 WRC (please refer to Figure 2 and 3). Bens scores on all four of the progress monitoring probes are within the average range, according to the fall second grade national norms. The mean WRC according to the fall second grade level is 64 with a standard deviation of 37 WRC. Ben is considered in the average range because he scored an average of 54 WRC, which is within one standard deviation from the mean of 64 WRM. The average range is between 19th percentile and 84th percentile. Ben scored on average 54 WRC placing him at the 41st percentile. Ben percentile of 41% means that Ben scored as well as a better than 41% of his peers. While

Ben Smith 13 Ben is in the average range at the second grade norms, when comparing him to the third grade benchmarks he is supposed to be reading on average 89 WRC on third grade level passages. Bens scores indicate he is reading within the average range at a second grade level. In order to help Bens fluency reach a third grade level, he was placed in a tier three RTI intervention group. Dynamic Assessment: Ben was administered a dynamic assessment in reading fluency on November 8, 2012. A dynamic assessment is a type of assessment that explores the nature of learning by collecting change that is brought about to enhance instruction. Dynamic assessment follows a test-teach-test model. The dynamic assessment had Ben read three different passages at two different grade levels for one minute each (two from his instructional level and one from his frustration level). Ben was randomly assigned two-second grade leveled AIMSweb passages and one third grade leveled AIMSweb passage for each pretest and post-test for AIMSweb probes. His special education teacher and his DRA level as noted previously determined his instructional level to be at the second grade level. Bens current grade level is at his frustration level. During the teaching phase, Ben was taught how to read fluently with echo readings, choral readings and repeated readings. To begin the intervention, the third grade passage from the pre-assessment was used. The examiner read the passage fluently with speed, accuracy, and expression. When the examiner was reading the passage aloud, Ben was following along on the passage with his finger. Once the examiner finished reading the passage, Ben and the examiner read the passage in unison to have repeated readings. After reading the passage in unison, Ben read the passage aloud to the examiner with the appropriate speed, accuracy and expression. After the choral readings, the examiner and Ben practiced echo readings two times to continue to practice his fluency. The examiner read a sentence fluently and then Ben repeated the same sentence fluently. The echo reading continued until the passage was finished. During the teaching phase, time was not kept, nor were WRC scores recorded, to ensure that Ben had enough repeated readings with the passage before he moved onto the post-test. After Ben read the passage through four times it was determined that he achieved mastery on the passage. During the teaching phase, Ben echoed the examiners reading fluency perfectly. When he came across a word that he did not know, he decoded it by segmenting it into smaller pieces. When the teach phase was over Ben read the passage fluently, accurately, and with the appropriate expression. Ben used the choral, and echo readings to help him practice repeated readings. It appeared that the repeated readings of the passage improve his score each time he read the passage. The following tables display the data from the pre-test and the post-test: Passage Level Grade 2 Grade 2 Grade 3 Table 6: PRE-TEST WRC/Errors 55/3 40/4 36/3 Percent Accuracy 95% 91% 92%

Ben Smith 14 Passage Level Grade 2 Grade 2 Grade 3 Table 7: POST-TEST WRC/Errors 53/4 69/1 49/1 Percent Accuracy 93% 99% 98%

From this dynamic assessment, it appears that Ben is capable of improving his fluency skills when he is provided with echo and choral readings. Bens average score of the pre-test was 44 WRC and was 57 WRC on the post-test (please refer to Table 1). He did not improve on all of the passages from pre- to post-test however. On the first passage on the post-test decreased from the first passage in the pre-test, however he demonstrated an increase in WRC on the other second grade passage and the third grade passage. Bens accuracy increased on the all three post-test (see Table 6 and 7). Therefore, on the passages Ben increased his average WRC and accuracy. Overall, Bens scores suggest he benefited from the choral and echo reading techniques that were incorporated into the instruction to help him become a more fluent reader. Direct Writing Assessment Sample: A prompted writing sample was administered on October 1, 2012 to analyze Bens organization, conventions, sentence fluency, word choice, voice and ideas. Ben was given the story starter, I was playing outside when a spaceship landed and . Prior to giving Ben the story starter, he was informed that he had only fifteen minutes to complete his story and was not able to receive any assistance during the process. Ben produced 44 total words written (TWW) in his fifteen-minute response. Out of those 44 TWW, he spelled 31 of the words correctly. Bens writing ability was assessed using the intermediate six-trait writing model rubric and the ten story grammar elements. The six-trait writing model focuses on the following six traits: 1. Ideas: The meaning and development of the writing piece. 2. Organization: The internal structure of the writing piece. 3. Voice: The way the writer brings the topic to life in their writing piece. 4. Word Choice: The specific vocabulary the writer uses to convey meaning in their writing piece. 5. Sentence Fluency: The way words and phrases flow together throughout the text. 6. Conventions: The mechanical correctness of the piece such as capitalization, punctuation and grammar. The intermediate rubric for grades 3-6 includes five levels for scoring writing. The writing is scored as: -Outstanding/Strong: shows control and skill; many traits present -Skilled: balanced; strengths clearly outweigh the weaknesses -Passing: meets minimum for grade level; strengths and need for revision about equal -Emerging: need for revisions outweigh strengths; isolated moments show promise

Ben Smith 15 -Not Yet: a bare beginning; writer not yet showing control or command For Bens writing response, the following scores on table five were assigned based on six-trait writing model rubric: Table 8: Six-Trait Writing Model TRAIT: SCORE: Ideas Passing Organization Emerging Voice Passing Word Choice Passing Sentence Fluency Not Yet Conventions Not Yet Ideas (Passing): Bens ideas are starting to come into focus, but are still wandering off some. Ben connects his story to his personal experiences of watching Star Wars. Some interesting details were given, but not enough to expand on his ideas. More details are needed to expand and improve his piece of writing. Overall, Bens ideas meet the minimum grade level because his strengths and need for revision are equal. Organization (Emerging): There is a lead and a conclusion in this piece, but both need a lot of work to get them up to grade level standards. To conclude his piece, he wrote, just like Star Wars. Adding further details about Star Wars and his connection with it would help connect all the ideas together. Many of the parts of the story are out of place suggesting that his need for revisions outweighs his strengths. Voice (Passing): Personality of the main character needs greater development because Ben only describes the personality of his brother, the supporting character. In the story Ben said, My brother screamed like a little girl. Even though he reveals his brothers personality, he does not reveal anything about his own personality. Ben cares about the topic and tries to attempt to appeal to his audience, as he relates his story to Star Wars, but he only provides minimal descriptions of Star Wars. Word Choice (Passing): Bens vocabulary is limited in this piece, however many of the words are used correctly, which allows the meaning to be clear. Some words are well chosen and it is evident in his writing piece. His word choice of planet provides evidence of where he was traveling around in a spaceship. The word Jedi is effectively chosen to support Bens interest of Star Wars. Overall, Bens word choice strengths and need for revision are equal, suggesting that he is at grade level. Sentence Fluency (Not Yet): Bens writing consisted of 44 words, which were combined into one run-on sentence. When read aloud, the piece sounds awkward because there is no stopping place. Ben needs revision to improve sentence structure and vary sentence patterns so it reads fluently. Ben demonstrates that he is at the bare beginning as a writer being able to use fluent writing. Conventions (Not Yet): Ben struggles with spelling words in his writing piece. He had 13 spelling errors, which demonstrates 70% accuracy in spelling in this passage. The spelling in this passage needs revision so it does not impede on the readers ability to decode. Capitalization

Ben Smith 16 is another major issue, as he only capitalizes I. The biggest error is his lack of punctuation. Ben does not use quotation marks around dialogue, commas, or periods. Because his piece is one run-on sentence, significant editing would be advised for Ben so that he uses punctuation and capitalization correctly. Overall, Bens work needs to be rewritten for most readers to understand what he is saying. The story grammar elements focus on the following ten elements: 1) Main Character 2) Locale 3) Time 4) Initiating Event 5) Goals 6) Attempt 7) Direct Consequence 8) Reactions 9) Title 10) Dialogue The story grammar elements include a rubric with three levels for scoring writing. Each element is scored based on the writers effectiveness to adequately represent that element in their paper. The writer will receive a score of zero (absent), one (present but not developed) or two (developed) on each element. For Bens writing response, the following scores on table six were assigned on the story grammar elements rubric: Table 9: Story Grammar Elements ELEMENT: SCORE: Main Character 0 Locale 1 Time 1 Initiating Event 1 Goals 0 Attempt 0 Directed Consequences 0 Reactions 0 Title 0 Dialogue 0 Main Character (0): There is no main character established in the story. Ben uses the word I so it is assumed that he is the main character, but no details are given about him. In order to receive points he needed to explain the main character and establish descriptive details. Locale (1): Ben gives the location of a planet in his story, but does not describe the planet uniquely. Time (1): In Bens story, he states, two seconds therefore time is given, but it is not described in detail. Initiating Event (1): An external event of war is present in his writing piece. Ben states, We fight in war just like Star Wars.

Ben Smith 17 Goals (0): Ben does not have an established goal in his writing piece. Attempt (0): Ben does not follow the story line format; he does not have a solution to the event of war that was brought up in his paper. Ben just ends his paper by stating, Just like Star Wars. Therefore, his paper is still struggling because it is not well developed. Directed Consequences (0): Ben does not provide a solution or goal for his problem presented in the story. There is not a direct consequence for the main character attempting to solve the problem. Reactions (0): Ben does not reveal any emotional reactions for the main character, but he does reveal some emotional reactions of the supporting characters. Ben states, My brother screamed like a little girl. Title (0): Ben does not provide a title for his story. Dialogue (0): Even though Ben does have dialogue in his piece, he does not use quotation marks. It is determined that the dialogue was not used effectively in the story, which caused Ben to receive zero points for this section.

SUMMARY: Ben seems to be functioning below average compared to his third grade peers. His main weaknesses are reading fluency, reading comprehension, writing organization, grammar, spelling and mathematics reasoning. Bens performance on the formal and informal assessments resulted in patterns of strengths and weaknesses that are consistent with students with specific learning disabilities (SLD). Ben is currently receiving 10 to 15 hours of resource support per week in basic reading, fluency, comprehension, math, and writing to ensure that he is successful in the general education classroom. He has shown growth in reading and is now only falling slightly below his third grade peers. An important factor to note is the discrepancy between Bens IRI level on the ESRI and the DRA level in the assessment report. External factors on the IRI may have underestimated his performance. The IRI was administered in the school psychologists office rather than the resource room that he is use to, which may have made him nervous and perform less well. The time of day the test was given may be another external factor that might have affected his discrepancy in scores. Ben was administered the IRI in the early afternoon right before lunchtime. He was administered his AIMSweb probes and DRA in the morning. Based on the data collected it appeared that Bens DRA and AIMSweb probes are a more accurate representation of Bens reading performance. Overall, according to the DRA level, Ben is reading at a second grade level orally. Ben has shown tremendous growth throughout this year so far, which means that he does have the potential to experience success in the general education class with the additional support. RECOMMENDATIONS: I. II. Based on the data obtained, Ben should continue to receive resource support for basic reading, fluency, comprehension, math and writing. (REASON: Ben is still below grade level in all of these areas.) Ben may benefit from SOLO software components of read outloud, write outloud, word predictor and draftbuilder. (REASON: Ben struggles to organize his ideas and use proper spelling and grammar. This software will be able to improve his written organization, spelling and grammar with write outloud, word predictor and draftbuilder to ensure that his

III.

IV.

V.

Ben Smith 18 written expression is understood. Ben also struggles to read with speed; this software will read aloud with Ben to encourage choral reading, which will ultimately build fluency.) Ben would benefit from the Foundations Analysis, Synthesis, and Translation (F.A.S.T) interventions to help his ability to decode vowel patterns. (REASON: Ben struggles with decoding words with various vowel patterns.) R-CBM progress monitoring using AIMSweb is advised to continue. (REASON: Ben is below grade level in reading fluency and data should be collected to monitor his progress in relation to his peers to ensure that he is receiving the appropriate intervention.) All assessments other than reading assessments are read aloud to Ben. (REASON: Based upon the available data, Ben is below grade level in reading fluency, which may influence his score on the assessment.)

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: Common Core State Standards for Third Grade English Language Arts: 3.RFS.4 Read with sufficient accuracy and fluency to support comprehension. a. Read on-level text with purpose and understanding. b. Read on-level prose and poetry orally with accuracy, appropriate rate, and expression on successive readings. c. Use context to confirm or self-correct word recognition and understanding, rereading as necessary. I. Ben will improve his ability to read 2nd grade level text with fluency and accuracy. 1. By the end of the 2nd marking period, Ben will read unrehearsed 2nd grade material at a rate of 70 words correct per minute with 95% accuracy. Performance Criteria: 70 words correct per minute with 95% accuracy. Evaluation Procedure: AIMSweb 2nd grade R-CBM Evaluation Schedule: Bi-Weekly 2. By the end of the 3rd marking period, Ben will read unrehearsed 2nd grade material at a rate of 80 words correct per minute with 95% accuracy. Performance Criteria: 80 words correct per minute with 95% accuracy Evaluation Procedure: AIMSweb 2nd grade R-CBM Evaluation Schedule: Bi-Weekly 3. By the end of the 4th marking period, Ben will read unrehearsed 2nd grade material at a rate of 90 words correct per minute with 95% accuracy. Performance Criteria: 90 words correct per minute with 95% accuracy Evaluation Procedure: AIMSweb 2nd grade R-CBM Evaluation Schedule: Bi-Weekly _____________________________ Signature of Examiner Date Melissa Stevenson__________________ Name of Examiner Special Education Teacher__________ Title cc: Mrs. Smith Confidential File