Introduction - Appalachian State University



Case Report on CodyIntroductionCody, age 10, a rising 5th grader at Icard Elementary, attended the reading tutoring sessions because he is below grade level in reading fluency and comprehension. As a graduate reading clinician in Appalachian State University’s Master’s Degree Program in Reading Education, I tutored Cody for 13 one-hour sessions across the summer, 2010 semester.Initial literacy assessmentsThe following assessments were administered to Cody: interest inventory, elementary reading attitude survey, spelling inventory, word recognition in isolation (WRI) test, oral reading test, silent reading test, listening comprehension test, sense of story assessment, and oral and written composition samples were analyzed. These assessments were given to determine instructional levels and areas of needs and readiness in reading, writing, word study (spelling and phonics), and being read to.A student’s independent level in a particular area is the highest at which he or she can successfully work without instructional support. The instructional level is the optimal level for working with instructional support. One’s frustration level is that at which he or she can not readily benefit even with instructional support.Cody’s affect was favorable during testing. He responded agreeably to each assessment that was conducted and worked willingly on each task he was asked to complete. Cody’s positive attitude and cooperation was evident throughout our tutoring sessions. At times he would comment or ask about what level of words and/or assessment he was working on. He welcomed the challenge of working on higher level texts and always tried his best. SpellingThe spelling assessment is comprised of grade leveled lists of 12 words each ranging from first to eighth grade. Some words are high frequency words at the specific grade level, and some have common spelling patterns at the particular grade level. Reading and spelling ability are highly correlated, and this test is designed to assess the word knowledge the student has to bring to the tasks of reading and spelling by finding out what they know or conjecture about how letters work in words.The highest level at which he can spell at least 50% of the words correctly is considered to be his instructional level in spelling and phonics; that is, the level at which he can gain new insights, with teacher help, about how letters work in words. Patterns of errors made at the instructional level are noted as areas of readiness and need. One’s frustration level in spelling and phonics is the level at which he spells fewer than 40% of the words correctly.Cody’s results are charted below:Level1st2nd 3rd 4th Score92%92%42%50% Cody is independent on level 2 with a score of 92% with one error, he spelled the word “trapped” (TRAPED). He is instructional on level 4 with a score of 50% and six errors, and I would say he is frustrational at level 5 even though I did not conduct an assessment at this level, the amount of errors and the types of errors Cody is making at level 3 and 4 would foresee a frustrational score at level 5 because the words in that list contain the skills that Cody is either lacking or using but confusing at the time of this assessment process. He does understand the way long and short vowels work in words, as well as blends and digraphs. He has trouble distinguishing when to double a consonant and when not to, for instance he spelled “cozy” (COZZY), “trapped” (TRAPED), “slammed” (SLAMED), but he correctly spelled “shopping”, “dress”, and “cabbage”. He also struggles with using the hard “c” sound, the /k/ sound spelled with a “k”, and /ck/ usage in words, for example: “plastic” spelled (PLASTICK), “knock” spelled (KNOK), and “scurry” spelled “SKURRY). He also has trouble placing the “r” sound in his spellings, such as “trust” spelled (TURST) and “scream” spelled (SCEARM). I placed him at the end of the “with-in word” stage and the beginning of syllable juncture. Word Reconition in Isolation (WRI)The word recognition in isolation (WRI) assessment consists of lists of twenty words each ranging from pre-primer to grade 8. The administrator begins the test with the pre-primer level list. The words are flashed to the student for ? of a second to see if the student can automatically recognize the word. The assessment continues this way if the child correctly reads the word. If the student misses the word, the administrator then reveals the word for the student to try again with more time to decode the word. The administrator continues across the grade levels until the student begins to miss more than 50% of the words in the flash column.The purpose for this assessment is to note a child’s word recognition ability for words they can recognize automatically in isolation and those they are able to decode when given time in isolation. The highest level at which a student can correctly recognize 90% of the words on the flashed portion is considered to be their independent level, in that this level of an automatized sight vocabulary should be adequate to support successful and fluent reading in context without teacher aid. The highest level at which a student can recognize 60% to 70% of the words correctly in the flash portion denotes their instructional level in word recognition. The level at which his word recognition on the flashed portion drops below 50% accuracy is considered to be their frustration level.Cody’s results are charted below:LevelFlashUntimedPre-primer100100Primer901001st 901002nd 1001003rd 85954th 85955th 85956th 55857th 50758th 2045Cody is independent at level 2 with 100% on both the flash and untimed sections. He is instructional on level 7 with a score of 50% on the flash and 75% on the untimed section. He is frustrational at level 8 with a score of 20% on the flash and 45% on the untimed section. Cody successfully read the words from the pre-primer level up to level 2 either by being able to recognize the word immediately or by decoding the words he did not know automatically. At level 3, he began to pull words from his internal vocabulary that looked similar to the word being flashed, for instance: when he was flashed the word “slipper” he said (SLIPPERY), when flashed the word “receive” he said (RESERVE), and when flashed the word “opinion” he said (OPTION). This shows me that he wasn’t randomly guessing words, he was able to quickly recognize the beginning and ending patterns in each word (and some within word patterns) and match it up with a word in his vocabulary. Usually one’s spelling levels and word recognition in isolation are similar, however Cody’s instructional level for word recognition in isolation is much higher than his instructional level in spelling, which tells me that he can recognize words with more difficult spelling patterns he just hasn’t mastered them in his spellings yet. Contextual ReadingContextual reading is assessed by having the student read grade leveled passages for word recognition, accuracy, speed and comprehension to determine independent, instructional, and frustration levels in reading and to gain insight into a child’s readiness and needs in reading comprehension, fluency, and word recognition. A student’s independent reading level is considered to be the highest level that they can read with 98% accuracy in word recognition in context (WRC), good fluency (reading rate and prosody), and 90% comprehension; their instruction reading level is considered to be the highest level they can read with 95% WRC, acceptable fluency, and 70% comprehension; and their frustration level is the level at which they recognize less than 90% of the words correctly, poor fluency, and below 60% on comprehension.Cody’s results are as shown:Oral Reading in ContextAccuracyProsodyRate in WPMComprehension39831451004943166665932122836942125100792210532I began this assessment at the 3rd grade passage (form A) because that is the highest level at which Cody scored at least an 80% flash score on the word recognition test. He read fluently with 98% accuracy, with a rate of 145 wpm which is within range for that grade level text, and a comprehension score of 100%. These scores indicate that Cody is independent at the third grade level. On the 4th grade passage, he read fluently with 94% accuracy, with a rate of 166 wpm which is within range for that grade level and a comprehension score of 66%; even though his accuracy score fell in the “gray” area because he skipped a section of text that consisted of 11 words which brought his accuracy score down. Other than skipping that section of text he only made one error, he said (SOMEONE) instead of “somehow”. I would not say he was independent at this level because his comprehension score was so low. I would say Cody is instructional at level 5 because all of the categories fall into the instructional range except for his accuracy. When I looked back at the types of errors he made there were only 7 meaning change errors, and the errors he made did not hinder his comprehension of the text. I believe he could be successful at this level with support from a teacher. Cody’s scores show he is frustrated at the 7th grade level. He read with 92% accuracy, with a rate of 105 wpm which is far below the normal oral reading range for this level of text, and had a comprehension score of 32%. His drop in rate, which has been above or within range until this passage, low comprehension score, and the amount and type of errors he made while reading this text all indicate frustration at this level. His spelling and word recognition in isolation results did not agree, however his word recognition results predicted he would be instructional at the 5th grade level and therefore his word recognition results and his contextual reading results coincide. This further shows that Cody can read at a much higher level than he can spell. Listening ComprehensionFor this assessment, the student listens to a story read orally to him on his grade level to assess his understanding and comprehension when he is relieved of the word recognition requirements. The purpose of the task was to reveal his strengths and weaknesses in language problem solving, reasoning, and comprehension of material read auditorily. After working with Cody during the read aloud portion of the tutoring sessions, it was apparent that he could comprehend material at upper 5th and 6th grade levels. The results from this assessment correlate with the word recognition in isolation and contextual reading results. Since Cody is considered instructional at the 5th grade level, he should be able to sufficiently comprehend text read to him at the 6th grade level. His difficulty in comprehending material at the 7th grade level (17%) most likely comes from a lack of vocabulary knowledge and the complexity of language used in upper level texts. Cody needs to work on his prosody, recognizing punctuation and reading accordingly, and accuracy when reading. He has a habit of reading too quickly and skipping words when he reads. This problem was addressed in our tutoring sessions, and his prosody and accuracy improved in his oral readings. Sense of StoryCody listened as I read to him a familiar story “Goldie Locks and the Three Bears” and an unfamiliar story “Poor Old Dog.” After I read a story to him, I invited him to retell the story exactly as I had read it to him. I recorded his retellings so that I could type them at a later time and compare his retell to the actual story. Cody will be given a score out of 8 depending on how many of the 8 story elements he includes in his retelling. Cody will also be given a letter score of A to E, with E being the highest and A being the lowest score, on the organization and syntax he uses in his retell. The purpose of this exercise is to evaluate the extent of Cody’s sense of story elements and organization, and to measure the stage of his familiarity with the syntax, language and concepts in stories. Here are the results of this assessment: Sense of StoryRetellingsStory ElementsStory OrganizationStory LanguageGoldie- Locks 7 out of 8DDPoor Old Dog 6 out of 8DCOral Composition 5 out of 8CCWritten Composition 6 out of 8CCCody’s retelling of “Goldilocks and the Three Bears” demonstrated that he has a strong sense of story with stories that he has heard previously. His retelling included 7 out of the 8 story elements, which were a beginning, the setting, character introductions, sequence of events, description, conversation, and an ending. He did not mention any of the characters’ feelings in his retelling, however when I listened to his retell I could hear the intonation and expression in his voice to express what the characters were saying/feeling. Cody received a D for the organization of his retell which means he had appropriate use of introductory, connecting, and closing words and phrases. He received a D for his sentence syntax in his retell which means he spoke in complete sentences with subordinate clauses. Cody’s retelling of “The Poor Dog,” an unfamiliar story, was slightly weaker than his retelling of “Goldilocks and the Three Bears,” however he still demonstrated a basic understanding of story elements, syntax, and organization. His retelling included 6 out of the 8 story elements. In this retell, Cody did not mention the setting of the story or any of the characters’ feelings. Cody received a D for the organization of his retelling, and a C for the sentence syntax he used. A score of C means he spoke in complete sentences that did not include subordinate clauses. Writing This assessment offers insight into the child’s spelling, comprehension, and sense of story by having the child compose a piece independently both orally and then in writing. I began the assessment by telling Cody an oral story of a time when I was scared. I then asked Cody to share a story of an occasion when he was scared which I recorded so we could reference later. This also showed to what degree the physical act of writing and the cognitive challenge of spelling would keep him from writing down what was in his head. Again I was able to assess his sense of story elements, syntax, and organization through is oral and written compositions and the comparison of the two compositions. When I asked Cody to tell me a personal story, I followed the same procedure as I had for his other retellings. I recorded his oral telling of the story and then I assessed him based on his inclusion of the 8 story elements, syntax, and organization. As you can see in the results table above, he only included 5 out of the 8 story elements in his personal composition. He did not include any descriptive words, a beginning, or the setting in his personal story. Cody received a C for the organization of his story because he simply described the events in chronological sequence and repeated “and then” after each event. He scored a C on syntax as well which indicates that he spoke in complete sentences. When I compared his oral composition of the story to his written composition of the same story, I saw similar results. In the written version of the story, Cody included how a character felt. This is the first time in all of his retellings that he included feelings in his story. His oral version of the story was more detailed than his written version. He seemed to rush through the writing part of the assessment, but took his time and enjoyed telling me the story orally. The physical act of writing and the cognitive task of spelling did not appear to be difficult for him. He displayed a strong foundation in spelling; however he has trouble placing punctuation in his writing, specifically commas. His needs are adding details to his stories and working on grammatical and punctuation errors. Instructional Plans, Progress Report, and RecommendationsPlans were made across the instructional areas of reading, writing, word study (spelling and phonics), and being read to as a result of the conclusions drawn from the initial assessment. Tutoring lessons included activities in these four areas and were adjusted according to Cody’s progress and needs.ReadingPlans: I selected text on Cody’s instructional level of fifth grade. Before reading, I identified stopping points where he could anticipate what was going to happen next. I prepared questions to ask while we read the text and after we read the text. This is a Directed Reading/Thinking Activity (DRTA). I carefully chose texts which were of high-interest to him. Fluency, specifically phrasing, was a weak area for him, so repeated readings were conducted on texts that were on his independent level (late-3rd to 4th grade). These repeated readings were timed to see how many words he could accurately read in one minute, and I recorded his results on a chart that I displayed at our station so that he could see his progress. Time designated for reading and fluency practice was approximately 20 to 30 minutes.Progress: During our 13 one-hour tutoring sessions, Cody read a novel called Soup and a non-fiction chapter book called Shipwreck Secrets: the story of the H.L. Hunley. Throughout his readings, Cody made logical predictions and used the text and personal experiences to support his predictions. For example, when he read the story Soup, which was about two boys who always ended up in trouble, the main character Robert broke a church window accidently. I asked Cody what he thought would happen next, and he referenced a previous section in the text where Robert had gotten into trouble about something else and Cody stated that Robert’s aunt will probably find out and he will get a whoopin’ like last time. I asked him why he thought that, and he responded by saying that would be what would happen to me if I did that. In our first few tutoring sessions, I noticed Cody was reading too quickly and was not pausing at the appropriate points in the text (commas and periods). This problem was addressed in our sessions, and by the end of our time together, I was able to see improvement in his phrasing and accuracy. He also read with wonderful expression and intonation.Recommendations: I recommend that Cody continues to read material on the 5th grade level with support from a teacher or tutor. The instruction he receives in reading should focus on building comprehension, accuracy, and fluency. He also should be reading books on his own at 4th grade level at home or in school. WritingPlans: I asked Cody to write and dictate personal narratives and compositions in areas of interest with an emphasis on pre-writing planning and revising successive drafts. Time designated for writing and dictating stories was approximately 15 minutes. I shared a personal story with Cody and I asked him to share a personal story which I asked him to write down afterwards. Then we would revise the first draft by re-reading and finding areas where we could add details and correct grammar and spelling errors.Progress: Cody completed two stories this summer, and he was so proud of the last one we worked on that he wanted a copy to give to his parents. He was able to make revisions on his original versions by correcting capitalization, punctuation, and spelling errors, adding details, and rearranging sentences to make the story more cohesive. Cody corrected his own writing so that he could practice careful examination of his own writing and become a better writer. His first story was very short and simplistic, and he recognized that this was not his best work. His second story was more detailed, and he really worked on making his story interesting and exciting to the reader. Recommendations: Cody still needs help writing with the appropriate punctuation and capitalization. Cody should spend approximately 15 minutes per day either writing or editing/revising his writing. To keep Cody’s interest in writing, I suggest allowing him to writing about things he is interested in periodically during the week.Word StudyPlans: Our work in phonics and spelling consisted of having Cody categorize word cards by sorting them into columns according to the fourth grade level spelling and sound patterns that his spelling assessment had shown him to be needing and ready for. As he mastered sorts, he took spelling assessments to check for mastery. He also read and sorted mastered lists for speed and accuracy. Word Study is done to build a student’s knowledge of how letters work in words. Progress: The first sort focused on contrasting the low frequency vowel pattern ea sounds (e.g. great, leaf, bread). He mastered this sort fairly quickly. The next spelling pattern that Cody struggled with was understanding when to double the ending consonant and when not to double with added endings. We worked with short and long vowel words ending in –ing. Here are a couple of words I used in his sort. HopHoppingRunRunningTapTappingShopShoppingSmileSmilingMakeMakingWriteWritingDineDiningCody did not grasp this concept quickly, so we worked on this sort for the rest of our sessions. Recommendations: Cody needs to continue to work on consonant doubling. Cody should work on word study for approximately 10 minutes daily. He enjoyed this part of our tutoring sessions, especially being able to time himself on the sorts, so this is a possible suggestion for further instruction.Being Read ToPlans: I chose a high-interest text, with rich book language, approximately two grade levels above Cody’s instructional reading level to read aloud to him. The book I read to him was The City of Ember. I conducted a Directed Listening/Thinking Activity (DLTA) with this book. The purpose of this activity is to expose him to rich book language and stories with compelling plots so that he might improve his vocabulary and comprehension by being exposed to book language and contexts that he understands. At points of anticipation, I stopped and asked Cody what he thought might happen next and what I had read to make him think that way. These questions ensured that Cody was attending to the meaning of the text and was fully engaged. I modeled reading fluently with expression and inflection.Progress: Cody responded positively to this activity as he loves being read to. Cody continued to make accurate and/or logical predictions based on the text. On subsequent days I asked him to retell the story up to where we had stopped the day before for a review. Cody was able to retell the story easily in his own words, and he usually brought up questions that he had about the plot of the story. We were not able to finish the book due to the short time we were allotted; however he enjoyed the book so much he asked his parent to buy the movie.Recommendations: The focus for this area should be to model fluent reading and carefully choosing books with rich book language and compelling plots to expand his vocabulary and sense of story. Cody should be read aloud to for approximately 5 to 10 minutes per day.Cody has made adequate progress in the areas of comprehension, fluency, and spelling this summer. I have enjoyed working with him. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Dr. Tom Gill, the ASU summer reading clinic director, at gilljt@appstate.edu or 828-406-7794.Kylie HumphriesASU Graduate Reading ClinicianTom Gill, EdDASU Associate Professor ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download