Student: Mike Age: 17 Birthday: 3/26/94 Date: 12/6/11 Grade: 12 ***Note, this test was actually given to a 22 year

old roommate due to not having access to a child within the ages of 9:0 to 17:11. However, for the sake of scoring and results, assume Mike to be a 17 year old high school senior.

Background
Reason for Referral: Mike was referred for an evaluation in response to mixed concerns from his teachers, particularly around writing. Mike has been doing minimal, poor-quality work when it comes to writing in his classes. As Mike is relatively new student for these teachers (as he just moved into the district), they arent sure whether it is just another case of senioritis or if Mike needs extra support in their classes when writing is expected. The team is curious as to Mikes skills and writing, and if the obstacle is motivation or lack of skills. His verbal expression skills are very strong, so the team thinks the suspected problem may lie within the more conventional component of writing. Evaluation Procedure: Test of Written Language 4 (TOWL-4) Background Information: Mike lives with his parents in Colchester, Vermont and attends Colchester High School. He has two older siblings, one in college and one who works as an engineer. There is not much conclusive background information on Mike in regards to his schooling. Mike is from a military family that has a history of moving all over the country, without staying too long in one place. Thus, he has not been in one school system for longer than a year since he was in the 6th grade. His current school has contacted several prior schools, but it is hard to draw conclusions due to the brevity of Mikes attendance at each school. However, some descriptions that have been collected about Mike from prior teachers include introverted bright and reluctant learner. Mikes current team also found out that several times teams at other schools have met to discuss Mike, but each time he had moved away before any action could be taken.

Evaluation
Session:

Mike presented as an eager, well groomed, responsive young man. He was fairly reserved for the entirety of the test, but engaged with the examiner when it was appropriate. The test examiner has reason to believe this test may not reflect Mikes highest capabilities possible on the TOWL-4 due to certain environmental stimuli and conditions. First, the test was administered late at night when Mike appeared to be tired as indicated by his several yawns through out the test. Second, Mikes cell phone went off twice during the test, once he got up to answer it, which was disruptive to his focus and train of thought. Lastly, Mike became frustrated towards the end of the test asking how much longer it would take until he was finished. It would be best next time to administer the TOWL-4 to Mike in more than one test session. While the results of Mikes test may be slightly compromised by the aforementioned environmental stimuli, he did remain engaged for the entirety of the test. He several times did pause to think before writing his answer, and was sitting upright, oriented towards his test, and responsive to directions given by the examiner. Thus, while the results of this test may not reflect Mikes full potential, the examiner believes it is still a relatively accurate measure of Mikes abilities, especially for identification of Mikes strengths and weaknesses in writing. Mike was given the Test of Written Language Fourth Edition (TOWL-4), which measures students writing skills in the three components of writing: conventional, linguistic, and cognitive using seven subtests. The conventional component of writing refers to the rules that govern the spelling and punctuation pieces of writing. The linguistic component of writing refers to the vocabulary and grammar pieces of writing. Finally, the cognitive component of writing refers to ones ability to write coherently, well-sequenced pieces that have structure. Not only does the TOWL-4 assess each of the three components of writing, but it assesses writing in two different ways: writing contrived pieces and spontaneous pieces. The contrived writing subtests look at writing in isolation; for example writing a sentence. The spontaneous writing subtests look at ones ability to write passages freely. All seven subtests combine to form the three big index scores for the test, which are Contrived Writing, Spontaneous Writing, and Overall writing. The mean for the scaled scores on all subtests is 10, with a normal range falling 3 above and 3 below 10. The mean for the index scores is 100 with a normal range falling 15 above and 15 below 100.

Results
Scores: Mikes overall writing index score was 127, falling significantly above the mean, which placed him at a superior level according to this assessment. Mikes spontaneous writing index score was very significantly above the mean, with a score of 142, which placed him at a level of very superior according to this assessment. Mikes last index score, Contrived Writing, had a score of 119, which placed him significantly above average, also. See below for a chart of Mikes standard scores on each of the subtests.

Subtest

Standard Score

Percentile Rank

Descriptive Term 1

Vocabulary 14 91 Above average Spelling 10 50 Average Punctuation 12 75 Average Logical Sentences 11 63 Average Sentence Combining 13 84 Above average Contextual Conventions 14 91 Above average Story Composition 18 >99 Superior 1. The guidelines for descriptive terms were given by the TOWL-4 and are according to the students standard score. Mike performed significantly strong on the Vocabulary (standard score, 14), Sentence Combining (standard score, 13), Contextual Conventions (standard score, 14), and Story Composition (standard score, 18) subtests. On the Vocabulary subtest, Mike was expected to correctly use a given word in a sentence according to the words meaning, punctuation, grammar, and spelling was not taking into consideration for scoring this subtest. Vocabulary is an essential part of the writing process as students need to have a solid foundation of words they can use when writing. The Vocabulary subtest measured Mikes linguistic skills using the contrived format. On the Sentence Combining subtest, Mike was expected to combine two given sentences into one grammatically correct sentence; where spelling, punctuation and capitalization did not impact his score. The Sentence Combining subtest measured Mikes linguistic skills also using the contrived format. On the Contextual Conventions subtest, Mike was expected to write a story and earned points by using punctuation, spelling, and grammar that is related to mature, cohesive writing. The Contextual Conventions subtest measured Mikes conventional and linguistic skills using the spontaneous format. On the Story Composition subtest, Mike was scored based off of the same story he wrote for the Contextual Conventions subtest, except earned points related to the quality of his story. The Story Composition subtest measured Mikes cognitive and linguistic skills using the spontaneous format. Mike performed within the normal range, on the higher end, on the Spelling (standard score, 10), Punctuation (standard score, 12), and Logical Sentences (standard score, 11) subtests. On the Spelling subtest, Mike was expected to write sentences the examiner dictated with all words spelled correctly. The Spelling subtest measured Mikes conventional skills using the contrived format. On the Punctuation subtest, Mike was expected to write sentences the examiner dictated, using proper punctuation. The Punctuation subtest measured Mikes conventional skills, also using the contrived format. Lastly, on the Logical Sentences subtest, Mike

was expected to edit illogical sentences so they made sense. The Logical Sentences subtest measured Mikes cognitive skills using the contrived format. Mike demonstrated strong to very strong writing skills on the test, as indicated by his average to above average scores on all the subtests, above average to very superior scores (according to the TOWL-4 descriptive terms) on the index scores. However, there are some minor discrepancies among subtests scores that contributed to index scores. First, Mikes contrived writing index score is considered to be a significant strength, although 3/5 of the subtests that make it up scored within the average range, with one subtest even scoring exactly at the mean. These subtest scores within the average range also contributed to Mikes Overall Writing index score, which was almost two standard deviations above the mean, and thus the average range scores were masked by the other, above average and superior scores. Mikes writing strengths as demonstrated by his scores on the TOWL-4 are story composition, and vocabulary; which belong to the linguistic and cognitive components of writing. Mike is very skilled at writing high-quality pieces which include strong vocabulary, plot, and are interesting to read. While Mike demonstrates having no real weaknesses in writing, a weakness relative to his strengths is his spelling, which he scored average on. This subtest fell within the conventional component of writing.

Implications/Considerations:
Given the results from this assessment, Mikes team now knows much more in regards to his written expression skills, capabilities, strengths, and weaknesses. The team now knows Mike is capable of doing written work at least comparable to the average 17-year-old high school senior. Because the team now knows the skill repertoire is not what is holding Mike back from completing a lot of his written work, the motivation piece must be where an intervention is targeted. Extra support in regards to Mikes skills will not be necessary, however the teachers should be mindful that extra encouragement in order for Mike to get started and do quality work may be helpful. It would be of benefit for Mike if his core teachers came together to plan a curriculum wide intervention for Mikes motivation. An incentive plan that tapped into Mikes interests and engaged him to do his work would be the recommendation for Mikes writing. Because Mike has the skill set to do the writing, by providing him with motivation to engage in the writing, he will be more likely to complete his work to a standard expected by the teachers. It was a pleasure to work with Mike on the TOWL-4 assessment. Please contact me with any further questions! Thank you, Kate Barnard