Assessment Report

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 3

Olivia Lampe

Professor Konrardy

Evaluation and Diagnosis of Reading Difficulties

10 March 2020

Assessment Report

There were three separate sets of data for my student (Lucious, 1​st​ grade) that were

collected. First, I began by looking at the FAST screening results that were given to me by his

classroom teacher. While analyzing this data, I noticed that his correct words per minute were

low (14; the grade level score should be at 66), but his accuracy was at 64%. This tells me that I

should be focusing on fluency with him and getting him to a point where he is able to decode

words at a faster pace. With the data I collected, beginning with the Informal Phonological

Awareness Inventory Assessment, I noticed that he has no trouble with blending (scored 6/6 on

all three tests), but does have some trouble with rhyming. He is able to identify if two words

rhyme or not, but cannot produce a rhyme when given a certain word. He did well with the

phoneme isolation for listening to sounds at the beginning, middle, and end of a word. For the

segmentation section, he scored a 4/6 on counting the words in a sentence, 5/6 on the phonemes,

and 4/6 on counting the syllables. For the deletion section of the assessment, he scored a 5/6 on

the compound words, 4/6 on syllables, and 4/6 on phonemes. Lastly, he scored 0/6 on the

manipulation section when he was substituting phonemes in a word. So, these tests tell me that I

should be focusing a lot on rhyming and manipulation.

Next, I assessed him using the Mississippi Dyslexia Screener. The data overall that was

collected from the dyslexia screener showed that he was at low risk. The only section that was
not at low risk and was “at risk” was the sound/symbol recognition and decoding skills. All of

the other sections (encoding, alphabet knowledge, phonemic/phonological awareness, and rapid

naming) were at low risk for Lucious and gave me an idea of what his strengths were. This data

also tells me that I need to be working with him on decoding skills. For progress monitoring, I

was thinking about seeing how many words he can rhyme in a certain amount of time (ex: me

telling him a word and him having to say a word that rhymes). This way, I can collect data on the

amount of words and see if he is progressing. Another way I could work with him would be to

work on his decoding skills and fluency. A way that I could do this would be to give him text at

his level and see how many correct words per minute he is getting with each text. I want to make

sure that I am keeping data every week so that I can know if my specific intervention is working

or not.
Grading Rubric
0 pts 5 pts 10 pts

Screener No data/ not Screener assessment Screener assessment


Assessment discussed is discussed but is discussed and
connections are not appropriate
made to diagnostics connections are
made to diagnostics

Diagnostic No data/ not Diagnostic Diagnostic


Assessment discussed assessment is assessment is
discussed but discussed and
connections are not appropriate
made to intervention connections are
instruction made to intervention
instruction

Intervention No instructional Instruction is Intervention ideas are


Instruction pieces are discussed discussed, but not proposed that
tied to data correlate to data
collected

Progress No PM discussed A discussion of PM is PM discussion is


Monitoring present, but is not present and is
relevant or tied to directly connected to
data findings the results of the
assessment

Grammar/ 7 or more errors 4-6 errors 0-3 errors


Mechanics

50/50
Olivia, this is excellent work. You really dug into the scores and gave some thought to what
they mean. Your conclusions are solid and you are on the right track about what instruction to
give based on these scores. Your progress monitoring ideas are spot on as well. One
suggestion, as mentioned above, is to decide if you want to monitor decoding or fluency, and
really hone in on that skill. I’d suggest decoding, because that is more foundational than
fluency. If students can’t accurately decode, they will never be fluent. In all, this is awesome
work!!

You might also like