Low results across several literacy areas justify a structured review, but they do not identify one cause or establish a diagnosis. Assess the components separately and combine the results with classroom evidence, teaching history and response to support.

Start with a no-cost evidence review

Bring together:

• spelling errors from independent writing;

• accuracy and behaviour when reading unfamiliar text;

• fluency and phrasing;

• vocabulary and comprehension after the text has been read accurately;

• performance in English and another subject;

• attendance, language history and previous teaching;

• interventions already tried, their dosage and response;

• assistive tools or adjustments currently used;

• the pupil's view and information from home.

Use short, age-appropriate tasks and record exact errors. For example, ask the pupil to read aloud an unseen passage of about 150 words at the level of their class reading, note errors and self-corrections, time it, then ask two literal and two inference questions. Accuracy is the words read correctly divided by the total words. As a rough guide, 95% or more suggests the text is easy for the pupil, 90–94% that they can read it with teaching support, and below 90% that it is too hard to read alone for now. Keep the marked copy as a baseline and repeat the check with a fresh passage at the same level at review. Weak accuracy points first to decoding; accurate but slow, flat reading points to fluency; accurate, fluent reading with weak answers points to vocabulary or comprehension. Define the question to answer: is the difficulty broad, or is one component holding back the others? This initial analysis should determine which formal assessment, if any, is needed.

Separate the components

A pupil may comprehend well when text is read aloud but struggle to decode it. Another may read smoothly while missing vocabulary, inference or text structure. A spelling weakness may be phonological, orthographic, morphological or mixed.

Assessing the components separately determines the intervention focus, intensity and likely duration. Avoid using one global reading age to represent the entire profile.

Formal options to consider

• YARC (paid): individual Primary and Secondary reading assessments covering accuracy, rate and comprehension with age-appropriate passages. Confirm current edition, age range, user qualification and scoring requirements.

• Diagnostic Spelling Tests (paid): standardised spelling assessment routes extending into older learners. Check the current form, norms, administration and whether it supplies the error information required.

• A phonological assessment may be appropriate where the error pattern points to underlying sound-processing or code-knowledge gaps.

• Curriculum-based reading and writing samples remain essential because a standardised task does not show how difficulty appears across subjects.

Turn assessment into a decision

Conclude with:

• the principal barriers and what remains uncertain;

• the intervention target;

• the starting point and intensity;

• whether group or individual provision is appropriate;

• the baseline and review date;

• what would count as adequate response;

• when specialist assessment would be justified.

Group pupils only when their assessed profiles and intervention targets are sufficiently similar. Referral decisions should be based on the full evidence and the question that still needs answering. Depending on that question, the right person may be a specialist teacher, an educational psychologist, or a speech and language therapist where language is a concern.

Talamo has no commercial relationship with any of the organisations named here. We suggest them only because we think they could be useful to schools.