The child that I tested for the PLS-5 Test was a four-year-old girl named Katelyn. Katelyn did pretty well for her chronological age, and she tested into the age equivalence bracket of four to seven years old. She is a very bright girl, although there are some weaker areas that she struggled with. Her focus on the test also varied throughout the test. At the beginning of the test, she was focused on the test and answered the questions quickly, but towards the end of the test session, she was barely paying attention to the test, and would intentionally give a wrong answer to a question. This was an interesting project to do, and I do think there is room for me to improve for when I test children with the PLS-5 in the future. Katelyn’s scores
…show more content…
Some of her areas of strengths were spatial concepts and quantitative concepts for auditory comprehension. She definitely knew her spatial concepts, and during the question where the child would name where the spoon was in correlation to the box, she answered the questions quickly. She knew her spatial concepts very well, and during the question about the bear, she would often say where the bear was before I finished asking the question. The same thing happened with quantitative concepts. Katelyn is in a preschool classroom at a child development center, and she enjoys counting things. Even though the questions never asked the child to count how many of one object there was, she would always count. For example, when my partner was distributing the crayons to the bear, the child and herself, she counted how many crayons everyone had after my partner put them on the table. The same thing happened with pointing to pictures in the picture manual. Quantitative concepts were definitely one of her strengths for auditory comprehension. She did have weaknesses on the auditory comprehension side. One of the major weaknesses was emergent literacy skills. One of her biggest weaknesses for this topic was that she did not know her letters yet. Like in question 43, when I asked her to point to a letter, she would choose one at random. I think she may know sounds of a few letters, but she does not have the connection between the name of the letter and the letter itself. I think that is why she has emergent literacy skills as a weakness for auditory
Some of her areas of strengths were spatial concepts and quantitative concepts for auditory comprehension. She definitely knew her spatial concepts, and during the question where the child would name where the spoon was in correlation to the box, she answered the questions quickly. She knew her spatial concepts very well, and during the question about the bear, she would often say where the bear was before I finished asking the question. The same thing happened with quantitative concepts. Katelyn is in a preschool classroom at a child development center, and she enjoys counting things. Even though the questions never asked the child to count how many of one object there was, she would always count. For example, when my partner was distributing the crayons to the bear, the child and herself, she counted how many crayons everyone had after my partner put them on the table. The same thing happened with pointing to pictures in the picture manual. Quantitative concepts were definitely one of her strengths for auditory comprehension. She did have weaknesses on the auditory comprehension side. One of the major weaknesses was emergent literacy skills. One of her biggest weaknesses for this topic was that she did not know her letters yet. Like in question 43, when I asked her to point to a letter, she would choose one at random. I think she may know sounds of a few letters, but she does not have the connection between the name of the letter and the letter itself. I think that is why she has emergent literacy skills as a weakness for auditory