Microsoft Word - k.z initial .docx

BETHPAGE PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Bethpage, NY

CONFIDENTIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL REPORT

Office of Pupil Personnel Services

NOTE: Upon receipt of the school administrator, the parents

are permitted an interpretation of the contents of this

report by a Bethpage School Psychologist.

Name:

XXXXX XXX

Age:

9 yrs, 8 mo.

Grade: 4

Date Examined:

1/14/2016-

01/28/2016

Date of

Birth:

05/20/2006

School: Kramer Lane

Elementary School

Reason for Referral

XXXXX is a 4

grade student at Kramer Lane Elementary School. She was referred to

the Committee on Special Education by the Kramer Lane Instructional Support Team

due to ongoing academic concerns.

Evaluation Techniques

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fifth Edition (WISC-V)

Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement – 3rd Edition (KTEA-3)

Gray Oral Reading Test – 5 (GORT-5) (Administered by B. Yetman)

Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests, Fourth Edition (GMRT, Level 4, Form S) (Administered by B. Yetman)

Behavior Assessment System for Children- 2

Edition (BASC-2)

Teacher Report

Parent Report

Teacher Reports

Record Review

Relevant Information

XXXXX is a 9-year, 8 month old girl in the 4

grade at Kramer Lane Elementary School.

Based upon the social history dated 2/4/16, Ms. XXXX, XXXXX’s mother, reports that

XXXXX moved to Bethpage and began Kramer Lane Elementary School in the 3

grade.

Previously, XXXXX attended Hicksville Schools. XXXXX comes from a bilingual home

(Spanish), however, is not, nor has ever been eligible for ELL services. Currently,

XXXXX is struggling in all areas of the curriculum. She has difficulty retaining

information and does poorly on most classroom tests. She is below grade level in reading

and math and appears to have deficits in processing skills, comprehension and

organizational skills. Please refer to the social history for further background

information.

Mrs. XXX, XXXXX’s classroom teacher, reports XXXXX is struggling in all areas of

the curriculum. She has difficulty remembering and transferring knowledge. She will not

CONFIDENTIAL

AND

PRIVILEGED

REPORT

ask for help and will sit in her seat quietly. She often needs to be instructed in a small

group or one to one. XXXXX is reported to be shy but has friends; she is respectful and

kind to teachers. XXXXX is organized and appears to always pay attention during

instruction. She is always prepared and ready to work on whatever task is at hand.

XXXXX is able to follow simple directions but has difficulty with multi-step directions.

She does not raise her hand to participate during classroom instruction. XXXXX tends to

take a very long time to complete tasks even with remediation and support. Currently,

XXXXX comes to school with her homework complete which is an improvement from

the beginning of the year.

Previously, when XXXXX was in 3

grade, her classroom teacher, Mr. Arettines, reports

that she struggled with all aspects of the curriculum. As such, XXXXX received daily

reading support and RTI resource room support. She reportedly had difficulty with

written expression, multi-step math problems, and organizing her thoughts. Mr. Arettines

reports that there was limited follow through at home which he felt, at the time, may have

been a factor in her academic difficulties. His recommendation at the time was to closely

monitor XXXXX’s progress in the 4

grade to determine if a referral should be made to

the Committee on Special Education.

Currently, XXXXX receives daily reading support, RTI resource room (2X weekly) and

RTI Speech and Language support (1X weekly). Previous to the start of resource room,

XXXXX attended support with the ELL teacher daily for a six week period. The purpose

of this support was to provide assistance as well as help determine if XXXXX’s

difficulties were due to exposure to a second language. At the conclusion of the support,

the ELL teacher reports (based on observation) that XXXXX’s difficulties appear to be

more in her ability to process and does not feel it is a translating issue. Mrs. Jennings,

Speech and Language Pathologist, reports XXXXX has poor phonemic awareness and

difficulty retaining word decoding skills. She often needs directions repeated.

Based upon the results of the Fountas and Pinnell Reading Assessment completed by

XXXXX’s reading teacher, Mrs. Yetman, her reading went from an independent Level M

(end of second grade) to a level N (beginning of third grade) (1/16). Her reading teacher

reports that even though she went up a level, she still has reading difficulties and is below

grade level. She tends to read very slowly and relies on other students for the answer.

Mrs. Yetman also provides XXXXX with resource room support. Based upon XXXXX’s

performance in resource room, Mrs. Yetman reports that XXXXX has difficulty with

word problems and does not know her math facts. Mrs. XXX reports that despite the

support provided, XXXXX is still struggling greatly in the classroom and her homework

is inconsistent.

Below are XXXXX’s NWEA scores:

Test

Fall, ‘14

Spring, ‘15

Fall, ‘15

Winter, ‘16

NWEA Math

171/7%

189/15%

188/16%

193/14%

NWEA

Reading

167/9%

182/14%

184/19%

184/10%

Behavioral Observations:

XXXXX was evaluated over several testing sessions. XXXXX was asked to accompany

the examiner to the testing room and did so willingly and without complaint. Upon

reaching the testing room, the examiner instructed XXXXX to take a specified seat at the

table. She took the specified seat and waited for instructions. The examiner engaged

XXXXX in informal conversation and in which she responded politely and appropriately

to the questions about her family, favorite activities and television shows. XXXXX

appeared to enjoy the one on one interaction with the examiner. Rapport was easily

established and maintained throughout the testing process.

Throughout the testing session, XXXXX worked hard and appeared focused. XXXXX

asked for directions to be repeated throughout. XXXXX took a great deal of time to

respond to questions. XXXXX put a great deal of thought into her responses.

Classroom Observation

XXXXX was observed during a grammar lesson at 12 in the afternoon. The classroom

teacher, Mrs. XXX was present. XXXXX was seated at the front of the classroom where

there were two horizontal sets of three desks. XXXXX sat on the second set of desks,

closest to the window in the first seat.

Upon arrival, Mrs. XXX let the observer know that XXXXX was at speech and would be

returning momentarily. The students had snacks out on their desks and appeared to be

working quietly on an assignment. Mrs. XXX announced to the class that the lesson was

going to start shortly. The students started to chat, and Mrs. XXX said, “(student’s name)

is nice and quiet.” XXXXX walked into the classroom. XXXXX walked straight to the

back of the classroom to the closet, and went into her backpack. XXXXX then walked

back to her seat with her snack as Mrs. XXX went around and passed out Nilla wafers to

select students. Mrs. XXX proceeded to acknowledge how she liked how specific

classmates were sitting in their seats and behaving. It appeared that Mrs. XXX was going

to start the lesson and asked XXXXX if she knew what she was supposed to be doing.

XXXXX replied “yes” and Mrs. XXX proceeded to clarify and asked XXXXX “what?”

XXXXX said to turn to the page and Mrs. XXX asked, “which section?” XXXXX

replied, “grammar”.

XXXXX began to cut and work on her activity that the other students were just

completing. Mrs. XXX praised XXXXX’s classmate and XXXXX turned her head and

looked over as she was cutting her assignment.

Mrs. XXX started to teach the class a lesson on verbs and action verbs. A worksheet was

on the smartboard and the students also had the worksheet on their desks. As Mrs. XXX

started the lesson, XXXXX was eating her snack and appeared to be paying attention as

she was looking at the smartboard in the front of the classroom. XXXXX got out of her

seat to throw out the garbage from her snack. XXXXX sat back down at her seat and

started playing with her necklace and then proceeded to play with her eyebrows. It also

appeared to the observer that she was picking at her face. The worksheet on the

smartboard was titled “Is it in Past, Present or Future?” The students needed to determine

whether the sentences on the worksheet contained past, present or future verbs. XXXXX

raised her hand when the teacher asked about a specific question but was not called on.

The teacher went over to XXXXX; XXXXX stated that ‘tomorrow’ was an action verb.

The teacher corrected XXXXX and told her that ‘tomorrow’ was a “when”. She

proceeded to assist XXXXX in finding the correct answer. XXXXX got the first few

incorrect, however, with guidance from the teacher, she got the last couple of questions

correct.

Current Test Results:

Cognitive Abilities:

Classification of Cognitive Scores

Results obtained from the evaluation of XXXXX’s cognitive abilities using standardized,

norm-referenced tests were interpreted using a classification system that describes her

performance in a functional manner. This type of classification is used to highlight

XXXXX’s current level of performance and identify areas of instructional need and

intervention. Scores are reported as standard scores, which have an average of 100 and a

standard deviation of 15, or scaled scores, which have an average of 10 and a standard

deviation of 3. Percentile Ranks indicate the percentage of same-aged peers who scored

the same or lower than XXXXX on the task, and will also be reported.

Evaluation of Cognitive Abilities

XXXXX’s cognitive abilities were assessed with regard to five broad areas of cognitive

processing: crystallized intelligence, visual-spatial processing, fluid reasoning, processing

speed, and short-term memory.

To assess her cognitive abilities, XXXXX was administered the core battery of the

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (Fifth Edition). Seven scores from the WISC-V

combine to yield a measure of overall cognitive functioning called the Full Scale IQ. In

addition to the Full Scale IQ, the WISC-V groups an individual’s ability into five global

areas: the Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI), the Visual-Spatial Index (VSI), the Fluid

Reasoning Index (FRI), the Working Memory Index (WMI), and the Processing Speed

Index (PSI).

On the WISC-V, XXXXX earned a Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) of 88 (Confidence Interval

(CI): 83-94), which ranks her overall ability at the 21

percentile and classifies her global

IQ as falling within the Low Average Range. However, this estimate of XXXXX’s

general intellectual ability does not give much information regarding her individual

strengths or weaknesses, nor does it give the total picture of her cognitive functioning.

Therefore, an analysis of the various subtest scores on the WISC-V needs to be taken into

consideration in assessing XXXXX’s ability to function and learn successfully in her

present educational setting.

Verbal Comprehension Index

The first area of cognitive processing assessed was XXXXX’s Crystallized Intelligence.

Crystallized Intelligence is the ability to demonstrate the breadth and depth of knowledge

acquired from both formal classroom education and from incidental learning that occurs

outside of the classroom. Specifically, subtests that measure this area tap into XXXXX’s

general language development, including her store of general information, her ability to

verbalize, reason and comprehend that information, and the extent of vocabulary that can

be understood in terms of correct word meanings (i.e. lexical development). Two

subtests from the WISC-V were presented to XXXXX for this purpose.

The first subtest administered assessed XXXXX’s verbal reasoning and concept

formation abilities. Specifically, XXXXX was presented with two words and asked to

draw conceptual similarities between them (Similarities, scaled score =9). On the second

subtest administered, XXXXX was presented with a word in isolation and asked to

verbally produce a definition (Vocabulary, scaled score =6). When combined, these

subtests earned XXXXX a VCI composite score of 86 and ranked at the 18

percentile

and falls within the Low Average range.

It appears XXXXX has a relative weakness on her vocabulary skills which involves her

level of acquired knowledge obtained through life experiences. Such weakness can

impact her reading comprehension, answering factual questions, as well as her oral and

written language skills.

Visual-Spatial Index

Visual-Spatial Processing is the ability to analyze and synthesize visual information.

More specifically, it reflects an individual’s ability to generate, perceive, analyze,

interpret, store, retrieve, manipulate and think with visual patterns and stimuli. XXXXX’s

ability in this area was assessed through the use of two subtests from the WISC-V.

On the first subtest, XXXXX was required to reproduce a series of designs (presented via

model or picture) using blocks within a specified time limit. This subtest measures

XXXXX’s ability to understand spatial relations (Block Design, scaled score = 6). On the

second subtest, XXXXX viewed a completed puzzle and was asked to select, through

sight alone, three pieces that could combine to make the whole puzzle. This subtest

measured XXXXX’s speeded visual rotation (Visual Puzzles, scaled score = 7). When

combined the subtests earned XXXXX a VSI composite score of 81. This score is ranked

at the 10

percentile and is classified within the Below Average range.

Visual Spatial Reasoning appears to be an area of weakness for XXXXX. Furthermore,

XXXXX may experience difficulty on tasks that involve higher level math, using patterns

and designs, sensing spatial orientation and boundaries and noting visual detail. A

weakness in this area may have had an impact on the acquisition of early reading skills.

Fluid-Reasoning Index

Fluid reasoning involves XXXXX’s ability to reason and solve problems that often

include unfamiliar information or procedures and depend very little on learning and

acculturation. Fluid reasoning may include forming and recognizing concepts, perceiving

relationships among patterns, drawing inferences, comprehending implications, and

reorganizing or transforming information. XXXXX was administered two subtests from

the WISC-V to assess her ability in this area.

On the first subtest, XXXXX was required to look at an incomplete matrix of pictures,

and then choose the missing portion from 5 possible options. This subtest measured

XXXXX’s general sequential and inductive reasoning ability (Matrix Reasoning, scaled

score = 11). On the second subtest, XXXXX viewed a scale with missing weights and

then had to select an option from several choices that balances the scale. This subtest

measured XXXXX’s quantitative reasoning ability (Figure Weights, scaled score = 7).

XXXXX obtained a Fluid Reasoning score of 94, which is within the Average range and

ranked at the 34

percentile.

Although XXXXX’s overall Fluid Reasoning skills fell within the average range, she

appears to exhibit a strength in Matrix Reasoning and a relative weakness on Figure

Weights. This pattern of scores implies a relative strength in inductive reasoning

compared to quantitative reasoning. It is possible that her understanding of part-whole

relationships may be better developed than her mathematical reasoning skills. When

XXXXX solves novel problems, she may have difficulty applying quantitative concepts.

Working Memory Index

Short-term memory involves taking in and holding information, and then using that

information within a short period of time (typically a few seconds). It plays a very

important role in learning newly presented information. Short-term memory is made up

of both memory span and working memory. Memory span allows the individual to

attend to and immediately recall temporally ordered elements in the correct order after a

single presentation. Working memory, on the other hand, is the ability to temporarily

store and perform a set of cognitive operations on information that requires divided

attention and the management of the limited capacity of short-term memory. Two

subtests were administered from the WISC-V to assess XXXXX’s ability in this area.

On the first subtest, Digit Span, XXXXX was verbally presented with three sets of

numbers. On the first set, XXXXX had to repeat the numbers back to the examiner in the

correct order (memory span), while on the second set XXXXX had to repeat them in

reverse order (working memory). On the third set of numbers, the XXXXX had to

sequence the numbers presented according to specific directions (Digit Span, scaled score

= 9). The second subtest administered from the WISC-V only assessed XXXXX’s visual

working memory ability. On this measure, XXXXX was shown one or more pictures for

a short period of time (e.g. 3-5 seconds) and she was then asked to select the pictures she

saw, in order, from a larger picture array (Picture Span, scaled score = 11). XXXXX’s

abilities fall within the Average range and ranked at the 50

percentile (WMI= 100).

Processing Speed Index

Processing speed is the ability to fluently and automatically perform cognitive tasks,

especially when under pressure to maintain focused attention and concentration. This

ability was assessed using two different subtests on the WISC-V.

The first subtest required XXXXX to rapidly make a decision based on visual

information (i.e. a key of different symbols), and then draw the correct symbol from the

key that matched a given shape. This subtest provides an indication into XXXXX’s

ability to rapidly perform tests which are relatively easy or that require very simple

decisions. On this subtest she scored in the average range (Coding, scaled score = 11).

The second subtest given required XXXXX to rapidly identify the presence or absence of

a target symbol in a row of symbols. This subtest measured perceptual speed, which is

the ability to rapidly search for and compare known visual symbols or patterns presented

side-by-side or separated in a visual field. She scored in the average range in this area

(Symbol Search, scaled score = 11). XXXXX obtained a composite score of 105, which

is ranked at the 63

percentile and falls within the Average range.

ASSESSMENT OF ACADEMIC FUNCTIONING

XXXXX was administered selected subtests from the Kaufman Tests of Educational

Achievement – 3

Edition (KTEA-III). These subtests were chosen to reflect her current

reading ability, writing ability and mathematical ability. It should be noted this

evaluation tool, unlike the cognitive evaluation tool, allows for repetition of directions

and partial guidance. XXXXX seemed to thoroughly enjoy the portion of testing. She

maintained focus and concentration and responded well to the reinforcement provided by

the examiner.

Reading: On the Reading Composite, XXXXX received a score of 96, which is ranked in

the 39

percentile and is classified in the Average range. XXXXX’s reading decoding

ability was assessed through a task that required her to point to letters and say the name

or sound of a letter and read regular and irregular words (Letter & Word Recognition,

SS=101; Average). XXXXX’s reading comprehension ability was assessed through a

task that required her to look at a word and point to the picture that illustrates the word,

read short sentences that direct her to perform a certain physical action or say a certain

thing, and to answer questions after reading a passage (Reading Comprehension, SS=92;

Average).

The GORT-5 assesses oral reading rate, accuracy, fluency and verbal comprehension

skills. XXXXX’s overall reading ability, a combination of her fluency and

comprehension scores, fell within the “Low Average” range (SS: 89; 23

%ile).

XXXXX’s rate of reading (amount of time to read a story) fell within the “below

average” range (Rate: SS: 6; 9%ile). XXXXX’s ability to pronounce each word correctly

in the story fell within the “average” range (Accuracy SS: 10; 50

% ile). XXXXX’s

reading comprehension fell within the “average” range (SS: 8 25

%ile).

The Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests, Fourth Edition assesses the major areas of reading,

including phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary and comprehension. The readings

include both fiction and nonfiction test items and assess responses to texts based on the

complexity at different grade levels. The readings are done silently. Based upon the

results, XXXXX’s total reading score fell at the 8

percentile. Her vocabulary

knowledge fell at the 13

%ile and comprehension fell within the 5

%ile. Overall,

XXXXX has difficulty when presented with silent reading tasks.

Mathematics: On the Mathematics Composite, XXXXX received a score of 86, which is

ranked at the 18

percentile and is classified as Low Average. Her mathematical ability

was assessed through two subtests. On one subtest, XXXXX was required to solve math

problems involving reasoning and mathematical concepts (Math Concepts &

Applications, SS=82; Below Average). On the second subtest, XXXXX was required to

solve written computational problems using the four basic operations (Math

Computation, SS=92; Average). Based upon these results, XXXXX has difficultly with

more complex math problems that involve reasoning.

Written Language: On the Written Language Composite, XXXXX received a score of

88, which is ranked at the 21

percentile and classified as Below Average. XXXXX’s

writing ability was assessed through two tasks. One required her to write orally

presented words correctly (Spelling, SS=91, Average) and the other required XXXXX to

write letters, words, and sentences and edit text with correct punctuation and

capitalization via a storybook format (Written Expression, SS=87; Below Average).

Social/Emotional Functioning

The Behavior Assessment System for Children (2

Edition) is a set of rating scales used

to evaluate a student’s behavior and emotions in comparison to those of same-aged peers.

The BASC-2 was administered to XXXXX and her classroom teacher, Mrs. XXX. Mrs.

XXX’s ratings place XXXXX within the Clinically Significant range in the area of

Learning Problems. Characteristics within this area includes, sometimes has poor

handwriting and almost always: has reading problems, has trouble keeping up in class,

has spelling problems, gets failing school grades and has problems with mathematics and

often complains that lessons go too fast. Mrs. XXX rated XXXXX within the At-Risk

range for School Problems, Leadership, Study Skills, Functional Communication and

Adaptive Skills. Characteristics within these areas include, often has trouble getting

information when needed and often has difficulty explaining rules of games to others.

Other characteristics include is usually never chosen as a leader and never gives good

suggestions for solving problems.

XXXXX also completed the BASC-2 with assistance from the examiner. XXXXX rated

herself within normal limits in all areas. It should be noted that within this rating scale

are specific indexes that ensure the validity of answers provided by the examinee.

XXXXX’s L-Scale or “faking good” scale score came out elevated. This scale is

designed to detect a response set that may be characterized as one of social desirability.

An L-index score may be elevated due to a number of reasons. It may reflect a below-

average insight into one’s own behavior and feelings. Random responding or an inability

to comprehend the items may also elevate this index.

Summary

XXXXX is a 9 year, 8 month old girl in the 4

grade at Kramer Lane Elementary School

Elementary School. The results of this evaluation indicate that XXXXX has a Full Scale

IQ of 88 (21

percentile), which falls within the low average range for cognitive

functioning. XXXXX score fell within the average range on Working Memory,

Processing Speech and Fluid Reasoning, Low average in Verbal Comprehension and

Below Average in Visual Spatial Reasoning.

Visual Spatial Reasoning appears to be an area of weakness for XXXXX. Furthermore,

XXXXX may experience difficulty on tasks that involve higher level math, using patterns

and designs, sensing spatial orientation and boundaries and noting visual detail. A

weakness in this area may have had an impact on the acquisition of early reading skills.

Additionally, it appears XXXXX has a relative weakness on her vocabulary skills which

involves her level of acquired knowledge obtained through life experiences. Such

weakness can impact her reading comprehension, answering factual questions, as well as

her oral and written language skills.

XXXXX’s academic abilities were assessed with regards to reading, math, and written

expression. XXXXX performed within the Average range on tests assessing reading

decoding, reading comprehension, math computation, and spelling and Below Average

on tests assessing math concepts and applications and written expression. XXXXX is

reading independently at a level N (beginning of third grade). Based upon more, detailed

reading assessments, XXXXX scored within the Below Average range on the GORT-5

which assesses XXXXX’s oral reading. Noteworthy, XXXXX had more difficulty when

completing silent reading tasks. Her overall skills fell at the 8

percentile on the Gates-

MacGinitie Reading Test.

With regard to XXXXX’s social emotional functioning, Mrs. XXX rated XXXXX within

the At-Risk range for School Problems, Leadership, Study Skills, Functional

Communication and Adaptive Skills. XXXXX also completed the BASC-2 with

assistance from the examiner. XXXXX rated herself within normal limits in all areas.

Conclusion/Recommendations

1. The results should be integrated with other evaluation results and current teacher

reports in planning an appropriate education plan for XXXXX. The CSE will

meet to review all assessment results and make educational recommendations.

2. The results of this recommendation will be discussed with XXXXX’s parents and

teacher.

3. Strategies to support XXXXX’s academic success within the classroom

environment will be discussed further at or following the CSE meeting.

Respectfully submitted,

__________________________________

Maureen Conklin, M.S.Ed.

School Psychologist

Current Evaluation Techniques

Summary of Scores

Cognitive Functioning Results

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children –Fifth Edition (WISC-V)

Composite Scores Summary

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, 5

Edition

Standard Score

Percentile

Classification

Full Scale IQ Score

Low Average

Verbal Comprehension Index

Low Average

Visual-Spatial Index

Below Average

Fluid Reasoning Index

Average

Working Memory Index

100

Average

Processing Speed Index

105

Average

* Mean = 100, Standard Deviation = 15

Note: An index is not interpretable when the subtest scores that comprise that index display

too much variability.

*Data in parenthesis ( ) are the scores from testing the limits

Subtest Scaled Scores: WISC- V**

Scaled Score

Classification

Verbal Comprehension Index

Vocabulary

Below Average

Similarities

Average

Visual-Spatial Index

Block Design

Below Average

Visual Puzzles

Low Average

Fluid Reasoning Index

Matrix Reasoning

Average

Figure Weights

Low Average

Working Memory Index

Digit Span

Average

Picture Span

Average

Processing Speed Index

Coding

Average

Symbol Search

Average

**Mean = 10, Standard Deviation = 3

Note: Subtests in italics are not used in the calculation of the Full-Scale IQ score.

*Data in parenthesis ( ) are the scores from testing the limits

Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement-3

Edition - Select Subtests

Score

Classification

Reading

Average

Letter & Word Recognition

101

Average

Reading Comprehension

Average

Math

Below Average

Math Concepts & Applications

Below Average

Math Computation

Average

Written Language

Below Average

Written Expression

Below Average

Spelling

Average

Gray Oral Reading Test- Fourth Edition (GORT-4)

Score

Percentile

Classification

Oral Reading Quotient

Poor

Rate Score

Below Average

Accuracy Score

Below Average

Fluency Score

Poor

Comprehension Score

Below Average

Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests, Fourth Edition

Vocabulary: 13

%ile

Comprehension: 15

%ile

Total: 8

%ile

Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition

Teacher Rating

T-score/

Percentile

Classification

Composites

Externalizing Problems

This scale is the disruptive nature of the child’s

behavior.

54/72%

Average

Internalizing Problems

This scale is a broad index of inwardly directed

distress that reflects internalizing problems a child

may be experiencing

45/33%

Average

School Problems

This scale is a broad measure of adaptation to

+60/84%

At Risk

school. High scores indicate a pervasive pattern of

dissatisfaction with schooling, school personnel

and the structure of the educational process.

Behavioral Symptoms Index

This scale measures overall behavior. This scale

estimates reasonably the general level of

functioning or presence of impairment for an

individual with a disability or diagnosed condition.

46/38%

Average

Scales

Hyperactivity

The tendency to report being overly active, rush

through work/activities and act without thinking.

41/12%

Average

Aggression

The tendency to do physical or emotional harm to

others on their property.

43/24%

Average

Conduct Problems

The tendency to engage in antisocial and rule-

breaking behavior, including destroying property.

42/20%

Average

Anxiety

Feelings of nervousness, worry and fear; the

tendency to be overwhelmed by problems.

42/21%

Average

Depression

Feelings of unhappiness, sadness and dejection; a

belief that nothing goes right.

48/54%

Average

Somatization

The tendency to be overly sensitive to and

complain about relatively minor physical problems

and discomforts.

47/49%

Average

Attention Problems

The tendency to report being easily distracted and

unable to concentrate more than momentarily

42/26%

Average

Learning Problems

The presence of academic difficulties particularly

understanding or completing homework.

*76/98%

Clinically Significant

Atypicality

The tendency toward bizarre thoughts or other

thoughts and behaviors considered “odd”.

53/75%

Average

Withdrawal

The tendency to evade others to avoid social

contact.

52/67%

Average

Mean T Score = 50, Standard Deviation = 10

* Clinically Significant T ≥ 70

+ At Risk T = 60-69

Teacher Rating

T-score/

Percentile

Classification

Composite

Adaptive Scales

This scale assesses core

characteristics of adaptive

behavior that are important for

functioning at home and school

with peers, and in the

community.

40/17%

Average

Scales

Adaptability

The ability to adapt readily to

changes in the environment.

52/56%

Average

Social Skills

The skills necessary for

interacting successfully with

peers and adults in home, school

and community settings.

53/27%

Average

Leadership

The skills associated with

accomplishing academic, social,

or community goals, including

the ability to work with others.

+39/16%

At Risk

Functional Communication

The ability to express ideas and

communicate in a way others can

easily understand.

36/10%

At Risk

Study Skills

The skills that is conducive to

strong academic performance,

including organizational skills

and good study habits.

+38/14

At Risk

Activities of Daily Living

The skills associated with

performing basic, everyday tasks

in an acceptable and sage

manner.

Mean T Score = 50, Standard Deviation = 10

* Clinically Significant T≤ 30

+ At Risk T = 31-40

Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition-Self Report of

Personality

T Score/Percentile

School Problems 39/9%

Internalizing Problems 42/20%

Inattention/Hyperactivity 41/19%

Emotional Symptoms Index 40/15%

Personal Adjustment 60/86%

Attitude to School 40/17%

Attitude to Teachers 40/11%

Atypcality 42/25%

Locus of Control 46/42%

Social Stress 37/4%

Anxiety 44/32%

Depression 40/2%

Sense of Inadequacy 49/52%

Attention Problems 44/33%

Hyperactivity 40/14%

Relations with Parents 56/67%

Interpersonal Relations 59/89%

Self-Esteem 58/88%

Self-Reliance 57/73%