13.2 Using Results to Guide Services

ALTA Competency Exam for Multisensory Structured Language Education CALT

Track your progress as you read

Finished sections get a check mark.

1 Introduction & Exam Overview

1.1 Current Exam Facts 1.2 Eligibility and Therapy-Level Training 1.3 Registration, Prometric, and Study Plan

2 Language Development: Oral and Written Continuum

2.1 Oral-to-Written Language Continuum 2.2 Receptive and Expressive Oral Language 2.3 Receptive and Expressive Written Language

3 Language Development: Phonological Processing & Research

3.1 Atypical Literacy Development and Remediation 3.2 Phonological Processing Components 3.3 Research on Language Development

4 Structural Linguistics: Phonology

4.1 Continuum of Phonological Skills 4.2 Phonemes, Graphemes, and Morphemes 4.3 Articulatory Gestures

5 Structural Linguistics: Alphabetic Principle & Syllables

5.1 Alphabetic Principle and Sight-Word Recognition 5.2 Six Syllable Types 5.3 Syllable Division Patterns

6 Structural Linguistics: Accent, Morphology & Orthography

6.1 Accent Placement and Sound-Symbol Influences 6.2 Morphology: Roots and Affixes 6.3 Orthography, Affixing Rules, and Etymology

7 Structural Linguistics: Syntax, Semantics & Comprehension

7.1 Syntax, Sentence Structure, and Punctuation 7.2 Semantics and Pragmatics 7.3 Comprehension Strategies and Text Structures

8 Structural Linguistics: Written Language & Research

8.1 Handwriting and the Writing Process 8.2 Research on Structural Linguistics

9 Dyslexia: Definition, Brain & Neurology

9.1 Defining Dyslexia and Instructional Impact 9.2 Brain Anatomy and the Reading Network 9.3 Neurological Aspects of Learning Disabilities

10 Dyslexia: Related Issues, Comorbidity & History

10.1 Behavioral, Social, and Emotional Issues 10.2 Comorbid Disorders 10.3 Historical Pioneers in Dyslexia

11 Dyslexia: Research & Executive Function

11.1 Research on Dyslexia and Related Disorders 11.2 Executive Function and Dyslexia

12 Psychoeducational Assessment: Foundations

12.1 Assessment Terminology and Purposes 12.2 Essential Components of a Dyslexia Evaluation 12.3 Formal and Informal Assessment Instruments

13 Psychoeducational Assessment: Interpretation & Error Analysis

13.1 Interpreting Standard Scores, Percentiles, and Stanines 13.2 Using Results to Guide Services 13.3 Error Analysis of Work Samples 13.4 Psychoeducational Research

14 MSL Strategies: Multisensory, Systematic & Analytic

14.1 Simultaneous VAKT Multisensory Strategies 14.2 Systematic and Cumulative Instruction 14.3 Synthetic vs Analytic Instruction

15 MSL Strategies: Direct Instruction, Automaticity & Diagnosis

15.1 Direct vs Indirect Instruction 15.2 Automaticity in Literacy Development 15.3 Diagnostic Teaching

16 MSL Strategies: Program Principles & Theoretical Models

16.1 MSLE Program Content and Principles 16.2 Metacognition and Learning Environments 16.3 Simple View of Reading 16.4 Scarborough's Reading Rope

17 Federal Laws: IDEA, Section 504 & ADA

17.1 Federal Disability Law Landscape 17.2 Federal Eligibility Guidelines 17.3 Documentation Decisions and Accommodations 17.4 Historical Development of Disability Law

18 Professional Ethics: ALTA Code of Ethics

18.1 ALTA Code of Ethics Overview 18.2 Confidentiality, Competence, and Credentials 18.3 Ethical Standards with Parents and Colleagues

19 Professional Communication

19.1 Professional Student Reports 19.2 Strengths- and Needs-Based Language 19.3 Communicating with Parents, Students, and Colleagues

13.2 Using Results to Guide Services

Key Takeaways Explain This Topic AI

Assessment results should guide the focus, intensity, and goals of MSLE services—not merely confirm a diagnosis label.

Match the intervention target to the profile (for example, low decoding with stronger listening comprehension → structured decoding/spelling therapy).

Write observable instructional goals; use standard scores for periodic evaluation, not as weekly lesson targets.

Pair intensive intervention with accommodations that provide access while skills build; do not substitute one for the other.

Integrate formal scores with informal probes and response-to-instruction data when adjusting service plans.

Last updated: July 2026

13.2 Using Results to Guide Services

Quick Answer: Assessment results should drive the intensity, focus, and goals of MSLE services—not merely confirm a label. CALTs use profiles (phonology, decoding, fluency, language, spelling) to recommend therapy frequency, content sequence, accommodations, and collaboration with schools and families (Domain 4.F).

Earning accurate scores is useless if nobody changes instruction. Domain 4.F asks whether you can turn psychoeducational findings into service decisions : who needs structured literacy therapy, what to teach first, how intensive the plan should be, which accommodations remove barriers without replacing instruction, and how to document progress.

From Profile to Plan: The CALT Decision Frame

A therapy-level recommendation typically answers five questions:

Need — Does the profile support language-based reading/spelling difficulty consistent with dyslexia or a related disorder?

Focus — Which linguistic layers are primary deficits (phonological awareness, phonics/decoding, orthography/spelling, fluency, morphology, comprehension)?

Intensity — How frequent and how long should sessions be, given severity and response history?

Context — What will happen in school (IEP/504, Tier 2/3, classroom accommodations) versus private therapy?

Measure — How will progress be monitored so services adjust?

Research-based practice indicates that assessment results should be used to guide instruction and intervention , not to sort students permanently into fixed ability tracks.

Linking Common Profiles to Service Emphasis

Pattern often seen Instructional priority for MSLE Service notes

Low decoding/spelling; stronger listening comprehension Intensive phoneme–grapheme mapping, syllable types, morphology; controlled text Classic dyslexia-aligned therapy focus

Low phonological awareness + decoding Begin with PA + alphabetic work before complex orthography Do not jump to comprehension strategies alone

Adequate accuracy, very low fluency Accuracy consolidation + guided repeated reading of controlled then authentic text Fluency is not “read faster” without accuracy

Weak vocabulary/language + weak reading Integrate oral language, morphology, and comprehension strategy with decoding as needed May need SLP collaboration

History of inadequate instruction; scores borderline High-quality structured literacy trial with progress monitoring Rule in/out instructional casualty vs. dyslexia

Intensity and Dosage Decisions

Severity and educational impact drive dosage. A student with multiple subtests in the low 70s SS range, years of failure, and secondary anxiety usually needs more frequent, longer-term therapy than a student with a mild, recently identified decoding lag and strong compensatory language. CALT training emphasizes cumulative, systematic MSLE—results tell you where to enter the scope and sequence and how tightly to control text , not whether to invent a new program each week.

Practical intensity cues (always individualized):

Mild relative weakness, strong response to prior structured lessons → maintain systematic lessons; may coordinate with school intervention

Moderate deficits across decoding and spelling → regular therapy schedule; explicit cumulative review; family practice routines

Severe / long-standing deficits → high frequency, longer sessions, careful mastery criteria before advancing, close school collaboration

Goals That Are Score-Informed but Instructionally Worded

Avoid goals that only say “increase standard score to 90.” Prefer goals such as:

• Accurately read closed and VCe syllables in isolation and controlled sentences at X% accuracy
• Spell dictated words with target suffixing patterns with X% accuracy across three probes
• Read grade-appropriate controlled passages at improved correct-words-per-minute with maintained accuracy

Standard scores remain useful for periodic re-evaluation and eligibility conversations; lesson goals should be observable language behaviors .

Accommodations vs. Intervention

Domain 4.F also requires clean separation of two tools:

• Tool Purpose Example
• Intervention / therapy Change the skill Orton-Gillingham–aligned MSLE decoding lessons

Accommodation Change access while skill builds Extra time, text-to-speech for content areas, reduced copying load

Modification Change the expectation/standard Rare in dyslexia; usually not first line

Using results wisely means recommending both intensive instruction and appropriate accommodations when decoding deficits block content learning. Accommodations without intervention leave the disability unaddressed; intervention without access supports can leave a capable thinker failing science and history.

Collaborating With Schools and Families

Psychoeducational reports often recommend “multisensory structured language therapy.” As a CALT, you translate that into concrete next steps:

• Share strengths (for example, listening comprehension, reasoning) so the student is not defined by deficits
• Name priority skill targets for the next instructional quarter

Suggest progress-monitoring tools (curriculum-based decoding probes, spelling inventories, oral reading fluency of controlled text)

• Clarify what parents can practice at home without introducing conflicting methods
• Align with IEP/504 teams when the student is school-identified
• Using Informal Data Alongside Formal Scores

Formal batteries are snapshots. Domain 4.F expects you to integrate:

• Work samples and error analyses (see 13.3)
• Response to carefully delivered MSLE lessons (diagnostic teaching)
• Teacher and parent history of early language delay, family dyslexia, and instructional exposure

If formal scores are low but the student rapidly masters new grapheme–phoneme correspondences in therapy, increase challenge and update the plan. If scores look “average” but classroom writing collapses under orthographic load, dig into spelling error patterns and timed fluency—services may still be warranted.

Ethical Guardrails When Guiding Services

Stay within CALT competence: interpret educational implications; do not practice outside your credential as a psychologist or medical diagnostician

• Avoid promising a cure or a fixed timeline to a specific standard score
• Update recommendations when new data arrive
• Document the link between assessment findings and the service plan
• Exam Application Pattern

CALT stems for 4.F often present a short profile and ask what the therapist should do next or what the results best support . Prefer answers that:

• Target the weakest linguistic component that limits reading/spelling
• Keep instruction systematic and cumulative
• Use results to adjust services rather than to label and stop
• Pair intervention with access supports when appropriate

Mastery look-for: given SS and qualitative descriptors, you can state a coherent therapy focus, intensity rationale, and monitoring plan in one paragraph.