This part of case study is to interpret standardized test data. You interpret test results to be shared with parents. Please review the following presentation slides:
Formal Assessments of Reading
Standard Scores and Percentiles
Then read the detailed Module 2 Assignment instructions and submit your completed work to this folder.
Module2CaseStudyAssignment501.docx
FormalAssessmentsofReading.pdf
Module2CaseStudyAssignment501.docx
Module 2 Case Study
A new fifth grade girl, who is 10 years, 6 months old, has moved into your district this year. She has been in school for about 6 weeks and the classroom teacher has observed and reported to you the following:
Has trouble following directions
· Difficulty with reading decoding and comprehension
· Slightly below average in math but seems to understand mathematical functions and principles
· Is able to write a small paragraph with about 10 simple sentences
· Complies with social rules during class
· Seems to be developing appropriate friendships and the other children seem to like her
Her folder from the previous school just arrived and has been passed on to you to interpret the following scores from the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement-II which had been administered the previous spring. The student was being evaluated for special education but this was not completed due to the family move.
For the chart below fill in the column with an estimated percentile rank. (Use the chart in the PowerPoint to help you get close and the stand ppt on standard scores and percentiles). Then please write a narrative that describes the student’s academic functioning. The focus of the narrative should answer the question: “How does the student compare to typically achieving peers?” Write the narrative in a way that a parent could understand and use statistical language. Conclude the narrative with some recommendations to help the student progress.
KTEA-II Results
Subtest
Standard Score
Grade Equivalent
Percentile Rank
Letter Word Recognition
75
3.6
?
Reading Comprehension
64
2.3
?
Math Concepts
103
5.3
?
Math Computation
112
5.9
?
Written Expression
72
3.0
?
Spelling
63
2.0
?
Listening Comprehension
82
3.9
?
Oral Expression
90
4.9
?
,
Chapter 6
Formal Assessment of Reading: Individualized
Assessment
Introduction
• Development of Formal Reading Measures • Types of Scores • Administration and Scoring of Formal Tests • Determining Chronological Age • Individualized vs Group Tests • What do individualized Norm-referenced Measures of
Reading Look Like? • Test Bias • Selecting Formal, Individualized Instruments • Special Considerations for Formal, Individual Assessment
of Adult and English Language Learners
Test Development
• Table of specifications (blueprint) (Figure 5.2) • Development version • Pilot or field testing • Standardization version • Norm sample
• Representativeness of sample
Figure 6.1
Types of Scores
• Numerical Scales: Nominal, Ordinal, Interval, Ratio
• Raw Score: Actual number correct, taking into account the basal
• Derived Scores • Standard Scores: Z Scores, IQ Scores, T
Scores, Scale Scores • Grade Equivalents, Age Equivalents • Percentiles
Assessment Terms
• Grade Equivalent • Age Equivalent • Grade-Based
Norms • Age-Based Norms ØAs a Rule, Use Age-
Based Norms to Determine Standard Scores
• Standard Scores- can Add and Subtract-Used for Comparisons
• Percentiles- Provides A Rank Order 1-99
• Stanines-A Rough Gauge 1-9
Text Box 6.1
Age and Grade Equivalents
Age Equivalent Grade Equivalent 6-1 1.2 6 years, 1 month 1st grade, 2nd month
Percentile versus Percentage Misha Jesse Percentage 50 90 Mastery
Percentile 16 80
Text Box 6.2
Text Box 6.3
Contrasting Standard Scores for Word Recognition and Reading Comprehension
Mean = 100; Standard Deviation = 15
Word Reading Recognition Comprehension
Shelby 85 84 Saimah 95 70
Text Box 6.4
Comparing IQ Scores with Reading Achievement Scores (Mean = 100; Standard Deviation = 15)
Saimah Shelby Standard Score IQ 94 103 Reading Comprehension -70 -85 24 18
Administering and Scoring of Formal Tests
Test Administration • Test Manual: Administration Instructions,
Scoring and Norm Information, Reliability and Validity Data
• Protocol • Calculation of Chronological Age • General Guidelines for Test Administration • Raw Scores • Establishing Basals and Ceilings • Derived Scores: Percentiles, Grade Equivalents,
Standard Scores
Test Administration
• Determine chronological age
• Know start and stop rules
• Establish rapport with examinee
• Administer subtests according to directions
• Do NOT coach, prompt, or give feedback EXCEPT as directed in the manual
• Obtain raw scores- take into account basal and ceiling
• Obtain derived scores (standard scores, percentiles, etc.
Tips for Administering Standardized Tests • Text Box 6.5
Word Recognition
Basal Rule: 3 in a row correct. Ceiling rule: 3 in row incorrect.
1. ___ 2. ___ 3. ___
→ 4. _1_ 5. _1_ 6. _1_ 7. _1_ 8. _1_ 9. _1_ 10. _0_ 11. _0_ 12. _0_
Note: Starting point for this student indicated by the →
Vocabulary
Basal rule: All items in a set correct. Ceiling rule: All items in a set incorrect.
1. ___ 2. ___ 3. ___
4. ___ 5. ___ →6. _1_ 7. _1_ 8. _1_ 9. _1_ 10. _1_
11. _0_ 12. _0_ 13. _0_ 14. _0_ 15. _0_
Note: Starting point for this student indicated by the →
Figure 6.2. Sample Reading Subtests Showing Basal and Ceiling Rules
Raw Score Conversion Table for Reading Comprehension Test
Age: 8 years, 9 months Raw Score
Stand ard Score
Percen tile
Grade Equiva lent
Age Equivale nt
↑
15 95 37 2.1 7-6 16 96 39 2.4 7-9 17 97 42 2.7 7-11 18 98 45 2.9 8-3 19 99 47 3.2 8-6 20 100 50 3.5 8-9
↓
Figure 6.3. Sample Excerpt from a Norm Table for an Individually Administered Reading Comprehension Test for Students Age 8 years, 9 months. Examiners calculate the raw score for the test, then look up derived scores (standard scores, percentiles, grade- and age-equivalents) based on the examinee’s chronological age.
Determining Chronological Age
Calculation of Chronological Age
Subtract Date of Birth from Current Date:
2016 06 22
– 2009 07 14
Months always have 30 days and years (of course) have 12 months). Always double check your work.
Standardized Diagnostic Testing
• When to Use Diagnostic Tests • Instructional Level • Informal Instruments • Probes • Direct Measurement • Domains
Individualized vs. Group Tests
Individual versus Group?
Individual • Special education
eligibility • Determine goals and
objectives for IFSPs, IEPs
• Progress monitoring • May be more reliable
for certain students
Group • Determine mastery of
curriculum standards • Determine if teachers
are effective (value added) • Controversial but
happening! • Accountability and
general school planning
• May be less reliable for certain students
Test Interpretation • Analyze test scores • Are scores above
average, average or below average?
• Do the scores yield any instructional information?
• Compile with other data
• Maintain confidentiality
• Is there a pattern of strengths and weaknesses? • e. g. Areas of learning
disability? basic reading, reading fluency, reading comprehension?
What do Individualized, Norm- Referenced Measures of
Reading Look Like?
Figure 6.4
Figure 6.5
Figure 6.6
Figure 6.7
Figure 6.8
Figure 6.9
Methods of Assessing Comprehension
• KTEA-III • Reading Comprehension subtest
• Picture identification, Answering questions
• WIAT-III • Reading Comprehension subtest
• Picture identification, Answering questions
• WJ-IV • Passage Comprehension subtest
• Picture identification, Fill in the blank • Reading Recall subtest
• Silent reading followed by oral retelling
Comprehension
• Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (WIAT-III) • Reading Comprehension subtest • The examinee is required to read short sentences or
passages and respond to comprehension questions
Reading Comprehension Similar to WIAT-III
Sample Maze Activity Norm-referenced tests are standardized (without/on/for) a clearly defined group, termed the (test/sample/norm) group, and scaled so that each (score/instrument/variance) reflects a rank within the (evaluation/reliability/norm) group. Psychologists have developed norm-(standardized/referenced/rated) tests to assess, for example, (height/attitude/intelligence), reading, mathematics, writing, etc. Although we (aren’t/are/is) fortunate in having a choice of (poorly/haphazardly/well)-standardized and psychometrically sound tests (without/above/with) which to evaluate children, some (numbers/tests/practitioners) do not meet acceptable psychometric standards. (Passage from Sattler, 2001)
Nelson-Denny Reading Test
• Comprehension • 7 reading passages • 38 comprehension questions • Literal and interpretive question types • 5 answer choices per question • 20 minutes
Methods of Assessing Vocabulary •WJ-IV: Reading Vocabulary
•Synonyms, Antonyms, Analogies
•Nelson Denny •Multiple choice
Vocabulary
•Woodcock Johnson – IV Tests of Achievement (WJ-IV) •Reading Vocabulary subtest • The examinee is required to orally state synonyms and antonyms for printed words and orally complete written analogies
Reading Vocabulary Similar to WJ-IV
Analogies
Synonyms
Antonyms
Nelson-Denny Reading Test
• Vocabulary • 80 items • 5 answer choices each • 15 minute time limit • Example
• Which word best completes the opening statement? • A chef works with: A. bricks B. music C. clothes D. food E. statues
Methods of Assessing Fluency •KTEA-III •Decoding Fluency subtest
•Nonsense word list (timed) •Word Recognition Fluency subtest
•Word list (timed) • WIAT-III •Reading Comprehension subtest
•Reading timed passages •WJ-IV •Sentence Reading Fluency subtest
•Reading sentences and marking whether statements are true or false (3 minute time limit)
•Word Reading Fluency •Choosing two words that go together from an array of choices
Fluency
• The Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency-2 (TOSWRF-2)
• Examinees are required to identify increasingly difficult words that have no spaces between them by drawing lines between the boundaries of as many words as possible within the time limit (3 minutes)
• The Test of Silent Contextual Word Reading Fluency (TOSCRF-2) • Similar to TOSWRF-2 but examinee reads connected text
of increasingly difficult graded passages
TOSWRF-2: Example
Nelson-Denny Reading Test • Reading Rate
• Part of Comprehension Test • The examiner calls “Mark” after one minute has
elapsed, and the examinees are asked to record the number to the right of their current line of text and continue reading.
Methods of Assessing Phonics
• KTEA-III • Nonsense Word Decoding subtest
• Nonsense words
• WJ-IV • Word Attack subtest
• Nonsense words
• WIAT-III • Pseudoword Decoding subtest
• Nonsense words
Phonics • Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (WIAT-III)
• Pseudoword Decoding subtest • Requires the examinee to read aloud a list of nonsense
words designed to mimic the phonetic structure of words in the English Language.
Pseudoword Decoding Similar to WIAT-III
• heb • mib • fum • bim • pon • vun • dreeb
Methods of Assessing Phonemic Awareness
• KTEA-III • Phonological Awareness subtest • Rhyming, Sound Matching, Blending, Segmenting,
Deletion
• WJ-IV • Spelling of Sounds subtest • Rhyming, Deletion, Substitution, Reversal
• WIAT-III • Word Reading subtest • Rhyming, Sound Matching, Blending,
Phonemic Awareness
• Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement (WJ IV) • Spelling of Sounds subtest • Requires the examinee to use rhyming, deletion,
substitution, and reversal to manipulate sounds in words.
Spelling of Sounds Similar to WJ-IV
• Rhyming: “What rhymes with go?”
• Deletion: “Say cowboy without saying boy”
• Substitution: “Change /s/ in sun to /f/.”
• Reversal: “Listen to the sounds in the word pot – /p/ /o/ /t/. Now you say the sounds backward.”
Other Measures that Assess Phonemic Awareness
• CTOPP-2 • Durrell-2 • ERDA-2
• PAL-2 RW • TOWRE-2 • TERA-3
Methods of Assessing Sight Word Recognition
• WIAT-II • Word Reading subtest
• Letter and word identification
• KTEA-II • Letter and Word Recognition subtest
• Letter and word identification
• WJ-IV • Letter Word Identification subtest
• Letter and word identification
Sight Word Recognition
• Kaufman Tests of Educational Achievement (KTEA III) • Letter and Word Recognition subtest • The examinee is asked to point to or name various
letters, sounds, and words.
Letter Word Recognition Similar to KTEA III
Test Bias
• Scores from a test should not provide a systematic advantage to a particular group or subgroup based on irregularities in test content, administration, or interpretation
• If a test produces such an unfair advantage it is said to be biased against the group that is disadvantaged (Payne, 2003)
Evidence of Test Bias
• a) Does the test assess the same content for all the groups using it?
• (b) Are the constructs assessed by the test measured consistently for all groups using it?
• (c) Does the test predict (later achievement) as well for all the groups using it?
• (d) Does the test provide equally useful instructional information for all groups using it?
Avoiding Bias
• Expert judgment • Statistical analyses: Are the constructs assessed
the same across different groups (e.g., gender, race, SES level?)
• Remember tests that are not inherently biased may be misused (e.g., use of test in English for students with limited English skills)
Selecting Formal, Individualized Instruments
• Consider test characteristics • Consider psychometric properties • Consider needs of children, classrooms, schools,
or systems • Determine whether a group or individualized test
is needed
Special Considerations for Formal, Individual Assessment of Adult and English Language
Learners
Tips for Formal, Individualized Assessment of Adult Learners • Text Box 6.7 • Assess adult learners’ educational histories, background
experiences, and interests as well as specific reading skills. • Multiple assessments will likely be needed to provide complete
information about adult learners’ reading strengths and weaknesses.
• Ensure that the test used with adults is standardized on that population.
• Put adult learners at ease; establish rapport and a purpose before launching into formal testing.
• Using grade equivalent scores, and to a lesser extent age equivalent scores, is problematic due to ease of misinterpretation of these score, and their psychometric limitations.
Tips for Adults cont’d
• Tests should include item content appropriate for adults, rather than young students, even though the difficulty level of the content may be low in order to achieve a reasonable test floor.
• Consider entering your test data and using the instructional skills profile available at the Adult Reading Components Study website: https://lincs.ed.gov/readingprofiles/resources.ht m
https://lincs.ed.gov/readingprofiles/resources.htm
https://lincs.ed.gov/readingprofiles/resources.htm
Tips for Formal, Individualized Assessment of English Language Learners
• Text Box 6.8 • Users should follow standards set for test administration,
scoring and interpretation in general and for ELL and other diverse learners as developed by experts. Many of these standards are reproduced in Chapter 6; some of the most relevant are reproduced in this Text Box in abbreviated form.
• Be aware that an ELL student’s formal test scores will be compared to students in the U.S., who may not resemble the ELL in background, culture, knowledge, etc.
• Related to Number 2 above, an ELL’s scores on formal tests may be depressed because of cultural, linguistic, and knowledge differences.
Tips for ELLs cont’d • Do not administer a language-loaded test for ELL
examinees unless the language content in the test is the focus of assessment.
• Related to Number 4 above, if a student’s English language proficiency is the target of assessment English language- loaded tests (i.e., English reading tests) are appropriate
• Ensure that the test does not contain item content that may be offensive in the ELL’s home country or culture.
• Ensure that reliability and validity of the test have been established for ELLs.
• Ensure that the items are not biased against ELL learners by evaluating recommendations from expert panels.
Tips for ELLs cont’d
• Ensure that items are not biased against ELL learners by examining evidence from statistical techniques designed to determine bias.
• When possible, use an examiner who can communicate in the ELL’s native language to establish rapport and aid in administering the test.
• Be aware that an ELL’s progress in learning a second language and ability to understand test demands may be limited by negative transfer from the native language.
• Reduce importance of speeded performance on scores; some cultures do not value speed.
• Ensure that the test only measures what you intend to measure (i.e., specific types of reading skills) and not some irrelevant content.
Tips for ELLs cont’d
• If your ELL students score below the mean, ensure that if mean differences occur, the differences are not the result of bias.
• Use ample teaching items to ensure that ELL learners understand the task demands.
• Using grade equivalent scores, and to a lesser extent age equivalent scores, is problematic due to each of misinterpretation of these score, and psychometric limitations.
Assessment at a Glance
Interested in getting help with this assignment?
Get a professional writing team to work on your assignment!
Order Now
Recent postsFor this final assignment, you will prepare a brief paper detailing the steps undertaken to complete a presentation that disseminates information you assemble
Please choose to answer only one of the 2 following questions. Option 1: In your opinion and based on scientific, peer-reviewed published evidence, does child
At the beginning of the previous academic year, the institution announced it would drop football at the conclusion of the season. The announcement created pub
you will review current research in Personality and provide a critical evaluation of that personality research through an annotated bibliography. An annotated
In Module 5, we considered the third in our three-part series on research design. Specifically, the focus was on the longitudinal studies, in which the resear
Need help with a similar or different Task?
We have the best writers to help you. Hire Writer Now
