Two tools, two concerning results, three dated referrals: NU580's Unit 4 report scores a bilingual two-year-old's ASQ-3 and M-CHAT-R/F, recounts his words across both languages, and never mistakes a screen for a diagnosis. Searches like "nu 580 unit 4 assignment example", "nu580 unit 4 sample" and "nu580 unit 4 example" land here.
Eight Words in English, Eleven in Spanish: A Developmental Screening Report for a Bilingual Two-Year-Old
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
NU580: FNP II - Primary Care of Children and Adolescents' Health
Unit 4 Developmental Screening Report
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The child is a composite; scores, counts and dates are bracketed.
Why Screen Today
At his 24-month visit, [Diego]'s parents mentioned that he "only says a few words" and does not yet put two together. The AAP recommends autism-specific screening at 18 and 24 months and general developmental screening at 9, 18 and 30 months, with additional screening whenever surveillance raises concern (Hyman et al., 2020; Lipkin et al., 2020). His parents' concern called for both tools today.
The Tools
ASQ-3: a parent-completed questionnaire with age-specific forms, covering five areas, from talking and understanding to movement, hand skills, problem solving and social and self-care skills, each scored against a cutoff for that age. M-CHAT-R/F: an autism screen in two stages, a checklist and then an interview, validated from 16 to 30 months of age. A total of 0 to 2 is low risk; 3 to 7 is moderate risk and calls for the structured follow-up interview; 8 or more is high risk and calls for referral without the interview (Robins et al., 2014).
The Bilingual Recount
His parents first counted eight words, all in English. Asked about Spanish, they listed eleven more: agua, leche, mamá, papá, perro, más, no, sí, pan, zapato, abuela. Three of those name the same things as English words he uses (milk, dog, more). Total vocabulary: 19 words. Conceptual vocabulary, counting each concept once: 16. A bilingual child's language is judged across both languages together, and the recount raised his total from 8 to 19, but 19 is still well short of what a two-year-old typically uses. Research on Spanish-English toddlers supports counting across both languages, since single-language counts underestimate what bilingual children know (Core et al., 2013). No two-word combinations in either language.
Scores
ASQ-3, 24-month form: communication [20], under its cutoff; the two movement areas and problem solving all clear of theirs; personal-social [30], in the zone flagged for monitoring. M-CHAT-R: total [5], moderate risk. Follow-up interview completed: final score [3], positive, meaning increased likelihood of autism spectrum disorder that warrants evaluation (Robins et al., 2014).
Interpretation
Two concerning results: a communication score below the cutoff even with the bilingual recount, and a positive M-CHAT-R/F after follow-up. Together they show increased risk of a language delay and of autism spectrum disorder. Neither is a diagnosis. Bilingualism does not cause language delay and cannot explain this one away; bilingual children reach milestones on a similar timeline when both languages are counted.
Referrals, With Dates
1. Early intervention, Part C: referral sent today, [date]; intake call expected within [two] weeks. Services can begin before any diagnosis.
2. Audiology: hearing evaluation scheduled [date], since hearing loss must be excluded for any language delay.
3. Developmental-behavioral pediatrics: diagnostic evaluation for autism spectrum disorder, referral sent today; first available appointment [date].
What His Parents Were Told
The screens show that [Diego] needs a closer look, not that something is definitely wrong. Speaking Spanish at home is good for him and should continue. Early intervention can start helping now, while the evaluation is scheduled. Follow-up visit in [one] month to check that each referral has happened.
References
Core, C., Hoff, E., Rumiche, R., & Señor, M. (2013). Total and conceptual vocabulary in Spanish-English bilinguals from 22 to 30 months: Implications for assessment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 56(5), 1637-1649. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2013/11-0044)
Hyman, S. L., Levy, S. E., Myers, S. M., & Council on Children With Disabilities, Section on Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics. (2020). Identification, evaluation, and management of children with autism spectrum disorder. Pediatrics, 145(1), e20193447. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2019-3447
Lipkin, P. H., Macias, M. M., & Council on Children With Disabilities, Section on Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics. (2020). Promoting optimal development: Identifying infants and young children with developmental disorders through developmental surveillance and screening. Pediatrics, 145(1), e20193449. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2019-3449
Robins, D. L., Casagrande, K., Barton, M., Chen, C.-M. A., Dumont-Mathieu, T., & Fein, D. (2014). Validation of the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised with Follow-up (M-CHAT-R/F). Pediatrics, 133(1), 37-45. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2013-1813
How this NU580 Unit 4 example is structured
The report separates three things that weaker versions blur: what each instrument measured, what the scores mean by that instrument's own rules, and what happens next. Each tool is introduced in a short paragraph describing it accurately, the ASQ-3 as a parent-completed questionnaire with age-specific forms from early infancy to about five and a half years, and the M-CHAT-R/F as a two-stage autism screen validated for toddlers 16 to 30 months, with the interview stage reserved for middle scores. Scoring follows each tool's published rules, and the paper cites the AAP recommendations placing general screening at 9, 18 and 30 months, with more when surveillance raises concern, and autism screening at 18 and 24. Interpretation is limited to risk. Closing the report, a section on the bilingual recount shows why it matters, since language is judged across every language a child hears, and why bilingualism never explains a delay away.
Get an NU580 Unit 4 example written to your instructions
Screening assignments differ in which tools they name. Some sections supply a completed ASQ-3, some an M-CHAT-R/F, some another validated instrument such as the PEDS or the SWYC. Send the unit's case and scoring sheet with your rubric, and the composite report will use the tool your prompt names, scored by its published rules. First sample free, back within 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
NU580 Unit 4 questions, answered
Can a screening report diagnose autism?
No. The M-CHAT-R/F estimates risk and decides whether a child needs a diagnostic evaluation, which a specialist or trained team performs. A report that treats a positive screen as a diagnosis oversteps. The sample states the screen result, the follow-up score and the referral, and leaves diagnosis to the evaluation, which is how graders in this course generally expect it phrased.
What if the ASQ-3 score lands in the monitoring zone?
The monitoring zone sits between the cutoff and about one standard deviation below the mean, and it calls for activities at home and a rescreen rather than referral. The sample's personal-social score falls there, so the plan includes suggested activities and a rescreen date. Leaving a monitoring result without any follow-up date is a common small deduction.
Do I need to include the scoring sheet?
Usually as an appendix or a table, depending on the rubric. The grader wants to see domain totals, cutoffs and zones so the interpretation can be checked. Copyrighted questionnaire items should not be reproduced in full; summarize what was asked instead. The sample reports scores and cites the manuals without copying the forms themselves.