
- •Contents
- •Series Preface
- •Acknowledgments
- •Purposes and Uses of Achievement Tests
- •Diagnosing Achievement
- •Identifying Processes
- •Analyzing Errors
- •Making Placement Decisions and Planning Programs
- •Measuring Academic Progress
- •Evaluating Interventions or Programs
- •Conducting Research
- •Screening
- •Selecting an Achievement Test
- •Administering Standardized Achievement Tests
- •Testing Environment
- •Establishing Rapport
- •History and Development
- •Changes From KTEA-II to KTEA-3
- •Subtests
- •Mapping KTEA-3 to Common Core State Standards
- •Standardization and Psychometric Properties of the KTEA-3
- •Standardization
- •Reliability
- •Validity
- •Overview of the KTEA-3 Brief Form
- •Brief Form Standardization and Technical Characteristics
- •How to Administer the KTEA-3
- •Starting and Discontinuing Subtests
- •Sample, Teaching, and Practice Items
- •Recording Responses
- •Timing
- •Queries and Prompts
- •Subtest-by-Subtest Notes on Administration
- •How to Score the KTEA-3
- •Types of Scores
- •Subtest-by-Subtest Scoring Keys
- •How to Interpret the KTEA-3
- •Introduction to Interpretation
- •Step 1: Interpret the Academic Skills Battery (ASB) Composite
- •Step 2: Interpret Other Composite Scores and Subtest Scores
- •Subtest Floors and Ceilings
- •Interpretation of Composites
- •Clinical Analysis of Errors
- •Qualitative Observations
- •Using the KTEA-3 Across Multiple Administrations
- •Repeated Administrations of the Same Form
- •Administering Alternate Forms
- •Using the KTEA-3 Brief Form
- •Progress Monitoring
- •Screening for a Comprehensive Evaluation
- •KTEA-3 Score Reports
- •History and Development
- •Changes From WIAT-II to WIAT-III
- •Age Range
- •New and Modified Subtests
- •Composites
- •Administration and Scoring Rules
- •Skills Analysis
- •Intervention Goal Statements
- •New Analyses
- •New Scores
- •Validity Studies
- •Materials
- •Scoring and Reporting
- •Description of the WIAT-III
- •Subtests With Component Scores
- •Mapping WIAT-III to Common Core State Standards
- •Standardization and Psychometric Properties of the WIAT-III
- •Standardization
- •Reliability
- •Validity
- •Starting and Discontinuing Subtests
- •Sample, Teaching, and Practice Items
- •Recording Responses
- •Timing
- •Queries and Prompts
- •Subtest-by-Subtest Notes on Administration
- •How to Score the WIAT-III
- •Types of Scores
- •Score Reports
- •Subtest-by-Subtest Scoring Keys
- •Listening Comprehension
- •Early Reading Skills
- •Reading Comprehension
- •Sentence Composition
- •Word Reading and Pseudoword Decoding
- •Essay Composition
- •Numerical Operations
- •Oral Expression
- •Oral Reading Fluency
- •Spelling
- •Math Fluency—Addition, Subtraction, and Multiplication
- •Introduction to Interpretation
- •Step 1: Interpret the Composite Scores
- •Subtest Floors and Ceilings
- •Skills Analysis
- •Intervention Goal Statements
- •Qualitative Data
- •Using the WIAT-III Across Multiple Administrations
- •Linking Studies
- •Overview of the WISC-V, WISC-V Integrated, and KABC-II
- •Qualitative/Behavioral Analyses of Assessment Results
- •Identification of Specific Learning Disabilities
- •Interpretation and Use of Three New Composite Scores
- •Accommodations for Visual, Hearing, and Motor Impairments
- •Ongoing Research on Gender Differences in Writing and the Utility of Error Analysis
- •Female Advantage in Writing on KTEA-II Brief and Comprehensive Forms
- •Strengths and Weaknesses of the KTEA-3
- •Assets of the KTEA-3
- •Test Development
- •Two Forms
- •Standardization
- •Reliability and Validity
- •Administration and Scoring
- •Interpretation
- •Phonological Processing
- •KTEA-3 Flash Drive
- •Limitations of the KTEA-3
- •Test Development
- •Standardization
- •Reliability and Validity
- •Administration and Scoring
- •Test Items
- •Interpretation
- •Final Comment
- •Strengths and Weaknesses of the WIAT-III
- •Assets of the WIAT-III
- •Test Development
- •Normative Sample
- •Reliability and Validity
- •Administration and Scoring
- •Interpretation
- •Better Listening Comprehension Measure
- •Technical Manual
- •Limitations of the WIAT-III
- •Floor and Ceiling
- •Test Coverage
- •Poor Instructions for Scoring Certain Tasks
- •Item Scoring
- •Audio Recorder
- •Final Comment
- •Content Coverage of the KTEA-3 and WIAT-III
- •Case Report 1: Jenna
- •Reason for Evaluation
- •Background Information
- •Behavioral Observations
- •Assessment Procedures and Tests Administered
- •Test Results
- •Neuropsychological Implications and Diagnostic Impressions
- •Recommendations
- •Psychometric Summary for Jenna
- •Case Report 2: Oscar
- •Reason for Evaluation
- •Background Information
- •Behavioral Observations
- •Assessment Procedures and Tests Administered
- •Test Results
- •Diagnostic Summary
- •Recommendations
- •Resources
- •Psychometric Summary for Oscar
- •Case Report 3: Rob
- •Purpose of the Evaluation
- •History and Background
- •Behavioral Observations
- •Assessment Procedures and Tests Administered
- •Results
- •Summary and Diagnostic Impressions
- •Recommendations
- •Psychometric Summary for Rob
- •Q-interactive Versus Q-global
- •Equivalency Studies
- •Essential Features of Q-interactive
- •Key Terminology
- •Central Website
- •Assess Application
- •References
- •Annotated Bibliography
- •About the Authors
- •About the Digital Resources
- •Index

ILLUSTRATIVE CASE REPORTS 367
CASE REPORT 3: ROB
Age at Evaluation: 15 years, 9 months Grade: 10
Norms Reported: Grade-Based for Achievement Scores, Age-Based for Cognitive Ability and Behavior Scores
Purpose of the Evaluation
Rob is struggling to complete exams in school and he was unable to complete the PSAT in the standard allotted time. Rob has always taken longer to process information than others his age, especially when presented verbally (such as lectures), and when completing exams and homework. He had a previous psychoeducational evaluation by his school district after which he received accommodations through a 504 Plan. He needs an updated evaluation to qualify for accommodations through the school and for college boards.
History and Background
Rob’s mother, Ms. Abby Long, provided the following background information. Rob lives with both parents, Abby and Martin Long, his two younger sisters (ages 10 and 12), and his paternal grandmother. The primary language spoken at home is English. His grandmother also speaks Spanish111111111 in the home. There is a family history of autism in twin cousins. No other learning, speech or developmental problems were noted in Rob’s family.
Rob’s medical history is fairly unremarkable. He was born full-term, weighing 8 pounds 3 ounces. Rob’s mother reported that he met early motor and language developmental milestones within a normal timeframe. He has not had any serious illnesses, injuries or hospitalizations and is not currently taking any medication. He had his most recent physical a year ago. His mother noted that due to his homework, he does not sleep much. During the week, he typically goes to sleep at 10 p.m. and wakes up at 4 a.m. to finish schoolwork. He sleeps in a little more on weekends, and typically sleeps 7 to 8 hours a night during the summer.
Rob’s academic history began when he entered preschool at age 3, where he attended three days a week. He entered kindergarten at 5 years old, and did fine in school throughout his elementary school years. He consistently performed well on standardized state testing as well. Beginning in second grade, however, he had increasing di culty completing tasks in a timely manner. In seventh grade, Rob was referred for psychoeducational evaluation by his school because he was taking an abnormally long time to complete classwork, and he had di culty showing the steps involved in math reasoning. Results of the evaluation indicated that poor visual motor integration was impacting his ability to work rapidly and copy information. His overall cognitive abilities and academic achievement were all within the average to above average range. He was not eligible for special education; however, a 504 Plan

368 ESSENTIALS OF KTEA™-3 AND WIAT®-III ASSESSMENT
for accommodations was put into place that allowed Rob extra time to complete assignments and tests, provided a peer note taker when the teacher was lecturing, provided Rob with a paper copy of PowerPoint presentations to use during lectures, and provided a small group format for state testing. During middle school, with these accommodations in place, Rob earned all As.
Currently, Rob is in his sophomore year of high school. His mother noted that he has an excellent work ethic, spending extra time to study and understand the material well. His teachers are no longer willing to provide additional time without a written plan for accommodations. Moreover, Ms. Long said that Rob has been stressed about not being able to finish his tests on time. She said that when he rushes, he makes careless errors because he does not have time to check his work. His mother mentioned that Rob not only struggles with finishing timed tasks, but he also struggles with processing too much information at one time (e.g., multistep directions, lectures in which the teacher says a lot at once).
Rob recently took the PSAT and he was not allowed extra time to complete the exam. He reportedly did well on the math that he finished, but he did not finish either the reading or math sections in the time given.
Socially, Rob’s parents reported that he gets along well with his peers at school. He is on the school’s tennis team. When not in school, his mother said he likes to play video games, write stories, and watch movies.
111111111
Behavioral Observations
Rob presented as a tall, slim, well-groomed adolescent boy with short brown hair and brown eyes. He was dressed casually and appropriately for each testing session. Throughout the evaluation, Rob was kind, made good eye contact, and showed good social skills, answering the examiner’s questions, elaborating appropriately in conversation, and telling the examiner relevant stories or information. Thus, rapport was easily established. Rob was always cooperative and appeared to try his best on all tasks. He willingly participated in all activities, even refusing breaks. Furthermore, he was polite and helpful, helping to clean up some of the testing material in between items.
Rob appeared motivated to perform well. He asked for clarification with many verbal directions, wanting to make sure he understood what to do and that he was following directions. For longer questions that were presented verbally, he frequently asked for repetition, suggesting some di culty with spoken instructions.
Rob’s approach to most problems was slow and methodical. He rarely responded quickly or impulsively, taking his time before answering and often taking quite a long