Best Tools to Assess for Dyslexia

Frank Yee • June 13, 2025

Here is a comprehensive, parent-friendly guide to the best tools to assess for dyslexia, including the reasoning for each, recommendations for parents, and explanations for any notable omissions. This guide is informed by best practices, expert consensus, and current research, including the latest tools and their practical use in schools and private evaluations.


Best Tools to Assess for Dyslexia

1. Comprehensive Psychoeducational Battery

a. Wechsler Individual Achievement Test – Fourth Edition (WIAT-IV)


Why include it?

The WIAT-IV is widely used in schools and private practice to assess core academic skills, including word reading, reading comprehension, oral reading fluency, pseudoword decoding (nonsense word reading), spelling, and written expression. It provides norm-referenced data and includes a “Dyslexia Index” that combines key subtests to estimate dyslexia risk.


Recommendation:

Parents should request this test because it covers the foundational academic skills most impacted by dyslexia and is recognized by nearly all school districts.


Limitations:

While comprehensive, it is not process-oriented; it tells you what the child can/can’t do, but not why.


b. Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement and Cognitive Abilities (WJ-IV ACH & COG)


Why include it?

The WJ-IV batteries assess reading, writing, math, and cognitive processes. They include subtests for letter-word identification, word attack (nonsense word reading), reading fluency, spelling, and oral language, as well as cognitive processes like working memory and processing speed. The WJ-IV is highly respected and often used for diagnosing specific learning disabilities, including dyslexia.


Recommendation:

Parents should request this if available, especially if the WIAT-IV is not being used, or as a complementary measure.


Limitations:

Similar to the WIAT-IV, it is not specifically designed to diagnose dyslexia subtypes.


2. Phonological Processing and Rapid Naming

a. Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing – Second Edition (CTOPP-2)


Why include it?

Many believe the CTOPP-2 is the gold standard for measuring phonological awareness, phonological memory, and rapid naming—core deficits in dyslexia. It helps identify whether a child’s reading difficulties stem from problems with sound manipulation or retrieval speed.


Recommendation:

Parents should always request this test or a similar phonological processing assessment, as it targets the hallmark features of dyslexia.


Limitations:

It does not measure reading or spelling directly, so it must be paired with achievement tests.


b. Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) Tasks


Why include it?

RAN tasks measure how quickly a child can name familiar items (letters, numbers, colors, objects). Slow RAN is a classic marker of dyslexia and is often included in batteries like the CTOPP-2 or as stand-alone tasks.


Recommendation:

Request as part of a phonological processing battery or as a supplement.


3. Reading Fluency and Comprehension

a. Gray Oral Reading Test – Fifth Edition (GORT-5)


Why include it?

The GORT-5 assesses oral reading fluency (accuracy, rate, expression) and comprehension. It is particularly useful for identifying children who can decode but not read fluently, a common profile in dyslexia.


Recommendation:

Request if your child struggles with reading aloud or comprehension.


b. Test of Word Reading Efficiency – Second Edition (TOWRE-2)


Why include it?

The TOWRE-2 is a brief, timed test of sight word reading and pseudoword decoding. It is sensitive to the speed and accuracy deficits typical in dyslexia.


Recommendation:

Request for a quick, objective measure of reading fluency and decoding.


4. Process-Oriented and Dyslexia-Specific Batteries

a. Feifer Assessment of Reading (FAR)


Why include it?

The FAR is a comprehensive, process-oriented assessment designed specifically to diagnose reading disorders, including dyslexia. It evaluates phonological awareness, orthographic processing, decoding, fluency, comprehension, and provides dyslexia subtyping and error analysis.


Recommendation:

Highly recommended, especially if previous evaluations were inconclusive or if you want to understand why your child struggles with reading.


Note: The FAR is not yet standard in all public schools, so you may need to request it as part of an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) or through a private evaluator.


Why it may be omitted:

Not all school psychologists are trained in the FAR, and some districts may not have access to it. If your district cannot provide it, ask for an IEE or seek a private evaluation.


b. Tests of Dyslexia (TOD)


Why include it?

The TOD is a new, comprehensive battery specifically designed to assess dyslexia risk and diagnosis. It includes screening, early, and comprehensive versions, covering phonological manipulation, rapid naming, word and pseudoword reading, spelling, and more.


Recommendation:

Request if available, as it is highly targeted and research-based.


Note: As a newer tool, it may not be available in all districts yet.


5. Supplemental and Screening Tools

a. San Diego Quick Assessment (SDQA) / Lexercise Screener


Why include it?

These are quick, free screeners that can help identify children at risk for dyslexia, especially in settings where formal testing is delayed.


Recommendation:

Use as an initial step, but always follow up with a comprehensive evaluation.


What Should Parents Ask For?


At a minimum, parents should request:


  • An academic achievement battery (WIAT-IV or WJ-IV)
  • A phonological processing assessment (CTOPP-2 or equivalent)
  • A reading fluency and decoding measure (TOWRE-2, GORT-5)
  • A cognitive assessment (WISC-V or WJ-IV COG)
  • If available, a process-oriented battery (FAR or TOD)
  • If any of these are omitted, ask:
  • “Why are you not including a phonological processing test, when this is a hallmark of dyslexia?”
  • “Why are you not using a process-oriented tool like the FAR or TOD?”
  • “How will you determine why my child struggles with reading, not just if they struggle?”


Why Some Tools Might Not Be Included


FAR and TOD: Not all schools have access or trained staff; may require IEE or private evaluation.


GORT-5/TOWRE-2: Sometimes omitted if the school believes their achievement battery covers fluency, but these are more sensitive to dyslexia profiles.


Screeners (SDQA, Lexercise): Not diagnostic—good for identifying risk, not for formal eligibility decisions.


Summary Table

Conclusion

Best practice: Request a comprehensive, multi-domain evaluation that includes academic achievement, cognitive testing, phonological processing, and reading fluency.


If your school omits key tests (like the FAR or CTOPP-2), ask for the rationale and consider requesting an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) at public expense.


If you want to understand why your child struggles, not just if, advocate for process-oriented tools like the FAR or TOD.


Remember: No single test diagnoses dyslexia—a combination of tests, history, and expert interpretation is essential.

DISCLAIMER:

 The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship.

By Yee & Associates PC • September 10, 2026
Arrested for OUI near Franklin, MA? Learn the step-by-step process, the critical RMV hearing window, and why acting fast protects your license and case.
By Team Yee & Associates PC • October 8, 2025
Learn about the criminal defense process in Framingham, including court procedures, timelines, and what to expect when facing charges in Massachusetts.
By Team Yee & Associates PC • September 24, 2025
Learn how Newton parents can identify quality legal representation for special education disputes, IEP issues, and other school-related challenges.
September 10, 2025
The term informed consent is tossed around frequently in special education—but parents are often left wondering: “What am I really entitled to know before I sign off?” The federal and state definitions may surprise you. According to federal law (34 CFR § 300.9), consent means that the parent: Has been fully informed of all information relevant to the activity for which consent is sought, In their native language or other mode of communication, and Understands and agrees in writing to carry out the activity. Massachusetts law, under 603 CMR 28.02(4), mirrors this but goes further, requiring that the parent understands the information and knows their consent is voluntary and revocable at any time. So, what does “fully informed” mean? That’s where nuance matters. The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has clarified that parents need only have a general understanding of the proposed action—not a deep technical breakdown of every detail. In legal terms, this means understanding what is relevant to the decision at hand. What Is “Relevant” Information? In both law and common sense, relevance is about whether something matters to the decision you're being asked to make. In legal terms: It must make a material fact more or less likely to be true (see Laccetti v. Ellis, Gath v. M/A-Com). It must logically connect to a question that affects your child’s services or placement. If a school proposes an evaluation with six components but only conducts four, asking why the other two were omitted is relevant—because it could affect whether the evaluation provides a complete picture of your child's needs. Red Flags to Watch for: From Referral to Placement 1. Evaluation Requests: Ask What You’re Getting—and What You’re Not Before consenting to an evaluation: Ask for a description of each assessment. Clarify if any typically used subtests are being omitted, and why. Request examples of what the test measures and how it will be used. Avoid confrontational language. Try: “I’m not trying to delay anything—I just want to understand what’s being measured and why some parts may have been left out. Can you help me understand the relevance of each?” 2. IEP Goals: Ask How They Were Chosen When you’re reviewing IEP goals, ask: Were the goals based on the most current data? Do they directly connect to the evaluations or identified needs? Do they reference a method of instruction, or deliberately avoid naming one? If an IEE recommended a specific methodology (e.g., Orton-Gillingham for dyslexia or DTTC for apraxia), ask: “Given the IEE’s findings, I’d like to know why a different approach was chosen. What data supports the effectiveness of the selected method for my child’s profile?” Services Must Be Based on Peer-Reviewed Research—To the Extent Practicable Federal law (34 CFR § 300.320(a)(4)) requires that the IEP includes: “A statement of the special education and related services and supplementary aids and services, based on peer-reviewed research to the extent practicable…” Most parents aren’t aware they can—and should—ask: “Is this service or approach supported by peer-reviewed research?” “Could you provide a source or summary of research that shows this method is effective for children like mine?” This isn’t being difficult—it’s your right. And it helps the team stay accountable. Placement: Understanding the Peer Group One of the trickiest issues is group appropriateness—especially in districts that are understaffed. If your child is in a group setting, but their needs are significantly different from their peers, you have the right to ask how the grouping benefits your child. The Andover Case: A Tool Parents Can Use In Andover Pub. Schs., 117 LRP 17110 (SEA MA 04/20/17), the hearing officer ruled that: Parents can request sanitized IEPs (i.e., redacted of all identifying information) of proposed peers to assess appropriateness. FERPA does not block the release of de-identified IEPs. This means that if you're told a program is “a good fit” for your child, you can ask: “Could we see de-identified IEPs of the peer group to better understand the instructional levels being targeted?” Wrapping Up: Stay Curious, Stay Focused Informed consent is not about becoming an expert on educational methodologies or neuropsych testing. It’s about being empowered to: Ask why a service is recommended. Understand how your child’s needs are being met. Spot when things don’t add up—and push for clarification respectfully. Most importantly, it’s about framing questions around relevance, not resistance. When you tie your inquiry back to your child’s success, you're not being difficult—you’re being effective.
By Team Yee & Associates PC • September 10, 2025
Discover key warning signs that indicate Needham parents should contact a special education attorney for their child's IEP disputes and educational rights.
By Team Yee & Associates PC • August 27, 2025
Learn what Wellesley residents need to know when selecting criminal defense representation, including court procedures and local legal considerations.
By Team Yee & Associates PC • August 27, 2025
Learn about your IEP rights as a Franklin parent, including meeting participation, evaluation timelines, and how to handle disagreements with your school district.
By Team Yee & Associates PC • August 27, 2025
Learn what Franklin parents need to know when selecting a special education attorney for their child's IEP, evaluations, and school advocacy needs.
A scale of justice is sitting on a wooden table next to a judge 's gavel.
By Frank Yee • June 13, 2025
While adults have long known that children demonstrate a lack of maturity and underdeveloped sense of responsibility, leading to recklessness, impulsivity and heedless risk-taking, there is now scientific evidence that is recognized and accepted as true by the courts of this country: “Our decisions rest[] not only on common sense – on what ‘any parent knows’ – but on science and social science as well.” Miller v. Alabama, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 2464 (2012), quoting Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 569 (2005); see also Diatchenko v. District Attorney for the Suffolk District, 466 Mass. 655, 669 n.14 (2013). In short, before you assume your child will likely be found delinquent of a crime, you should consult with an experienced juvenile criminal defense attorney about the changing climate of juvenile criminal law.
A judge 's gavel is sitting on top of a black table.
By Frank Yee • June 13, 2025
You call your son’s school, tell the nice lady in the special education department that you suspect he has a learning disability and you want him evaluated. After a brief discussion about your concerns, you are told that you must provide the school with written consent before testing can commence. Not to worry, the helpful school official offers to mail you the form. She encourages you to return the signed form promptly so testing can begin. You anxiously await the form’s arrival in the mail. Three days later you receive the consent form. Attached to it is a post-it note instructing you where to sign. However, as you review the form, you notice that the section of the form entitled “list the recommended assessment(s)” is blank and that the “yes” box is checked for an “educational assessment,” a “health assessment” and a “psychological assessment.” You hesitate before signing. Your mother always warned you never to sign anything unless you understood it and you do not understand any of this educational jargon. However, you do not want to delay the testing. Should you sign it? The simple answer is your mom was right: You should not sign the consent form if you do not understand it. However, please know that you are not alone. Few parents understand that they have a right to make decisions about their child’s education based on “informed consent.” In Massachusetts, this means you have a right to be “fully informed of all information relevant to the activity for which consent is sought.” So, if the language appearing in the form leaves you asking questions, by all means, ask them! Indeed, ask questions until you and you alone are satisfied you have the information you need to make an informed decision. For example, consider asking for a list of all the assessments the school seeks to administer, a detailed description of each assessment and, to the extent the assessment has “sub-parts,” ask if any sub-part will be omitted from the testing. If so, ask them to explain the decision not to administer that sub-part. As a matter of fact, if you ever do not understand the school’s decision to administer or not administer an assessment or sub-part to an assessment, ask the school to provide you with an explanation for the decision. It’s your right! If your school responds that it is not required to explain itself, remind that school official that the legislative history for informed consent includes the following language: “A few commenters recommended adding a requirement to the definition of consent that a parent be fully informed of the reasons why a public agency selected one activity over another. Discussion: We do not believe it is necessary to include the additional requirement recommended by the commenter. The definition of consent already requires that the parent be fully informed of all the information relevant to the activity for which consent is sought.” In other words, to be “fully informed” a parent not only has the right to know whatassessment will be administered/not administered by the school, he or she also has the right to know why the assessment will be administered/not administered. So, don’t be shy. Ask, ask, ask……
Show More