Two-Part Directions That Run Right-to-Left
Ms. Okafor screens four kindergartners in a 20-minute block using read-aloud following-directions items. Each direction is read twice, verbatim, with a 5-second pause. Dev (5 years 11 months) answers 7 of 10 two-part directions correctly. His errors cluster sharply. When the spoken order matches the left-to-right layout of the picture row ('First touch the star, then the moon'), he is correct 6 of 6. When the spoken order runs against the layout ('First take the moon, then touch the star'), he is correct 1 of 4, and on three of those he touches the leftmost picture first while saying the second noun aloud. He finishes every item in under 3 seconds and never asks for a repeat. The other three children show no order effect at all, and the room is quiet throughout. Ms. Okafor wonders whether Dev has an attention problem or whether the items are measuring something he has never been taught.
1. Dev is correct when the spoken order matches the picture layout and wrong when it reverses. What does that pattern point to, and which details in the setup rule out attention or hearing as the explanation?
Read the worked answer
The pattern points to verbal working memory and sequencing, not to comprehension of the words.
- He solves the same two nouns correctly when order aligns, so vocabulary and picture recognition are intact.
- He never asks for a repeat and answers in under 3 seconds, which is the opposite of an attention or fatigue profile.
- The other three children show no order effect, so the reader's pace, the room, and the item wording are constants, not causes.
- Most telling: on three reversed items he touches the leftmost picture first while saying the second noun aloud. He is reciting the tail of the sentence instead of re-ordering the two parts. That is a recency/sequencing error.
Level A following-directions items deliberately load on holding and re-ordering oral instructions. Dev's score understates his vocabulary but fairly reflects the sequencing skill the items target.
2. Dev misses three reversed items in a row. May the examiner read those directions a third time, or restate them in the order the pictures appear?
Read the worked answer
No, not for a score. Two principles govern this:
- Standardization. The administration rules specify how many times a direction may be read. A third reading, or a re-worded reading that matches the picture layout, makes the item easier than the version the norms are built on, so the resulting number cannot be compared to anything.
- Construct change. Restating the direction in left-to-right order removes the very skill being measured - holding the order the child heard. The item would then test simple matching.
What the examiner may do:
- Record in the observation notes that the child requested or needed repetition, and how many items were affected.
- After testing ends, teach sequencing of two- and three-part directions as an instructional goal, using the reversed-order format as practice.
- If administration errors did occur, flag them rather than silently correcting them.
3. Write the two-sentence score narrative Ms. Okafor should place in Dev's file, and say what it must not claim.
Read the worked answer
A defensible narrative:
'Dev correctly followed 7 of 10 two-part oral directions. All three errors occurred when the spoken sequence ran opposite to the left-to-right arrangement of the pictures; on those items he began with the picture named last. This pattern is consistent with difficulty holding a two-part direction in order rather than with a vocabulary or hearing problem.'
What it must not claim:
- It must not label him as having an attention deficit, an auditory processing disorder, or a language delay. Ten items and one error pattern cannot support a diagnosis.
- It must not say his vocabulary is below average - nothing in the data tested vocabulary in isolation.
- It must not report the 7/10 as a pure ability estimate without noting the order effect, because a directions-heavy subtest will understate him.
The narrative describes behavior and pattern; interpretation and any diagnosis belong to a fuller evaluation.