Case StudiesThe following case studies were selected to illustrate the efficacy of

the PKRS-II in identifying academically at-risk children. Children with avariety of developmental delays are depicted.

Case Study #1N. R. was given the PKRS-II in August of his kindergarten year. Dur-

ing the testing session, the examiner noted his short attention span, im-pulsive behaviors, and excessive motor movements. In order to obtainvalid PKRS-II scores, the examiner initiated two breaks during the test-ing period. N. R’s results, considered an indication of optimal perfor-mance, were as follows:

Area Scaled Scores Standard Score

Verbal Domain 9

Perceptual Domain 7

Auditory Domain 6

Total Readiness Score 87

As a result of the PKRS-II testing, the examiner referred N. R. to theschool psychologist and speech therapist for further psychoeducationalassessment. Based on the findings of a battery of tests, these profession-als diagnosed N. R. as having attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder(ADHD) with delays in fine motor, articulation, and expressive lan-guage. N. R. was referred to a pediatrician, who concurred with theADHD diagnosis and prescribed Adderall.

During kindergarten and first grade, N. R. received speech and occu-pational therapy services to remediate his articulation, expressive lan-guage, and fine motor delays. N. R.’s continuing behavioral problemsresulted in his placement in a behavior disordered self-contained class-room during his first grade. Throughout his second grade, he continuedto receive speech therapy and self-contained BD services. He was re-evaluated in May of his second grade year with the following results:

Instrument Standard Score

Motor Free Perceptual Test 117

Beery Visual Motor Integration 101

WISC-III

VerbalPerformanceFull Scale

107100103

Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement

ReadingMathWritten Language

848288

He is currently receiving academic support services within a regularclassroom placement.

Case Study #2A.A. was given the PKRS-II during the spring before her kindergarten

year. The examiner noted that she approached tasks in a slow methodi-cal manner and made no attempt to answer/complete the more difficultitems. Her test results were as follows:

Area Scaled Scores Standard Score

Verbal Domain 5

Perceptual Domain 6

Auditory Domain 3

Total Readiness Score 71

32 PKRS-II Manual

A.A. received individual academic assistance by a classroom aideduring her kindergarten year. In December of her first grade, she was re-ferred to the school psychologist for a psychoeducational evaluation.She obtained the following scores:

Instrument Standard Score

WISC-III

VerbalPerformanceFull Scale

687371

Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement

ReadingMathWritten Language

648867

Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales

CommunicationDaily Living SkillsSocializationMotor SkillsAdaptive Behavior Composite

6476736770

She is currently placed in an EMH self-contained classroom.

Case Study #3In May before her kindergarten year, G. S. was given the PKRS-II. She

approached the tasks with the enthusiasm and expressed delight withher performance. She obtained the following scores:

Area Scaled Scores Standard Score

Verbal Domain 12

Perceptual Domain 8

Auditory Domain 14

Total Readiness Score 110

Case Studies 33

As a result of the PKRS-II testing, G. S. was monitored for possibleperceptual difficulties during her kindergarten year. Although someweaknesses were noted, her developmental delays were not sufficient towarrant special education services. During the first grade, the classroomteacher noted that she had difficulty completing copying tasks and un-derstanding math concepts. She was involved in math and visual-motorremediation activities within the regular classroom.

In the spring of her second grade, she participated in the group-test-ing program initiated by her school. She received the following scores:

Instrument Standard Score

Stanford Achievement Test

ReadingMathListening

12395113

Cognitive Abilities Test

Verbal BatteryQualitative BatteryNonverbal Battery

125100104

These test results suggest that the classroom intervention activitieswere beneficial.

34 PKRS-II Manual