5. Case Studies

Case Study 1

Document 1: Educational Evaluation Report

Name: Bailey Lynn Beatriz     School: Gicaw Island Elementary     

Report Date: 2/12/xx

Student ID: 287308                  Age: 6-10                                    Grade: 1

Referral Status: Reevaluation                     Dates of Testing: 1/19, 1/26, 2/2

Evaluator: Charlotte Emilia                           Title: School Psychologist

I. Reason for Evaluation: 

Bailey Lynn is a 6-year, 10-month old female student in the first grade at Gicaw Island Elementary. She is currently being re-evaluated for special education services. She was initially identified for services through the Infant and Toddler Connection at age two, then received Early Childhood Special Education as a student with developmental delay and speech and language impairment in preschool. Teacher education reports from this Fall indicate that Bailey Lynn is currently performing well below grade level for Reading and math. Bailey Lynn has made minimal progress this school year. She currently receives special education, speech, and physical therapy services at Gicaw Island Elementary.

II. Areas of Evaluation addressed in this report: 

☒ Current Educational Performance       ☒ Cognitive Ability          ☐ Developmental/Familiar

☒ Social/Emotional                                      ☒ Student Behavior        ☐ Speech/Language

☐ Health/Medical                                        ☐ Vision                           ☐ Hearing

☐ Fine Motor                                                ☐ Gross Motor

III. Assessment Tools: (List)

Differential Ability Scales, 2nd Edition (DAS-II)

Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement, 4th Edition (WJ-A-IV)

Test of Auditory Processing Skills, 3rd Edition (TAPS-3)

Developmental Test of Visual Perception, 3rd Edition (DTVP-3)

Adaptive Behavior Assessment System, 2nd Edition (ABAS-II)

Classroom Observation

IV. Background Information: (Include relevant medical, developmental, and sociocultural information as well as past attempts to address areas of concern.)

Bailey Lynn is in the 1st grade at Gicaw Island Elementary School. She attended early intervention preschool starting at the age of 2, then transitioned to the special education preschool program in the Gicaw Island district. She has attended Gicaw Island Elementary since her kindergarten year. Bailey Lynn receives push-in special education in her general education classroom, speech/language services, and physical therapy services through her IEP. Information from the School Social Worker’s Evaluation Report from January of this year indicates that Bailey Lynn lives with her mother and two older sisters (ages 10 and 14) in an apartment near Gicaw Island Elementary. Bailey Lynn has little contact with her father. Relevant to this report and other evaluation components, Bailey Lynn experienced a stroke in utero. She does not require any on-going medical treatment but does demonstrate significant left-side weakness. Bailey Lynn’s mother noted that Bailey Lynn achieved early developmental milestones such as sitting, walking, and speaking much later than her sisters.

V. List of Previous Testing/Records Reviewed:

Prior evaluation reports from the Infant and Toddler Connection and Bailey’s initial special education evaluation were reviewed for this report. Measures of cognitive ability and adaptive functioning that were conducted three years ago document cognition in the low to extremely low ranges with some variability. For more detailed information, see the full School Psychologist Evaluation Report from 3 years ago. The current evaluation uses the same assessment measures as the initial evaluation to determine if there is stability or change in cognitive abilities and adaptive functioning.

VI. Behavioral Observations During Assessment:

Bailey Lynn was friendly and cooperative during testing. She left her classroom willingly and quickly established rapport with the examiner. She appeared comfortable with the assessment process and setting. Bailey Lynn’s conversational language appeared to be age appropriate. She was able to work for about 20 – 30 minutes at a time, but would begin to lose focus after that. She could be easily redirected and responded well to encouragement. Bailey Lynn appeared to fatigue quickly and frequently stated that she was tired. She complained that her wrist hurt when asked to write or draw. She wrote with her right hand and generally did not use her left hand/arm to stabilize her paper. Given her fatigue and attention needs, this assessment was conducted in multiple brief sessions over three separate days. At times, Bailey Lynn was confident about her responses and would praise herself making comments like, “I’m a smart cookie!” At other times, she would scrunch up her face and say, “Too hard!”  There were many instances where Bailey Lynn seemed to have difficulty understanding directions as evident by her quizzical expression or lack of response. In these circumstances, directions were restated or clarified and testing continued. Given the provided supports, it is believed that the assessment results provide an accurate portrayal of Bailey Lynn’s abilities.

CLASSROOM OBSERVATION

Bailey Lynn was observed in her general education classroom on two separate occasions. She was noted to walk with an uneven gait, leaning toward her left side. Bailey Lynn had some difficulty transitioning from between standing positions and seated positions, especially on the floor.

The first observation occurred during a small-group guided writing task. Bailey Lynn required frequent reminders to complete her work. She would often play with her pencil, walk around the room, or sing. Beyond cues needed to attend to the task, Bailey Lynn also needed the task to be broken down into single steps for her to complete the activity. For example, she verbally formed the sentence, “The dog has a ball” in response to a picture but needed her teacher to remind her of each word in the sentence so she could write it down. Bailey Lynn used invented spelling with very little evidence of phoneme-grapheme correspondence. She was unable to read her sentence to this evaluator after writing it.

The second observation occurred when Bailey Lynn was receiving some one-on-one support from the special education teacher in the general education classroom. During the activity, she was asked to locate large letters that were placed on index cards on the floor and then provide a word that began with the letter. Bailey Lynn correctly located the six letters that she was asked to identify, though she needed frequent reminders not to jump on the letter cards. Bailey Lynn could not provide words beyond those pictured on the classroom alphabet chart for any of the letters. Some of her incorrect responses seemed to be an attempt to produce the letter sound (e.g., Buh for B). In other instances she provided incorrect words (e.g., Mom for L).

During both observations, Bailey Lynn had few interactions with her peers. She did not demonstrate any significant behavioral concerns or social difficulties. She did require frequent redirection to stay on task.

VII. Assessment Results and Discussion: (Include a discussion of nonstandard test administration to include the use of an interpreter and the impact on test results.

Bailey Lynn was given a series of norm-referenced standardized assessments to evaluate her cognitive abilities, academic achievement, and adaptive functioning. For most of the assessments, an average Standard Score (SS) is 100 with a standard deviation of 15, meaning scores between 85 and 115 are considered average. Scaled Scores are also reported for some subtests. The average Scaled Score (ss) is 10, with a standard deviation of 3. Scaled scores between 7 and 13 are considered to be in the average range. Where T-scores are reported, the average score is 50 with a standard deviation of 10. T-scores between 40 and 60 are considered to be average.

A. Cognitive Functioning – Bailey Lynn completed the DAS-II to evaluate her cognitive abilities. This measure was chosen to allow direct comparisons to prior evaluations. The DAS-II provides a General Conceptual Ability (GCA), which is a measure of overall cognitive functioning. The GCA comprises several domain or composite scores including the Verbal Cluster, Nonverbal Reasoning, and Spatial Cluster. The DAS-II also provides a Special Nonverbal Composite (SNC) which measures cognitive functioning without relying heavily on language. The SNC is useful for understanding the cognitive functioning of individuals who have receptive or expressive language difficulties, as Bailey Lynn does. (These have been documented in her file since pre-school.) Bailey Lynn’s domain and index scores on the DAS-II are as follows:

General Conceptual Ability:  SS = 61, 1st percentile (Extremely Low)

Bailey Lynn’s overall cognitive functioning was measured to be in the extremely low range as documented by the GCA. Her performance across all domains and clusters was below average; however, she had some individual strengths and weaknesses.

Verbal Cluster: SS = 75, 5th percentile (Borderline)

Bailey Lynn’s score on Verbal Cluster falls within the borderline range. Within this cluster, her ability to comprehend  verbally-presented instructions (Verbal Comprehension) fell in the low average range while her ability to expressively name pictures of objects fell in the borderline range.

Nonverbal Reasoning: SS = 78, 7th percentile (Borderline)

Bailey Lynn’s Nonverbal (or Fluid Reasoning) performance was in the borderline range, and was an area of personal strength for her, though still below expectations for children of her age. Within the subtests, Bailey Lynn’s ability to use sequences to complete visual patterns was measured in the borderline range. Her ability to use abstract reasoning to find similarities or relationships between pictured objects was in the low average range.

Spatial Cluster: SS = 54 , 0.1 percentile (Extremely Low)

Bailey Lynn had notable difficulty on measures of Visual Spatial Functioning. Her performance in this domain falls in the extremely low range and is a statistically significant weakness for her. Within the cluster, her ability to translate pictures into 3D images using manipulatives fell in the borderline range. Her ability to copy designs fell in the extremely impaired range (<0.1 percentile). It should be noted that her difficulties with fine motor skills likely impact her performance in this area. A separate measure of visual processing (DTVP-3) was administered to distinguish visual processing from motor control and will be discussed later.

Special Nonverbal Composite: SS = 61, 1st percentile (Extremely Low)

The Special Nonverbal Composite score is in alignment with the GCA and suggests that Bailey Lynn’s expressive and receptive language difficulties do not significantly impact her performance on this measure. Additionally, her performance on the DAS-II is similar to her performance on the measure three years ago. Her current scores are either exactly the same as the initial assessment or are within 2 points of scores derived on that measure.

B. Academic Achievement – Bailey Lynn was administered the WJ-A-IV to evaluate her current levels of performance in academic areas such as Reading, Math and Written Language. Her Brief Achievement (SS = 62, Age Equivalence = 4-10), Academic Skills (SS = 62, Age Equivalence = 4-8), and Academic Applications (SS = 65, Age Equivalence = 5-2) are all in the extremely low range and below the expected performance level of kindergarten students. These scores suggest that Bailey Lynn will have significant difficulties with the academic expectations of first grade. Bailey Lynn’s performance on all domains and subtests of the WJ-A-IV, with the exception of Passage Comprehension, fell in the extremely low range and below the kindergarten level.

Reading:  Bailey Lynn’s overall reading abilities were measured to be in the extremely low range (Broad Reading SS = 69). Her ability to produce letter sounds and read single words fell in the extremely low range. Her ability to quickly read sentences and determine if the statements are true or false fell in the borderline range. Conversely, Passage Comprehension was a statistical strength for Bailey Lynn as evidenced by performance in the low average range (Grade Equivalent = K.5).  The initial items on this subtest include pictures that Bailey Lynn appeared to use to provide context clues. Bailey Lynn was not able to correctly respond to any items that did not include pictures.

Mathematics: Bailey Lynn’s overall performance in mathematics fell in the extremely low range (Broad Mathematics SS = 63). All subtests that are encompassed by the Broad Mathematics score also fell in the extremely low range. Bailey Lynn was unable to solve any mathematical calculations. Her efforts to respond to the assessment items included copying one of the numbers from each fact, even after directions were clarified. In the Math Facts Fluency subtest, this response method resulted in 6 correct answers (e.g., 5 – 0 = 5), placing her score for this subtest in the borderline range.

Written Expression: Bailey Lynn’s performance in the Written Language domain fell in the extremely low range (SS = 55). Her performance on both subtests within this domain were also in the extremely low range. On the Spelling subtest, Bailey Lynn was able to correctly write 3 uppercase letters. She was unable to write lowercase letters or spell any of the requested words (e.g., is, fun). Her performance on the Writing Samples subtest which requires students to fill in the blank to make a sentence match a picture also fell in the extremely low range. Bailey Lynn was able to correctly write her name, but could not answer any of the subsequent questions.

C. Visual Processing – Bailey Lynn was given the DTVP-3 to further evaluate visual processing skills based on her performance on the DAS-II. The Motor-Reduced Visual Perception domain was administered to evaluate Bailey Lynn’s visual processing when motor skill requirements are removed. Bailey Lynn’s performance on this measure was in the “very poor” range (Motor-Reduced Visual Perception SS = 56, < 1st percentile), indicating significant deficits in her visual processing.

Subtests within the Motor-Reduced Visual Perception domain include identifying shapes/images within a larger figure (Figure-Ground subtest), identifying shapes or images based on incomplete visual stimuli (Visual Closure subtest), and determining images that are the same or similar to a target image (Form Constancy subtest). Bailey Lynn’s performance on the Figure-Ground subtest fell in the below average range (9th percentile). She performed in the “very poor” range, below the 1st percentile on the Visual Closure and Form Constancy subtests.

D. Auditory Processing – The TAPS-3 was administered to assess auditory and phonological processing. Bailey Lynn had notable difficulty with the tasks on this assessment. Her overall Phonologic Index fell in the extremely low range (SS = 56. <1st percentile). Tasks on this assessment include Word Discrimination in which she was asked to determine if two verbally-presented words are the same or different (e.g., bite/bike), Phonological Segmentation in which she was asked to separate individual sounds within single words (e.g., cat = c/a/t), and Phonological Blending in which she was asked to combine individual sounds to make a word (e.g., d/o/g = dog). Bailey Lynn’s performance on each of these subtests fell in the extremely low range, below the 1st percentile.

E. Adaptive Functioning – Bailey Lynn’s mother completed the report forms for the ABAS-II, a tool designed to assess adaptive functioning (i.e., life skills) across three domains. The report forms result in a General Adaptive Composite (GAC) which provides an overall description of an individual’s abilities related to functional/daily living skills based on their age. Bailey Lynn’s GAC fell in the borderline range (SS = 72, 3rd percentile). She demonstrated variability across the three domains within the composite.

The Conceptual Composite evaluates Communication Skills, Functional Academics, and Self-Direction. Bailey Lynn’s score for the composite (SS = 72, 3rd percentile) was in the borderline range. Her Communication was in the low average range, while Functional Academics and Self-Direction were in the borderline range.

The Practical Composite includes Home Living (the ability to perform simple tasks in the home), Self-Care (feeding, dressing, and hygiene), Community Use (ability to navigate surroundings), and Health and Safety Guidelines. Bailey Lynn’s Practical Composite fell in the borderline range (SS = 72, 2nd percentile). Her Home Living Skills were reported to be in the average range. Self Care was in the borderline range. Community Use and Health and Safety Guidelines were in the extremely low range.

The third domain of the ABAS-II is the Social Composite. This consists of Leisure or Play Skills and Social Skills. Bailey Lynn’s Social Composite was in the average range (SS = 98, 45th percentile).

VIII. Summary and Recommendations: (Include implications for instruction.)

 Bailey Lyn is a 6-year, 10 month old female in the first grade. This report documents her triennial evaluation. She was initially identified for special education services under the categories Developmental Delay and Speech-Language Impairment. Bailey Lynn’s teachers report that she is performing below grade level in Reading and Math and that she has made little progress this school year. Bailey Lynn receives special education, speech-language therapy, and physical therapy through her current IEP.

Bailey Lynn’s cognitive abilities fell in the Extremely Low range. She has variability among the domains and subtests, with the skills in the Verbal Cluster and Nonverbal Reasoning being relative strengths for her, though still significantly below average. Bailey Lynn’s performance on the tasks within the Spatial Cluster was a statistically significant weakness for her and was likely impacted by motor difficulties.

Assessments of visual and auditory processing fell in the extremely low or “very poor” ranges.

Bailey Lynn’s academic skills fell in the extremely low range and below kindergarten level on measures of Reading, Math, and Written Expression. She demonstrated a strength on the Passage Comprehension subtest, likely using picture cues as a support. 

Parent reports of Bailey Lynn’s Adaptive Functioning, indicate that her overall adaptive skills are in the borderline range, though social skills were reported in the average range.

The results of this assessment should be used in coordination with other assessments to best understand Bailey Lynn’s strengths and needs.

IX. Evaluator Signature and Date:

 Charlotte Emilia                                                         School Psychologist

Name                                                                                      Title

 2/12/xx

Date of Signature

Document 2: Results of Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening (PALS) – Spring

Student: Bailey Lynn             Date: January 15, 20xx          Grade: 2

1) Spring Entry Level Summed Score (Benchmark = 54)

Total Spelling = 13

Second Grade Word List = 0

Entry Level Summed Score = 13

 2) Word List Reading (All lists have 20 words; Benchmark = 15 Second Grade Words)

Preprimer = 17

Primer = 9

1st grade = 2

2nd grade = 0

3) Alphabetics

Lowercase Alphabet Recognition = +26/26  (Benchmark = 26)

Letter Sounds  = +23/26 (Errors = Sh, Th, Y)  (Benchmark = 26)

4) Phonemic Awareness – Blending

Total Score  +15/20 (Benchmark = 14)

Two Phonemes = +5/5

Three Phonemes = +5/5

Four Phonemes with initial blends (e.g. stick, flag, freeze) = +0/5

Four Phonemes with final blends (e.g., fast, left, soft) = +5/5

5) Phonemic Awareness – Sound-to-Letter (Student identifies the letter that produces a sound found at the beginning, end, or middle of spoken words. Half credit is provided when the student can reproduce the sound, but not name the letter.)

Total Score = +32/40 (Benchmark = 34)

Beginning Sound = +10/10 (e.g., top = T)

Ending Sound = +10/10 (e.g., bus = S)

Middle Sound = +12/20 (e.g., fun = U, keep = E)

6) Spelling

Total Score = 13 ( Benchmark = 39)

Total Feature Score = 9

Beginning Sounds +4/4

Digraphs +0/4

Blends +¼

Short Vowels (CVC) +3/4

Nasals +1/4

CVCe +0/4

Long Vowels +0/4

r- and l-influenced vowels +0/4

Total Words Correct = 4

7) Oral Reading in Context (Passage Reading)

PALS Spelling Inventory

Case Study 2

Document 1: Educational Evaluation Report

I. Demographic Information

Name: Amir C.           Age: 11-7        Grade: 6         Date of Testing: March 7, 20xx

II. Reason for Evaluation

A reading assessment was requested to evaluate Amir’s progress and determine his present level of performance in reading.

III. Assessment Tools

Qualitative Reading Inventory

IV. Background Information: (Include relevant medical, developmental, and sociocultural information, as well as past attempts to address areas of concern.)

Amir was found first eligible for special education in September of this school year under the categories Specific Learning Disability, Other Health Impairment, and Emotional Disability. Evaluation reports from Winterwood Public Schools and Compass Educational Psychology (a private firm) indicate that Amir’s overall cognitive abilities are in the average range, though there is variation across index scores with some aspects of cognition in the low average range and some in the above average range. The report from Compass Educational Psychology provides the following diagnoses: Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (combined presentation), Specific Learning Disability with impairment in reading/Dyslexia (combined type), Specific Learning Disability with impairment in written expression, and Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct.

A review of the current IEP indicates that Amir receives special education service for 300 minutes per week (1 instructional period per day) in the special class setting and 75 minutes per week in the general class setting. Amir also receives school-based counseling for 60 minutes per week. Amir has IEP goals that address Reading Comprehension, Reading Phonics, Self-Advocacy, Work Habits, Written Expression, and Social Emotional needs. Amir has not been able to pass the Reading portions of his Standards of Learning assessments since third grade.

V. List of Previous Testing/Records Reviewed

IEP Progress Report dated January of this school year

IEP Amendment dated November of this school year

Initial IEP dated September of this school year

Winterwood Public Schools Educational Assessment dated August 7, 20xx

Winterwood Public Schools Psychoeducational Assessment dated July 25, 20xx

Psychological Evaluation Report from Compass Educational Psychology dated July 8, 20xx

VII. Behavioral Observations During Assessment

Amir readily came with the evaluator for this assessment. He was allowed to bring his iPhone to the assessment location so he could listen to music during breaks between testing. While transitioning between the classroom and testing location, Amir engaged in animated conversation about his favorite music groups. Amir willingly set the phone aside when asked to do so. He made eye contact and listened attentively while the evaluator discussed the purpose of the assessment and provided directions. Amir appeared calm and focused through the assessment. He listened to one song at the conclusion of each leveled passage while the evaluator conducted preliminary scoring. Amir easily returned to the assessment tasks when requested. This assessment is considered to be a valid estimate of Amir’s reading performance at this time.

VII. Assessment Results and Discussion (Include a discussion of nonstandard test administration to include the use of an interpreter and the impact on test results.)

Amir was assessed using the Qualitative Reading Inventory (QRI) on March 7, 20xx. According to the authors of the assessment, the QRI is classified as an informal reading inventory designed to provide authentic assessment of children’s reading abilities (Leslie & Schudt Caldwell, 2021). QRI tasks include word list reading, passage reading, and reading comprehension questions that allow evaluators to identify reading levels, determine strengths and needs, and match students to appropriate texts or intervention.

The QRI was administered using the oral reading protocol. The assessment began with word list reading and transitioned to passage reading following the standard protocol. Concept questions were posed prior to oral reading to assess Amir’s familiarity with the content of each passage. All concepts were familiar. The results from each component of the assessment are summarized below. Please see the attached table for additional information regarding Amir’s performance on each component.

Word List Reading/Word Identification: Amir was able to read the third grade word list at an independent level with 95% total accuracy. The fourth, fifth, and sixth grade level word lists were at an instructional level with 75%, 80%, and 80% accuracy, respectively. The Upper Middle School word list was at Amir’s frustration level as evidenced by 60% accuracy. An error analysis as conducted by evaluating features of the word that Amir said as compared to the printed word. Just over half (52%) of Amir’s word identification errors were associated with omitting, substituting, or replacing a word ending. Examples included saying “crowd” for crowded or “materials” for material. Approximately 9% of Amir’s word reading errors were characterized by saying a word that had a similar beginning to the printed word (e.g., saying “energize” for engines).

Oral Reading Fluency: Based on his performance with the word lists, Amir was given the oral reading passages for the third through sixth grade on the QRI. He was also given an Upper Middle School: Science passage. (See the table for scores on all passages.) Amir read the sixth grade passage at a rate of 153 words per minute with 95% accuracy (145 words correct per minute). This is an instructional level for accuracy using QRI guidelines. Although the QRI does not provide percentile rankings for oral reading fluency rates, Amir’s performance would place him near the 50th percentile for performance using the Hasbrouck and Tindal (2017) oral reading fluency norms.

Amir was able to read the Upper Middle School: Science passage at a rate of 141 words per minute with 94% accuracy (133 words correct per minute). This is a frustration level for accuracy using QRI guidelines. Amir’s rate is between the 25th and 50th percentile for students at the end of 6th grade using Hasbrouck and Tindal norms and approximately the 40th percentile for 7th graders using DIBELS 8th edition oral reading fluency norms (University of Oregon, 2020). It should be noted that the Upper Middle School passage was about a topic that was highly interesting to Amir.

Error analysis was conducted to categorize the types of miscues that Amir made when reading passages. His most frequent error was word omission. This accounted for just under 40% of his passage reading errors. Common omissions included the following words: a, in, and, him, for, of, has, and have. The second most common miscue involved replacing a word with another word that fit in the context of the sentence (e.g., The boy went/walked to the store). This type of error accounted for 16% of Amir’s miscues. The third most common miscue was inserting a word. This represented approximately 15% of Amir’s miscues.

Reading Comprehension: Amir responded to literal and inferential comprehension questions for each passage that he read. He demonstrated independent level comprehension with 100% accuracy for the third, fourth, and fifth grade level passages. He answered questions with 75% accuracy from memory on the sixth grade level passage and improved to 100% accuracy when allowed to look back at the text. Amir answered the Upper Middle School comprehension questions with 88% accuracy from memory and 100% accuracy when looking back at the text. It appeared that he knew some of the answers from prior learning.

VIII. Summary and Recommendations: (Include implications for instruction.)

Oral reading fluency has three components: accuracy, rate, and prosody. Amir’s accuracy is within the instructional range for passages written between third grade and sixth grade levels. He read the Upper Middle School passage with 94% accuracy, the highest score in the frustrational range. There is a notable difference in Amir’s accuracy when reading words in isolation (i.e., word lists) as compared to reading passages. The difference suggests that he uses context clues when reading passages to determine unknown words or make predictions about text before he comes to it. In passages, he demonstrated consistent patterns of errors which included omitting, substituting, and replacing high frequency words (e.g., any, he, for, to have). He may benefit from using a tracking tool (i.e., mask) and slowing down slightly in order to reduce these errors. Amir’s oral reading fluency rate is in the average range for sixth graders as established by Hasbrouck and Tindal’s (2017) oral reading fluency norms. Amir exhibited mild difficulties with prosody. He read with a fairly monotone intonation and did not adjust his phrasing or pace in response to punctuation. Instruction addressing phrasing, pace, and punctuation may improve Amir’s accuracy. Repeated oral reading using high-interest text or Reader’s Theater can be an effective way to improve prosody.

This assessment shed some light on Amir’s on-going difficulties passing Standards of Learning assessments. He does seem to have a desire to read quickly. It is possible that his reading pace, paired with crucial omissions could impact his performance on the Reading portion of the end-of-year assessments. Amir also seemed to use context and background knowledge to answer comprehension questions. In situations where he has limited background knowledge, he could struggle with comprehension more. Evaluating Amir’s performance on classroom assessments of grade-level standards and reviewing the Student Detail by Question report for Amir’s SOL tests could provide additional information to guide intervention. Amir may be lacking knowledge of specific content standards that are evaluated on the Standards of Learning Assessment.

Qualitative Reading Inventory Profile Sheet

Word Identification

Oral Reading