COURSE NAME: BACHELOROF SCIENCE IN COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGY

FACULTY: FOHAS.

YEAR OF STUDY: SECOND YEAR.

SUBJECT: ASSESMENT IN COUNSELING

COURSE CODE: CP7226.

GROUP NUMBER: 2.

LECTURER: MADAM ESUPHAT KONE

GROUP MEMBERS

REGISTRATION NUMBER
AHMED SHAIB JUMA 202050052
AISHA F MUHIDINI 202050015
ALIO MAR SAID 202050031
ARAFAT JAMAL LUANDA 202050048.
EVER CHAVUMA TARATIBU 202050050.
FADHILA ABDULLA ABDI 202050041.
FADYA ABDALLAH ALI 202050017
FARHAT MOHAMMED SALUM 202050056
HAWA MOHAMMED RASHID 202050055.
JOHAR MGANA HAJI 202050072
KAUTHAR SAID MOHAMMED 202050021
KHEIR MOH'D SIMAI 202050011
MARYAM IBUNI MUHAMMED 202050060.
RAMADHAN MOHAMED HASSAN 202050071.
SAFIA SLEIMAN ALI 202050022
SHUFAA ABDALLAH 202050054.
SITI HAJI SIMAI 202050051.
UMUSULAIMU TIFLI MUSTAFA 202050044.
WAHIDA ASAA SHARIFU 202050019
YASSIR ABDUL JUMA 202050035
YUMNA R HAMAD 202050009
ZULEHA ALI OMAR 202050016
QUESTION: EVALUATING ASSESMENT REPORT?

SUBMISSION DATE: 9th MAY, 2022

CASE 1
 1. INTAKE INFORMATION

The report was able to identify the following parts of the intake information

 Relevant background information

 History of the presenting problem
 Medical history and
 Referral information

Relevant intake information

Name: Ms. S

Age: 29 years

Date of birth: 01/01/1985

Occupation: student

Year of education: 12 years.

Current Medication: None

Handedness: Right.

Reason for referral: Ms. S was referred by Dr. R.N for concern about attentional functioning.

History of presenting problem

The symptom description and history were obtained from an interview with Ms. S. and a review
of her available medical records.
Ms. S. reported a longstanding history of anxiety and depression since high school but stated her
symptoms have worsened over the past year; she eventually sought treatment. She reported her
anxiety continues to be moderate but is slightly improved, and her depression symptoms have
improved significantly with medication. However, she stated she has also experienced problems
in attention and concentration in the past several years, and these have not improved despite the
noted improvements in her mood symptoms. She reported being referred for a psychiatric
evaluation while in the U.S. Army due to her reports to her supervisor that she was experiencing
symptoms of acute stress after hearing a gunshot that led to her discovering one of her platoon
mates had committed suicide.
PAST MEDICAL, NEUROLOGICAL, PSYCHIATRIC, SUBSTANCE USE HISTORY:
Medical history is significant for reconstructive surgery for a bile duct cyst in 2009 (involving
multiple surgeries), activity induced asthma, and irregular menstruation (currently treated with
medication). Previous psychiatric history is reported above. Ms. S. stated she does not drink
alcohol and has never used tobacco or recreational drugs. Ms. S. stated that she gained over 200
pounds after her discharge from the Army and has attempted to obtain a referral from her
physician for bariatric surgery; however, reportedly, her physician has not been willing to
recommend her.

Strengths and weaknesses

The assessment report was able to identify some of the intake information as mentioned above.
Reason for referral was well explained. Since the intake information is important in making sure
that the correct diagnosis will be done and hence the treatment. For example, if it is known that
the client has good relationship with the family, therefore it is helpful that some of the
information about the client can be obtained from the family.

But the report has not being able to identify some of the intake information which is crucial for
the assessment and the treatment such as:

 Gender
 Marital status
 Religion
 Living situation
 Education: 12 years does not show grades
 Race
 Residence
 Family history is not explained
 Number of children
 No reason for no recommendation for bariatric surgery from her physician.

2. ASSESSMENT
The following are the part of the assessment that were evaluated

 Objectives of the assessment

 The means or method of the assessment and
 Assessment tools used

Objectives of the assessment

 Measuring cognitive ability

 Measuring cognitive achievement
 Determining the ability of information processing:
i. Attention
ii. Language
iii. Visual spatial ability
iv. Memory
v. Executive functioning
 Determining personality and mood

The means or methods of assessment

i. Interviews
ii. Medical records
iii. Formal psychological test.

Tools of Assessment.

i. Cognitive Assessment: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV (WAIS-IV)

ii. Achievement Assessment: Nelson-Denny Reading Test (Form G), Wide Range
Achievement Test-4 (WRAT-4)
iii. Information Processing: Lexical Fluency, Semantic Fluency, Digit Span, Ruff 2 & 7
Selective Attention Test, Trail Making Test, California Verbal Learning Test-II (CVLT-
II), Stroop Color Word Test, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test
iv. Personality Assessment: Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2–Restructured
Form (MMPI-2-RF)
EVALUATION OF THE ASSESSMENT

The evaluation will look into the strengths and weaknesses and/or validity and reliability of the
used tools in the determination of the objectives under this report.

Objectives: the objectives in this report have been well chosen, considering the clients current
status, despite of improvement in the mood after medication but still she has difficultness in
concentration and attention. Therefore, determining cognitive ability, achievement, information
processing and mood and personality are all important before making the diagnosis. Hence the
objectives are well identified and professionally good.

Assessment methods: being considerate: the client was referred from another personnel. Hence
it is very effective that reviewing record was to be done from another personnel’s data. Again,
interviewing the person who offered the referral it is very genius selection, since because other
data cannot be directly obtained from the records given. Lastly, the personal measurement are
important after obtaining information from another person. Hence selection of this method is
paramount to achieve the objectives under this report. Therefore, the used methods are valid and
reliable.

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV (WAIS-IV)

This test was administered to assess cognitive functioning. It is true that WAIS-IV measures
cognitive ability. The question is whether it is valid or not. The selected test is valid since
because it is the adult who is being assessed, if WISC-IV was used then it would not be valid.
Therefore, the test measures what it claims to measure.

Nelson-Denny Reading Test (Form G) and Wide Range Achievement Test-4 (WRAT-4)

Both tests FORM G and WRAT-4 have been administered to assess the achievement in reading,
comprehension of the sentence, spelling and computing the mathematical problems generally.
This is very crucial when measuring reliability. Because both tests administer the achievement
assessment, so if the results are relating, directly the test results are accurately. Hence they were
well selected and administered.
Ruff 2 & 7 Selective Attention Test, Trail Making Test, California Verbal Learning Test-II
(CVLT-II), Stroop Color Word Test, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test

These tests were administered to assess information processing in both lexical fluency and
semantic fluency and digit span as the aspects of the information processing. The different tests
were used because information processing is a lot of things including memory and perception.
Hence many tests were to make sure that the results are accurately and well distributed.

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2–Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF)

The test was administered to assess personality of the client, and it is widely used to do so. The
reliability of the test is very high. The profiles used under this test were able to identify the mild
depressive mood, however the symptoms did not meet the criteria for depressive disorder. This
has given opportunity to clarify that the personality is not the cause of displayed behaviors of
difficult in attention and processing.

3. DIAGNOSIS

This assessment report has indicated that Ms. S has been diagnosed with generalized anxiety
disorder which was diagnosed before the referral.

The test administered were somehow hindered due to the presence of anxiety. But it was not
significant enough to interfere with overall results.

CASE 2

4. INTAKE INFORMATION
The report was able to identify the following parts of the intake information

 Relevant background information

 History of the presenting problem
 Medical history and
 Referral information

Relevant intake information

Name: D

Age: 12 years

Sex: male

Race: African American

Occupation: student

Level of education: grade 6

History of presenting problem

D experiences failure in grades, and the problem of repeating grades. He repeated grade 2 and
currently repeating grade 6 without significant improvement. He has changed 6 different schools
since kindergarten. And having problems of insubordination in the class, truancy,
disruption of the class and threatening other students.

Medical history

D is not taking medicine and he has no history of illness or injury

Referral information

D was referred by the class teacher to the school psychologist due to the manifestation of the
externalizing behaviors such as beating the desks and disrespecting others in the class.

Strengths and weaknesses

The assessment report was able to identify some of the intake information as mentioned above.
Since the intake information is paramount in making sure that the correct diagnosis will be done
and hence the treatment. For example, if it is known that the client has good relationship with the
family, therefore it is helpful that some of the information about the client can be obtained from
the family.

But the report has not being able to identify some of the intake information which is crucial for
the assessment and the treatment such as

 Date of birth
 Marital status
 Disorganization in the date of assessment, which was put in the summary of the report
 Family history is not evident presented
 The background information is generalized and not easy for legit person to read and
understand the report

5. ASSESSMENT

The following are the part of the assessment that were evaluated

 Objectives of the assessment

 The means or method of the assessment and
 Assessment tools used

Objectives of the assessment

 Determination of the background information

 Determination of the general intelligence
 To measure the level of academic performance, educational functioning and curriculum
 To measure the extent of adaptive behavior
 To evaluate social/emotional status
 To measure the normality of fine and/or gross motor
  To determine normality of communicative status

The means or methods of assessment

 Record review
 Clinical interview
 Formal psychological test

Assessment tools

I. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-III) for general intelligence

measurement
II. Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (VABS) for the measurement the extent of adaptive
behavior
III. Woodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement, third (WJ-III) for academic performance,
educational functioning and curriculum
IV. Behavior Assessment Scale for children (BASC) for self report of personality and teacher
rating scale for reading, language, art classes and mathematics
V. Observation for the measurement of the normality of fine and/or gross motor and
determination of the normality of communicative status

EVALUATION OF THE ASSESSMENT

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-III)

The test was administered to measure the general intelligence of D. since D has difficulties in
learning and interaction with the classmates, the WISC-III is a good choice to determining his
kevel of intelligence. The question is the test valid and reliable? Is it supposed to be used here
according to the objectives of the measurer? The answer is yes, it really should be used here in
accordance to the objectives of the measurer. Again, yes it is very valid and reliable. As the study
done in Iran of 835 students from random 30 sample schools and 2456 boys and girls were
selected through a systematic random sampling from 72 educational departments. The results
showed that the reliability coefficients is higher than 0.95 and the validity is high the WISC-111
has sufficient and satisfied reliability and validity in Iranian students. Key Words: reliability,
validity, and WISC-III

The results from both verbal and performance test were of 66, which falls in the Deficient range
and in the 1st percentile. This range really indicates that D scored in the range of borderline and
deficient which might be significant in the causes of externalizing behaviors.

Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (VABS)

the test was administered to measure the extent of adaptive behavior. It is a good selection to
determine how someone is able to adapt to the environment and in the presence of others. Since
D’s teachers were complaining of hyperactivity and aggression. The test was to be administered
even to provide recommendations on the studying environment, as it was recommended that the
environment that has strictly regulations on the class rules will be good for him.

He scored 76 on the test with 5 th percentile, which indicate that D has deficit in communication
and interferes with the Daily Living Skills and Socialization are having a negative impact on his
educational performance in the classroom.

Woodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement, third (WJ-III)

The test was administered to measure academic performance, educational functioning and
curriculum. Since D has difficulties in school, then determining his ability in academic
performance is of no discussion. It swiped the areas of reading, mathematics and written
language.

In reading he scored 81 which fall under 11 th percentile, which clearly indicates Borderline range
in Passage Comprehension. In mathematics he scored 75 and 70 in the written language. The
validity of the results is justified by the comparison of data to find percentile of the range of
severity.

Behavior Assessment Scale for children (BASC)

It was administered for self report of personality and teacher rating scale for reading, language,
art classes and mathematics.
The scale seems to be effective since it involved the collection of data from D himself and
teachers. Self report of personality collected the information from client, and teacher rating scale
collected information from the teacher to verify the complaints which were brought by the
teachers such as aggression and hyperactivity.

Observation

The observation was done for the measurement of the normality of fine and/or gross motor and
determination of the normality of communicative status.

Since these things are overt, yet the psychologist can observe. But the observer should be
objective for the data to be accurate.

According to the report the fine and/or gross motor are okay and communicative status as well.
We cannot easily measure the validity because measurer is not known. But this test can be
reliable things the measured traits are overt.

6. DIAGNOSIS

The report shows that D has mild mental retardation due to the following symptoms observed
under the conducted tests

 cognitive abilities in the Deficient range (WISC-III Full Scale IQ=66)

 academic achievement scores that range from Borderline to Low Average (WJ-III Broad
Reading=81, Broad Math=75, Broad Written Language=70)
 deficits in the adaptive behavior (VABS Classroom Edition Communication=43, Daily
Living Skills=64, Socialization=58)
 presence of significant externalizing behavior problems, deficits in social adaptive skills,
and deficits in attention and learning (BASC)

This is correspondent to the categories under DSM-4. Such as intellectual functioning is below
70 which is 66 and he has deficit in present adaptive functioning.

CASE 3

1. INTAKE INFORMATION
The report was able to identify the following parts of the intake information

 Relevant background information

 History of the presenting problem
 Medical history and
 Referral information

Relevant intake information

Date of: 29/11/2009.

Examinee: Sally sample.

Guardian: grand sample.

D.o.b: 13/6/1993.

Gender: female.

Ethnicity: Caucasian.

Grade: 10 grades.

Testing date: 10/18, 10/25, and 11/1/2009

IDENTITY INFORMATION

At the time of this examination sally was a 16 years old Caucasian female with a history of anger
management issues and poor school performance. Sally was diagnosed with attention deficit/
hyperactivity disorder, combined type in2004 and placed on stimulant medication, which she has
continued since that time. Sally is the product of an uncomplicated full-term birth. Her biological
mother was reported to be 30 years of age and health. The biological father was 27 years old.

Sally weighed 7lbs at birth and is reported to have had a brief bout of breathing difficulty that
was resolved without further incident. She is reported to have met all her developmental
milestone within the normal time frame and was receiving care at a nursery school by 18 months
of age.
Significant event in Sally life Include the following:

 Parent separatedwhen Sally was approximately 11 months

 Parents officially divorced when she was 2 year old
 Sally moved in with her maternal grandparent at 2.5 years of age
 Sally began to experience academic problems in third grade
 Psycho-education assessment was conducted at Jon Doe Elementary during fourth grade.
i. IEP was recommended under other health impairment due to ADHD.
ii. No other deficit identified.
 Sally transferred to Lady Jane after 1 semester at Alfred E.Neuman middle school at fifth
grade.
 Transferred to Jon Doe High for ninth and tenth grades.
 Experienced school failure during the later portion of tenth grade

Strengths and weaknesses

The assessment report was able to identify some of the intake information as mentioned above.
Since the intake information is paramount in making sure that the correct diagnosis will be done
and hence the treatment. Family history was explained in good information though roughly, but
also the report has not being able to identify some of the intake information which is crucial for
the assessment and the treatment such as:

 Marital status
 Religion
 They use client name instead of client code
 There is no client residence

The background information, Personal history, medical history, family history is generalized,
disorganized and not easy for legit person to read and understand the report.

2. ASSESSMENT

The following are the part of the assessment that were evaluated
  Objectives of the assessment
 The means or method of the assessment and
 Assessment tools used

Objectives of the assessment

 Determining level of academic achievement. I.e. presence of learning disability,

academic strength and weakness.
 To determine the level of cognitive development i.e. intellectual strengths and weakness.
 To examine status of executive function
 To examine status of emotional and social functioning
 Identification of possible sources for Sally’s school failure
 Recommendation for treatment and/ or school accommodation.

Means or methods of Assessment

 Observation
 Interview
 Record review

Tools of Assessment

 Bender-Gestalt-2 (Bender)
 Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fourth Edition (WISC-IV)
 Roberts Apperception Test for Children, Second Edition (RATC-2)
 Integrated Visual / Auditory Continuous Performance Test (IVA-Plus)
 Behavioral Assessment System for Children, Second Edition (BASC-2)
 Rorschach Inkblot Test, Exner Comprehensive System (Rorschach)
 House, Tree, Person Test (HTP)
 Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory for Adolescents (MMPI-A)
 Wechsler Individual Achievement Test, Second Edition (WIAT-II)
 Rey Complex Figure Test (RCFT)
 Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functioning (BRIEF)
  Sentence Completion (SC)
EVALUATION OF THE ASSESSMENT

Observatory assessment: The observatory assessment was able to identify good appearance,
speech, affect and significant measures, this is evaluated by the in the following manner;

Validity: by using Bender, MMPI-A and ROSCHARCH it has been evaluated that the client was
not having any neurological disorder which is good approach to prove the observable features.

1. Cognitive Functioning (WISC-IV, RORSCHACH, RCFT, BRIEF, BASC-2, MMPI-A,

& IVA-PLUS)

The above listed tests were administered to assess cognitive functioning.

Intelligence: through WISC-IV the intelligence was able to be assessed, and it is reliable
instrument. But the report has not been able to show completely the actual data. Hence through
this the report is not elaborative in terms of data.

2. Attention and concentration

The report has been able to express the way that test was administered but it did not exactly say
which test was used to do so. Because the explanation used can be done with more than one test
under this report, such as WISC-IV and RORSCHACH

3. Perceptual thought and executive functioning

The report was good at comparison with other clients of the same age to measure the percentile
but the exactly demonstration on the scores was not elaborated to the extent only the reporter will
be able to understand the report accurately or a very experienced psychologist in the field.

Academic Functioning (WIAT-II)

Important dimensions of academic functioning such as mathematical skills, language skills and
reading skills were examined. And related percentiles were used to assess normality and
abnormalities which is effective to measure the reliability of the test results. Again the report was
not able to show the results of the data obtained from the individual subset.
Socio-emotional Functioning (RORSCHACH, MMPI-A, BASC-2, RATC-2, HTP, AND SC)

The many tests for the same variable as usual provide accuracy and reliability of the results. And
here the above mentioned test was used to assess the socio-emotional functioning.

The important aspects of the socio-emotional functioning were swiped out such as self-concept,
interpersonal functioning and social functioning. But the report was not able to show the results
of the data obtained from the individual subset as well.

3. DIAGNOSIS

The report has showed the following psychological disorder

Axis I: 314.01 Attention-Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder, Combined Type

300.4 Dysthymic Disorder, Early Onset

Axis II: V71.09 No Diagnosis

Axis III: None

Axis IV: Academic Failure

Axis V: GAF=48

The diagnosis was not clarified due to the absence of detailed symptoms identified in the tests
provided. And it is our opinion that they were supposed to be openly shown in the report.

RECOMMENDATION

The recommendations are well expressed and are specific to the client’s problem and focused to
enhance wellbeing.

They have included the family as a part of helping plan, hence they are effective

REFERENCES:
 American psychiatric association (2005). Diagnostic statistical manual (4th ed).
Washington DC: APA
 Reza, J & Abas, P (n.d). Reliability and Validity of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
ChildrenThird Edition (WISC-III) in Iran. Online:
https://doaj.org/article/b821b29992d347c6bce15c7939122595. visited on 9th may, 2022.