____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

CLIENT NAME
Date of Birth
Chronological Age
School
Grade

: David Foster
: March 8th, 2005
: 9 years, 0 months
: Mount Pleasant Park
:3

Dates of Assessment
Date of Report

: March 8th, 2014

: March 12th, 2014

Statement of Confidentiality
All psychological assessments are confidential in nature as they contain private information, which
may be used inappropriately by others. To protect the privacy and ensure confidentiality of the
persons involved, please ensure that this report is only circulated to those who are considered
essential to related judgments and decision- making. The intent of this report is to provide opinions
and recommendations in the context of psychological intervention, educational and vocational
decision-making, and any use of this report outside of that purpose should only be done with the
informed consent of the parties and in consultation with the writer.
U-CAPES does not conduct parenting capacity or custody and access assessments and Davids
parents were informed that this assessment is not intended to be used for such purposes.

REASON FOR REFERRAL:

David was referred by his parents, Julie and Clair Foster, for a psychoeducational assessment. The
Fosters would like to improve Davids confidence and help him with reading. David is behind
grade level with reading and spelling and has been receiving resource supports three times a week.
Davids classroom teacher is concerned with his confidence and motivation due to increasing
frustration and anxiety. The Fosters and the school also identify that David prefers to play on his
own and has difficulty getting along with peers.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION:
U-CAPES School History Form
U-CAPES Family History Form
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children 4th Edition (WISC-IV)
Wechsler Individual Achievement Test 3rd Edition (WIAT-III)
Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP)
The Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration- 6th Edition (BEERY VMI)
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th Edition (DSM-V)

Psychoeducational Report for: Foster, David

Page 2 of 10

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Davids background information was gleaned from a U-CAPES family history form, completed by
his parents and a U-CAPES school history form, completed by his classroom teacher.
Developmental and Medical History
Mr. and Mrs. Foster identified that David achieved language and motor developmental milestones
within typical limits and described him as a happy baby. Mrs. Fosters pregnancy was full term with
no complications. His parents reported that David complains about the occasional headache. No
other significant medical or health history was reported.
Family and Relationship History
David lives with his parents and younger brother who is seven years old. His mother is employed
as a bookkeeper and father an engineer. Davids grandmother reportedly struggled with depression
and his grandfather reportedly had difficulties with reading, only attending school until grade six.
Social and Behavioural History
Davids teacher and parents are concerned with his motivation and confidence within reading tasks.
Indeed, Davids teacher reported that his anxiety and frustration within reading tasks have been
getting worse since the beginning of the school year. Davids parents also noted that he does not ask
for help in class because he does not want his classmates to think he is different.
Davids parents identified that he is a very analytical thinker and enjoys riding his bike and making
things with his hands. They also reported that he likes things to go his own way when playing with
others and he has difficulties with sharing, cooperating and taking turns. In the classroom, the
teacher acknowledged that David prefers to play on his own but will play with classmates when
encouraged. She also identified that David has difficulty making friends and can be rejected by his
peers at school.
Educational History
Davids parents and his teacher identified that he has strong higher level thinking skills and artistic
abilities. At school David loves to draw, he shows interest in math and science, and he does well
with planning and creating projects using materials. In contrast, his parents and teacher reported
that David has difficulty with reading, spelling and written language output. More specifically,
Davids teacher noted that his reading was choppy and he struggles with decoding, his spelling is
phonetic and his printing is large for his age. She also identified that David does not always notice
his errors, is not critical of his own work and he can be slow to switch tasks, causing him to get
behind in his school work. Giving David extra time to complete assignments has been a successful
strategy in the classroom.

________________________________________________________________________________

ASSESSMENT RESULTS AND CLINICAL IMPRESSIONS

________________________________________________________________________________

Psychoeducational Report for: Foster, David

Page 3 of 10

*A percentile ranking compares a student's performance to that of others in his or her age group.
For example, a percentile ranking of 45 means that the student's test score is equal to, or higher
than, 45 out of 100 others in the test's same-age comparison group. Note that all test scores are
estimates and that on another day of testing, Davids scores may have varied to some degree. The
range of performance (e.g., Average, Low Average) is more reliable than a percentile ranking.
Observations during Individual Assessment:
Although David was initially nervous entering the assessment setting, he quickly became at ease.
Attention and concentration were generally good; however, testing took longer than is typical. He
approached all tasks seriously and followed directions in a very precise manner. When tasks
became difficult David demonstrated persistence and always checked his work over carefully
before declaring he was finished. Within reading tasks, David seemed aware of his difficulties,
often making comments that he could have done better than he did.
CURRENT ASSESSMENT RESULTS:
Cognitive Functioning
David's cognitive abilities were measured using the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, 4th
Edition (WISC-IV) and selected subtests from the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test Third
Edition (WIAT-III). The WISC-IV is a standardized intellectual test designed to measure the
intellectual functioning of an individual as compared to others of the same age. In addition, Davids
phonological processing skills were assessed using the The Comprehensive Test of Phonological
Processing (CTOPP) and Davids Visual Perception and Motor Coordination abilities were assessed
using the The Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration- Sixth Edition
(BEERY VMI).
A students Full Scale Intelligence Quotient (FSIQ) is derived from the combined results of the core
Indices on the WISC-IV (Verbal Comprehension, Perceptual Reasoning, Working Memory, and
Processing Speed). There was a significant discrepancy between Davids performance on the
Verbal Comprehension (Average) and Perceptual Reasoning (Above Average) Indices; therefore,
his Full Scale IQ is not considered to be a valid representation of his abilities, and is not reported.
The WISC-IV Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI) measures a students verbal knowledge and
understanding and the application of verbal skills to new situations; Davids performance fell
within the Average range (50th percentile). David performed within the Above Average range on
Vocabulary (84th percentile), indicating this task was a relative strength for David compared to
others his age. When asked to explain familiar situations, actions and activities, David performed
within the Average range (Comprehension, 37th percentile). The WIAT-III subtests of Oral
Expression require a student repeat sentences verbatim, generate labels within a category and
identify words when hearing their meaning; David performed in the Average range (37th percentile).
David performed within the Average range on the Phonological Awareness Composite on the
CTOPP (73rd percentile). He showed an average ability to break down sounds of spoken words
(Elison, 63rd percentile) and to generate words when hearing discrete sounds (Blending words, 50th
percentile).

Psychoeducational Report for: Foster, David

Page 4 of 10

In contrast to other verbal measures, when asked to describe how common objects or concepts are
similar on the WISC-IV, David scored within the Low Average range (Similarities, 25th percentile),
suggesting difficulty with abstract verbal reasoning and verbal concept formation. On a measure of
general knowledge David performed in the Low Average range (Information, 25th percentile).
However, the reading demands of this multiple choice subtest may have impacted his success.
The Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI) on the WISC-IV measures an individuals ability to interpret
and organize visually perceived material and to generate and test hypothesis to solve a problem.
David performed within the Above Average range (91st percentile), indicating PRI tasks were a
relative strength for David compared to his same aged peers. Indeed, his parents report building is
one of Davids favorite activities and his teacher identified drawing and planning as an area of
strength. When building three dimensional models from a picture David performed within the Well
Above Average range (Block Design, 95th percentile). Selecting missing portions to complete a
visual matrix David performed within the Above Average range (Matrix Reasoning, 84th percentile),
And, when choosing a picture to match a set of pictures, David performed within the Above
Average range (Picture Concepts, 63rd percentile).
The BEERY test of Visual-Motor Integration is a design copying task used to examine a students
ability to integrate visual information and fine motor skills. David performed in the Above Average
range (94th percentile), indicating his abilities are well developed. However, David focused on
making his copies the exact size as the target design which caused him to run out of time on many
items. On a matching task David was insistent that none of the shapes in the array were exactly the
same because of the difference in paper color and he seemed unaware that he was focused on
irrelevant details of the task. He performed in the High Average (Visual Perception, 82nd
percentile), signifying a relative strength compared to other students his age. The examiner then
tested limits by questioning Davids approach. On a subtest that required precise fine motor
coordination, joining dots to form shapes while staying between specified lines, David performed
within the Average range (Motor Coordination, 30th percentile). Although this score is in the
Average range, it is low relative to Davids visual perceptual abilities. David showed strong
abilities to perceive and organize what he sees, but he demonstrated a relative difficulty with the
motor control needed to execute written responses.
The Working Memory Index (WMI) on the WISC-IV measures a students ability to temporarily
retain auditory information and manipulate that information to produce a response; David
performed within the Average range (50th percentile). On a task designed to assess his ability to
recall numbers in forward and reverse order, David performed within the Average range (Digit
Span, 63rd percentile). When David had to manipulate the order of letters and numbers before
recalling them, he performed within the Average range (Letter Number Sequencing, 37th percentile).
The Phonological Memory Composite on the CTOPP measures a students ability to store and
repeat digits and non-word lists using short term memory. David performed within the Average
range for this Composite (Phonological Memory, 50th percentile) and on both subtests (Memory for
Digits and Non-Word Repetition, 50th percentiles).
The Processing Speed Index (PSI) on the WISC-IV measures a students ability to process
nonverbal visual information under a time limit. There was a significant discrepancy between

Psychoeducational Report for: Foster, David

Page 5 of 10

Davids performances on the two PSI subtests. Therefore, his PSI score is not considered to be a
valid representation of his abilities and will not be reported. When having to find a target picture
within an array of other designs, David performed within the Above Average range (Symbol
Search, 84th percentile), indicating his ability is well developed compared to others his age. On a
subtest that required a complex written response (i.e. drawing symbols), placing greater demands
on Davids writing abilities, David performed within the Low Average range (Coding, 25th
percentile). Davids performance on this latter task is consistent with his teachers report that David
often takes extra time to complete writing assignments.
Academic Functioning
Davids academic achievement was measured using the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test
Third Edition (WIAT-III) and select tests from the CTOPP. The Wechsler Individual Achievement
Test - Third Edition (WIAT-III) is a standardized test of achievement and functioning, designed to
measure an individuals academic performance. On the WIAT-III David demonstrated variability in
skills and abilities across the Composites of Reading, Written Expression and Mathematics.
Reading
On the WIAT-III Total Reading Composite David performed within the Far Below Average range
(3rd percentile), indicating very poorly developed reading abilities compared to others his age.
When his Early Reading skills were assessed David performed within the Below Average range (8th
percentile), indicating his foundational reading skills are not well developed. Davids performance
on the Reading Comprehension and Fluency Composite was within the Far Below Average range
(1st percentile), indicating an exceptional area of weakness. When asked factual and inferential
questions after reading passages, David performed in the Far Below Average range (Reading
Comprehension, 4th percentile), illustrating David has difficulties understanding what he has read.
Oral Reading Fluency on the WIAT-III measures an individuals ability to read connected text
rapidly, fluently and effortlessly; David performed within the Far Below Average range (0.5th
percentile), indicating very poorly developed abilities. Indeed, Davids teacher has identified his
reading as choppy and David has expressed frustration with reading tasks at school. He performed
within the Below Average range (9th percentile) on the Basic Reading Composite of the WIAT-III,
indicating an area of weakness relative to his same aged peers. When sounding out a list of words
and non-words, Davids reading was slow and effortful, performing in the Below Average range
(Pseudoword Decoding, 12th percentile; Word Reading, 7th percentile). The Rapid Naming
Composite on the CTOPP measures a students processing speed, fluency and accuracy within letter
and number recognition. Long term memory is required for this skill and these abilities are essential
to efficiently reading written language. On this Composite David performed within the Below
Average range (16th percentile), indicating Davids ability to identify and decode written language
is poorly developed. Indeed, these results are congruent with difficulties in accurate and fluent
reading noted by Davids teacher.
Mathematics
The Mathematics score measures a students abilities to solve problems and use numerical
operations. David performed within the Average range on both subtests (Numerical Operations,
50th percentile and Math Problem Solving, 47th percentile).

Psychoeducational Report for: Foster, David

Page 6 of 10

Writing
The Written Expression Composite score on the WIAT-III is derived from scores on subtests
measuring spelling, sentence composition, and essay writing. David performed within the Average
range when combining sentences (Sentence Composition, 50th percentile). Conversely, David
performed in the Below Average range on a test of spelling (Spelling, 9th percentile), consistent with
his teachers report that David is behind grade level and he spells phonetically. When instructed to
compose an essay about his favorite game David had difficulty generating ideas and started the
essay twice after deciding to switch topics. His letter formation was large for his age and he formed
letters from the bottom up. On the essay, he performed within the Low Average - Average range
(27th percentile). Difficulties with initiation and slow, inefficient letter formation impacted Davids
performance on this subtest.
SUMMARY & DIAGNOSIS:
David was referred for a psychoeducational assessment by his parents who expressed concerns with
his confidence and with reading. He is in Grade 3 at Mount Pleasant Park Elementary School and
receives additional instruction for LA three mornings per week. His teacher reported that David is
behind grade level in reading and spelling and he shows reduced confidence in reading tasks.
During formal assessment David was serious and meticulous within all tasks and he persisted when
tasks became difficult.
Davids scores on the WISC-IV showed significant variability between indices, resulting in a less
meaningful Full Scale IQ score that is not representative of his abilities. Within cognitive testing,
using the CTOPP, WISC-IV and the WIIAT-III David demonstrated average verbal understanding,
phonological awareness, phonological memory, working memory and processing speed. In contrast,
David performed within the Above Average range on tasks designed to measure visual organization,
visual perception and problem solving, indicating Davids visual processing and perceptual
reasoning are relative strengths compared to his same aged peers. Indeed, Davids teacher and
parents confirm planning, building and creating projects are a personal strength.
Academically, David placed within the Average range for tests of mathematics on the WIAT-III. In
contrast, Davids score fell in the Low Average range for written expression, consistent with his
teachers and parents concerns. David performed poorly on tasks requiring complex motor
coordination and more detailed written responses (e.g. WISC-IV Coding, WIAT-III Essay
Composition, BEERY Motor Coordination). David was methodical in his approach, which caused
him to go over the time limit on some tests and impacted his success. He also demonstrated poor
motor coordination abilities relative to his High Average visual perception skills. As such, ongoing
monitoring of fine motor coordination within writing tasks is recommended.
Congruent with Davids parent and teachers reports, Davids overall reading score on the WIAT-III
placed him in the Far Below Average range. David demonstrated considerable difficulty with oral
reading fluency, word reading, word decoding, foundational reading skills and reading compression
on the WIAT-III, performing in the Below - Far Below Average range, indicating these are areas of
extreme weakness compared to his same aged peers. When David read aloud his decoding was
slow and effortful, and he often expressed frustration with his performance. On the CTOPP test

Psychoeducational Report for: Foster, David

Page 7 of 10

fluent letter and number reading, David performed within the Below Average range. David also
demonstrated spelling within the Below Average range. Although David has intact phonological
processing within spoken language, his ability to fluently process written language is poorly
developed compared to others his age. His difficulty with decoding written language inhibits his
understanding of what he has read, slows his reading speed and impacts his spelling.
Given the outcomes of the current assessment and persistent difficulties with reading and spelling
in the classroom, Davids abilities meet the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
criteria for a Specific Learning Disorder with Impairment in Reading (315.00, F81.0), including
difficulties with word reading accuracy, rate and fluency and comprehension. Specifically, David
meets criteria for Dyslexia which refers to a pattern of learning difficulties characterized by
problems with accurate and fluent word recognition, poor decoding and poor spelling abilities.

Appendix A: Test results

Test results should be interpreted with the support of a registered psychologist.
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children Fourth Edition (WISC-IV) is a standardized
measure of intelligence (i.e., thinking, problem-solving and learning) consisting of a series of 10
subtests and 5 optional subtests which compare the childs thinking and reasoning to that of others
the same age. Subtests are grouped into Four Index Scores and a Full Scale score, which offer
insight into the individuals strengths and weaknesses. Skills assessed include: Verbal
Comprehension and expression; Perceptual Reasoning (thinking and problem-solving without
language); Working Memory (holding information in ones head while working with it); and
Processing Speed. The individual performance can be compared to other Canadian students in a
similar-age grouping (from age 6 to 16 years).
Composite Scores Summary (Canadian Norms):
Composite
Score

Percentile
Rank

95%
Confidence
Interval

Classification

Verbal
Comprehension

100

50

93-107

Average

Perceptual
Reasoning

120

91

110-126

Above Average

Working Memory

100

50

92-108

Average

Processing Speed

103

58

94-111

Average

--

--

--

--

Index

Full Scale

Psychoeducational Report for: Foster, David

Page 8 of 10

Subtest Scores:

Subtest

Scale
d

Percenti
le Rank

Scaled
S/W

Subtest

Score
Similarities

Score

Percenti
le Rank

11

63

37

25

13

84

S/W

Digit
8

25

Span
LetterNumber

Vocabulary

Comprehensi
on
(Information)

13

84

37

Sequenci
ng
Coding
Symbol

25

Block Design

15

95

Picture
Concepts

11

63

13

84

Search
S

Matrix
Reasoning

The Wechsler Individual Achievement Test - Third Edition (WIAT-III) is a standardized test of
achievement and functioning. The WIAT III is an individually administered measure that examines
performance in the areas of Reading, Mathematics, Written Language and Oral Language. Scores in each of
these domains are then combined to provide an overall achievement score. Canadian norms were used to
score this measure.
Composite Scores Summary:
Standard
Score

95%
Confidence
Interval

Classification
Percentile

Psychoeducational Report for: Foster, David

Page 9 of 10
Rank

Total Reading

71

6775

Far Below Average

Basic Reading
Reading
Comprehension
and Fluency

80

7783

Below Average

65

5773

Far Below Average

Written Expression

87

8094

19

Low Average

Mathematics

99

91107

47

Average

Standard
Score

95%
Confidence
Interval

Percentile Rank

79

7286

Below Average

73

6185

Far Below Average

99

89109

47

Average

100

90110

50

Average

78

7482

Below Average

91

81101

27

Average

82

7787

12

Below Average

100

91109

50

Average

Oral Expression

96

85107

39

Average

Oral Reading
Fluency

61

5369

0.5

Far Below Average

Spelling

80

7387

Below Average

Subtest scores:

Early Reading
Skills
Reading
Comprehension
Math Problem
Solving
Sentence
Composition
Word Reading
Essay
Composition
Pseudoword
Decoding
Numerical
Operations

Classification

The Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration, Sixth Edition (BEERY

VMI) is an individually administered standardized assessment designed to assess the extent to
which individual can integrate their visual and motor abilities. The test contains two subtests:

Psychoeducational Report for: Foster, David

Page 10 of 10

Visual Perception and Motor Coordination. Scores in each Composite are combined to create an
overall composite score of Visual-Motor Integration.

Standard
Score

Percentil
e

Performance Level

Beery VMI

123

94

Above Average

Visual Perception

114

82

High Average

92

30

Average

Scale

Motor Coordination

The Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP) is an individually administered

standardized assessment designed to assess a students reading-related phonological processing
skills. The test contains individual subtests to make up five composite scores of Phonological
Awareness, Phonological Memory, Rapid Naming, Alternate Phonological and Alternate Naming.
Composite/
Percentile
Rank

Description

108

73

Average

Elision

11

63

Average

Blending Words

12

50

Average

PHONOLOGICAL
MEMORY
Memory for
Digits
Non-word
Repetition

100

50

Average

10

50

Average

10

50

Average

RAPID NAMING

86

16

Below Average

Rapid Digit
Naming
Rapid Letter
Naming

16

Below Average

16

Below Average

Composite/Scale

PHONOLOGICAL
AWARENESS

Standard
Score