The 2022 speech-language assessment recorded meaningful foundational strengths. Once he had adjusted and formed a relationship, he could answer briefly. He could repeat the syllable structure of long words and pairs of words with similar articulation, identify first and last sounds, distinguish a target sound in sound, syllable, and word sequences, name familiar objects and seasons, use precise color names, construct simple sentences, maintain word agreement in sentences, use common prepositions, form plurals and diminutives, and create more complex sentence structures with substantial help.
At the same time, the /r/ sound was not fully established and could be replaced by /l/ or produced without vibration. He had difficulty distinguishing long and short vowels and some vowel combinations, naming less commonly used concepts, forming more complex derived words, retrieving the right word, and building a coherent narrative. He might identify details while omitting characters and not independently connect events into one continuous plot.
Reading pace was uneven. He repeated syllables, found consonant clusters difficult, and did not fully understand what he read. He asked for clarification of word meanings. Writing included confusion among several Lithuanian vowel forms, omitted soft signs and other letters, and difficulty with creative written work. School-type tasks produced substantial avoidance, directions often had to be repeated, and his pace was slow. Even when he knew what task was coming and the sequence of activities, he did not always begin without support. The speech-language conclusion was specific language development associated with a pervasive developmental disorder.
The same assessment documented knowledge about himself and his immediate environment, orientation in space and time with difficulty naming the months, satisfactory general knowledge, the ability to listen to excerpts, elementary grammar with help, copying sentences, and writing dictated sentences in familiar schoolwork. Those abilities were drawn from family information, school material, and work samples because he did not demonstrate them in the direct evaluation session.
The later school evaluation shows progress as well as persistent higher-level difficulty. With familiar people, his speech was described as natural. He pronounced sounds correctly, had adequate phonemic hearing and vocabulary, and had improved coherent speech. He could read and write without assistance, used an adequate verb vocabulary, and generally formed grammatically correct language.
However, less common words, complex spoken or written sentences, figurative meaning, metaphors, abstraction, and emotional language remained difficult. Unfamiliar words could require both an explanation and a picture. In formal lessons, he considered each word carefully and could sound hesitant or stuttering-like, while speech during breaks or off-topic conversation was smoother. He used short, less-elaborated sentences and often avoided speaking in front of a class. Some teachers found that he preferred written tasks. During the school psychologist's weekly observations, his already limited spoken communication decreased over time and he increasingly answered through phone messages, often with few errors.