Levels



ASU Reading Clinic Summary Sheet Child’s Name Alexis Limbo Date(s) of Test 6/23-6/28/10 Age: 8 Grade: 2 Word Rec. Isolation(WRI)Oral Reading in ContextSilentReadingin ContextListening Comp.SpellingLevelsFlashedUntimed(WRC)AccuracyProsodyRate inWPMComp.Rate inWPMComp.LevelStagePP1983n/an/an/an/aPP285100953n/an/aP60909224563421-2357092138508Late Letter240Name30Early w/n4Word patt.56 Examiner(s)Candace Barnes HeffingerGradeOral1-245-85 wpm2-160-85 wpm2-280-120 wpm380-135 wpm495-150 wpm5110-155 wpm6125-160 wpm7135-160 wpm8145-160 wpmLevelTotal ErrorsMCSCMCPP1 111PP2400P8111-2820 Prosody3 = very fluent2 = fluent enough for that level1 = disfluent Reading LevelsIndependent Level __Instructional Level __Frustration Level __Story ElementsSense of StoryStory LanguageRetellingsG: 4 P: 1G: C P: AG: C P: AOral Composition 3CCWritten Composition 3CBCase ReportTutor: Candace Barnes HeffingerStudent: Alexis Limbo7-6-10Introduction As a graduate reading clinician in Appalachian State University’s Master’s Degree Program in Reading Education, I tutored Alexis Limbo for 13 one-hour sessions across the summer, 2010 semester. Alexis is a repeating second grader and is eight years old. She struggles with word recognition in isolation (WRI), word recognition in context, (WRC), and in comprehension. I administered the Initial Literacy Assessments to Alexis on June 23 through June 28, 2010. Throughout the assessment she put forth good effort, but seemed unsure of how to answer questions due to feeling overwhelmed with too much information. I am glad that I have built up a great rapport with her thus far.Interest Inventory/Garfield Aptitude TestThe interest inventory consisted of a series of questions regarding her likes and dislikes about school, hobbies, etc. Through this I found that her favorite subject is math and she hates reading because she cannot read all of the words. While describing her feelings towards reading she used facial gestures by wrinkling up her nose and frowning her forehead. The Garfield Test focused on reading. Overall, she much rather read for recreational over academic. Alexis would much rather play and enjoy her free time than have to read. Initial Literacy AssessmentsThe components of this assessment include spelling, word recognition in isolation, reading, listening comprehension, sense of story, and oral and written composition. These assessments revealed Alexis’s instructional levels as well as her independent and frustration levels in area of literacy. One’s independent level in a particular area is the highest level at which the child can successfully work without instructional/teacher support. The instructional level is the best level for working with instructional support. A student’s frustration level is that at which the child can not readily benefit even with instructional support.Alexis gave her best effort throughout the entire assessment. The first literacy assessment that I gave was he Schlagal Spelling Assessment. This later helped me to know where to begin testing her word recognition in isolation which further showed me at what level to have her begin reading. In the beginning I quickly saw how she reacts to frustration, laughter. Throughout the assessment (spelling, word recognition in isolation, and reading) she tried sounding out each word. Alexis’s spelling attempts revealed that she was able to place some, if not all, letters in the word. On the word recognition in isolation (WRI) she did well in the beginning but later showed frustration because she did not say the word in time for it to count for the flashed presentation due to a lack of automaticity. If she did not know a word on the flash or untimed presentation she would simply say, “Don’t know.” With the oral reading passages, Alexis struggled with fluency which ultimately caused her not to comprehend what she was reading. Also, during this assessment she would read words backwards or would read too fast causing her to make errors. Alexis became restless having to read the different passages. Her listening comprehension level goes hand in hand with her oral reading level. During the oral and written composition assessments, Alexis’ mood changed from frustrated to excite because she loved the sharing of stories. To assess Alexis’s sense of story knowledge I read Goldilocks and the Three Bears and The Poor Old Dog. After having the stories read aloud to her she then had to retell it to the examiner the best she could recall. Through each of these assessments, I was able to determine Alexis’s instructional levels and areas of needs and readiness in reading, writing, word study (spelling and phonics), and being read to.Spelling:I began the assessment by giving Alexis a spelling test. I administered the Schlagal Qualitative Spelling Inventory of Word Knowledge consisting of only 12 words per list which are written for each grade level. Each list contains words that follow appropriate patterns for that level or are high frequency words for that grade level. The highest level at which the student can correctly spell 90% of the words is considered to be her independent level in spelling and phonics in that most of the words and spelling-to-sound correspondences at this level have been automatized, freeing the student to focus on the message she is attempting to convey in her writing and on the meaning of what she is trying to read at the same level. The highest level at which she can spell at least 50% of the words correctly is considered to be her instructional level in spelling and phonics; that is, the level at which she can gain new insights, with teacher help, about how letters work in words. Patterns of errors made at instructional level are noted as areas of readiness and need. One’s frustration level in spelling and phonics is the level at which she spells fewer than 40% of the words correctly. Alexis’s spelling attempts revealed her orthographic knowledge at each level. I called out each word, put it in a sentence, and then had Abbey repeat the word and try to spell it in writing. I began with level 1 of the Schlagal Spelling Inventory. Here she scored 42% missing 7 of the 12 words (gray area). Due to Alexis scoring higher than 40% I then moved to level 2 of the spelling assessment. Here she scored 8% misspelling 11 words of the 12. This concluded the Schlagal Spelling Inventory Assessment. Alexis is instructional at level 1. Alexis knows beginning and ending consonants at level 1 and some at level 2. According to her spellings at level 1, Alexis will need more practice with short vowels patterns with words that included consonant blends and digraphs (WEN “when”; WHISH “wish”), preconsonantal nasals (BUP “bump”), r-controlled words (THRAP “trap”; GIREL “girl”; DRIP “drop”), and words with silent e (PLAN “plane”). Word Recognition in Isolation: The purpose of this test is to see how well the student reads grade leveled words out of context. The WRI consists of twenty words at each grade level which follow patterns relevant to that grade or are high frequency words for that grade. Using two index cards, I flashed each word for one-fourth of a second to Alexis and waited for her response. If she pronounced a word incorrectly or gave no response, I allowed her to take an untimed look to try to sound out the word. We continued through each graded lists until she scored below 50%. This assessment reveals the highest level at which the child can automatically recognize and/or decode words on an independent and instructional level. Furthermore, the child’s WRI flash score at a given level should predict their oral reading accuracy and reading rate. To be considered instructional level for word recognition in isolation the child needs to accurately recognize between 70-80% of the words on a list of the flash presentation. To be considered at the independent level the child needs to score between 90-100%. The child’s instructional level in WRI indicates that the student probably has an adequate sight vocabulary to read successfully at that same level in context. It is important that the child have a high level of automaticity so that the child can read fluently enough without having to stop to decode each word and, thus, is able to pay attention to the meaning of the story. On the pre-primer level (PP2) for WRI Alexis scored 85% on the flashed presentation and 100% on the untimed presentation. Next I proceeded to test her on the primer level (P) for WRI where she scored 60% on the flashed presentation and 90% on the untimed presentation. Due to great automaticity we moved to level 1. At level 1 on WRI Alexis scored 35% on the flashed presentation and 70% on the untimed presentation meaning this is on her frustration level. Due to her flashed presentation score falling below 50% on level 1 we ceased to continue. Alexis is instructional in word recognition in isolation on the Primer level and independent on the Pre-primer level. Alexis puts forth good effort at decoding words which is seen by the increase in her scores between the flashed and untimed presentations. The word recognition in isolation assessment and spelling assessment are correlated in that she could not instructionally spell on a1st grade level nor does she have a high level of automaticity for reading words in isolation at a 1st grade level. There is no further correlation for spelling because the spelling levels do not go any lower than level 1. Contextual Reading:After administering the WRI test I then had Alexis read a series of grade level passages orally. As Alexis read I marked her reading errors on the examiner’s score sheet while tape recording her. The purpose of this assessment was to find at what grade level Alexis is independent (98-100% WRC; comprehension 90-100%), instructional (95-97% WRC; comprehension 75-89%), and frustrated (below 90% WRC; below 50%). Besides identifying appropriate reading levels, this assessment is also used to assess how quickly and fluently the child reads, along with if the child is using contextual clues or decoding. Contextual reading allows an opportunity to determine the student’s relative strengths and weaknesses across WRC, fluency, and comprehension. The first passage that she read was Look at me a PP1 level. This passage was used to build confidence in her reading ability. The pattern book was too easy for her, needing minimal help from me. Here she read with 98% word recognition in context (WRC) with good fluency, making only 1 error. Next she read Baby Bear Goes Fishing at the PP2 level scoring 95% on WRC, while reading with great fluency making only 4 errors. Next Alexis read Mouse Tales at the P level where she scored a 92% on WRC, read at 45 wpm which acceptable and fluent enough for this level and scored 63% (below the instructional range which should be 75-89%) on comprehension. Since her performance at the primer level falls in the gray area, Alexis continued on to read Frog and Toad, a 1st grade level passage. Here she also scored 92% WRC, read at a rate of 38 wpm (should be 45-85 wpm), and scored 50% on comprehension. Comprehension is the least reading measure. Testing is stopped when the student’s scores fall below 90% WRC or does not meet the WPM criteria for that level which she did not at grade level 1 (1-2). In conclusion, I found that Alexis is independent at a PP1 reading level, she has an instructional reading range at a PP2-P level and is frustrated at 1st grade. Alexis’s WRI score at the PP and P levels predicted both her oral reading accuracy and reading rate at that level which indicated that she has a good sight vocabulary to where she can read fluently at this level. Whereas when viewing her flash score at a 1st grade level passage (35% WRI) this indicated that she would struggle reading a 1-2 level passage because of a deficit in sight vocabulary. While reading she would read to fast, stumbling over words and or saying a word that began with the letter she saw first. Listening Comprehension: I began the listening comprehension assessment by reading passages to Alexis on her grade level which is 2nd grade. I read from form B while recording the comprehension questions and answers. The purpose of this test is to see if the student understands what is being read orally to her. Through this test the student’s independent, instructional, and frustration levels can be found. This test will let teachers know at what level they should provide taped books so that the child’s problems with print do not interfere with her continuing to learn. According to the criteria chart for setting levels anything below 50% is at the student’s frustration level. If it is in their instructional range then it should fall between 70-89% and if it is in their independent range it will fall between 90-100%.This test was administered to see at which level Alexis can listen to a story and comprehend the text when the word recognition is done for her. On level 2 she scored 40% on listening comprehension which is at her frustration level. On level 3 she scored 0%. Alexis does not understand material being read to her at grade level. This test correlates with oral reading in context because she was near frustration level the most at a 1-2 reading passage where she scored a 92% WRC. She struggles with comprehension due to the lack of automaticity of her word recognition in isolation causing a lower fluency rate in WRC. Some of this may be due to a lack of vocabulary knowledge. Exposure to books with rich book language will help build vocabulary. When doing a read aloud it should be done as a directed-listening-thinking-activity (DLTA) which be explained below in the Plan, Progress, and Recommendations. Picture books should also be included like fairy tales, so she can use those to draw meaning from. Lastly, prior to reading inferences can be made through predictions as to what the story will be about. Alexis will need to read stories with simple plots and few characters in order to comprehend the story well which ultimately build on her comprehension knowledge.Oral and Written Composition:The purpose of this assessment is to see what the child composes in terms of a personal narrative orally and what they actually write down. The writing component consists of two pieces. The first is sharing the story orally and the second writing it down on paper. After this three different charts must be filled out focusing on: sense of story elements, sense of story sentence syntax, and sense of story organization. I began by giving Alexis the option as to what kind of story she wanted me to tell. She wanted to hear one about my sisters and me because she too has siblings. But once that story was shared she wanted to hear one more before telling her on. While sharing stories took place I kept the tape recorder going. Both her oral and written compositions were short but she kept the same details and events in each telling. She asked for help with spelling which I told her to spell the best she could because she would not be penalized for errors. But, she would have no other way until aiding her in spelling. Oral Translation: I was gettin’ out of bed, and I was sleep walking. And um I opened the cabinet and I got a spoon out and started taping it. Then I goed’ and sit in the chair.Sense of Story:I read both Goldilocks and the fable The Poor Old Dog. This assessment was given to see how well Alexis understands book language and the flow of a story. Once reading was done she retold both. Retelling for Goldilocks:Goldilocks goed’ in their house and Goldilocks tried all of their, the soup. And then um Goldilocks said that um the Baby Bear’s soup was just right. And then she went into the living room and she saw the chairs. And then…she went in the living room…she said Baby Bear’s chair was just right. And then she went up to the bedroom and said Baby Bear’s bed was just right. But she broke Baby Bear’s chair. Then they came back and saw Goldilocks sleeping in Baby Bear’s chair. Then goldilocks heard the Bears talking and ran straight out of their house. Retelling for The Poor Old Dog:They were an old dog. (Pauses to laugh) They were an old that found clothes, or something like that. And he found a sign that said something. (Pauses to laugh and tells me it’s too hard to understand). In assessing her retellings I used 3 sense of story scales. As you can see she hit most points when retelling Goldilocks, but missed The Poor Old Dog all together. For Goldilocks she gave a setting, characters, told the story in sequence, and gave an ending. She told the story using and then…and then…throughout the retelling. Lastly, she retold in complete sentences. For the retelling of The Poor Old Dog she told in phases jumping from point to point which was disoriented. The only sense of story elements that were included in the retelling of The Poor Old Dog was a character, the dog. But, once again she was frustrated having to even listen to this fable because many of the words she did not understand and she could not follow all of the events taking place. One reason she could retell Goldilocks better was because she had heard the story before. That was not the case for The Poor Old Dog. Instructional Plans, Progress, 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 Alexis’s progress and needs.Reading:I selected text on Alexis’s instructional level which is on the primer level (P). Daily Guided Reading followed what is known as the 3-Day Cycle. The reasons for doing a 3 -Day Cycle during guided reading was so that the teacher can support the child’s development for processing new texts at increasing levels of difficulty. Through this Alexis learned how to use reading strategies while integrating her repertoire of knowledge and strategies. Also, she learned to attend to words, letters, and sounds as needed. Most importantly, she began to read without teacher modeling. The 3-Day Cycle begins by the teacher introducing a new book daily which is then followed by a re-read from the previous day’s books. Once the book has been re-read accurately it then can be taken out of the cycle. Reading for fluency consisted of simply re-reading books for about three to five minutes each session. The last week of tutoring we began timed fluency reading and charted her results. Reading fluency is a very important part of reading instructions because the reader must be able to recognize words instantly, thus, helping them to comprehend what they are reading. Daily twenty-five minutes were devoted for guided reading. Books read were non-pattern books with simple text and story plots. Alexis read sixteen books throughout. She read four level 5 (pre-primer 3) books, eight level 6 (early primer) books, three level 7 (late primer) books, and an early 1-2 level book. Alexis began reading at level 5 (PP3), but I soon realized that this level was too easy for her. She then progressed up to a level 6 (early primer) while continuing to read some level 5 books. The majority of her reading time was spent reading at level 6 where she read fluently along with an accurate oral rate. Alexis ended the tutoring sessions reading fluently at a level 7 (late primer). Across reading sessions Alexis put forth great effort. In the beginning Alexis struggled to read fluently and smoothly revealing she strains to understand print. This is why her guided reading lesson plan followed the 3-Day Cycle. While reading I would ask her to make predictions. But, she always tried reading with expression and enthusiasm. The last week and a half we stopped doing picture walks before a new read and she began reading book cold which confirmed that she is ready for a DRTA (directed-reading-thinking-activity); described below. While reading a book cold she would use pictures to help her figure out the words in context. For example when reading the book, Tiger Runs Away (level 6), she did not know the word chair but figured it out by looking at the picture. Here she saw the cat sleeping in the chair. Throughout each story she would also substitute words that would change the meaning, but she did not stop and reread until I would point it out. After the first week she was able to stop and go back and make self-corrections. She self-corrected by looking at the word again and at times realized that what she just read did not make sense. When substituting words she would say the word was as saw and the word there as here or where. Also, each day a new story was introduced she struggled with word recognition accuracy, prosody, and speed. She would start every story reading word for word, but by the end of most stories, or on day 2, she began reading with more intonation. Alexis read most stories fluently for each re-read. The only time Alexis’s rate decreased and prosody became choppy was when trying to read longer books that contained many words on a page. The amount of words would intimidate her. Fluency is a concern so repeated readings were conducted with these texts. Often I recorded these re-readings so she could hear her fluency and note the changes with the repeated readings. I charted this so she could note her progress, and she and I both rated her prosody on a range of 1- choppy, 2- somewhat fluent, 3- very fluid and smooth. On the last week of tutoring she was reading a level 6 book with 86 words per minute. Due to this I conducted a running record to see if she could place out of a level 6 and move to level 7. Alexis entered the program reading a pre-primer level passage with 92% WRC at a rate 45 words per minute and left reading a level 6 (early primer) with 98% WRC at a rate of 61 words per minute. A level 6 is now her independent reading level.Alexis’s has made many gains throughout each session. She is quickly emerging into a great reader. After week one of tutoring she came in every day ready to read. Daily I chose books of her interest. As mentioned above she read 16 books. Alexis came in reading on a level 5 and left reading at a level 7. This was a huge accomplishment. Recommendations for this area include lots of reading! During a two hour language arts block 40% (about 48 minutes) of the time should be spent reading, at both instructional and independent levels. Average readers who read 90 minutes a day will gain a year per year growth in reading. Twenty-five minutes with the teacher and twenty-minutes without the teacher. Also, during this time she could listen to the story on a cd. As she progresses to more complex text a directed-reading thinking activity (DRTA) can be done during guided reading with the teacher. Re-reads must be included for reading fluency for about three to five minutes a day. The DRTA focuses on open-ended questions throughout the reading process. The activity is geared to make students aware of their own interpretive actions during reading. The DRTA requires students to recognize predictions, judgments, and evidence verification. Begin by asking students to skim a reading selection prior to reading it. They should take note to titles, subheadings, illustrations, captions, pictures, etc. Ask students to predict the content or perspective of the text passage. Have them verify how they reached their conclusions. The teacher should pick reasonable stopping points, better known as points of anticipation. Students should evaluate their predictions and refine them if necessary. If a student does change their prediction have them explain why they did giving specific points from the reading. This process will be repeated throughout the reading selection. It is important to remember to do this in small groups on the student’s instructional level. While she is away from the teacher or is reading home she must be reading at her independent level which is a level 6 (early primer). Through guided reading modeling Alexis will now know how to stop and make predictions about what she is reading. A good reader is always asking questions to self. Writing:Daily ten minutes of writing was done. My general recommendation was to use Alexis’s interest in spending time with her family to write a personal narrative. We used graphic organizers such as a concept map or flow chart to help plan her story. Revisions were made to writing on the next day. The purpose for daily writing was so that Alexis could freely express herself. I would share a story first about the topic and then had her tell me a story on the same topic. After telling the story, she was not able to adequately write down the same story. At first when mapping out her thoughts and ideas I wrote in complete sentences, but, when asking her to compose a personal narrative I realized she was copying it down word for word from the graphic organizer. In encouraging her to express herself through her own words I then used fewer words when completing the graphic organizer. I quickly saw that it took her a tremendously long time to write. It took her two ten minute writing sessions to write two sentences (20 words). Since she was becoming frustrated with this I began taking down her dictation. Through dictations she could retell the same exact story and freely express herself. In terms of freedom of expression I did not correct her grammar but did spell words correctly. After composing our first rough draft, I then typed up the story and we would go back together and add in details until the composition was completely edited. In only three weeks she made much progress. The first piece she had written was about her cat, Fluffy, where she had only written using 62 words. On this particular draft she had written the narrative, but I then typed it up and we added more details. The last composition she had written was about a family rafting trip. Here she began writing the piece on her own but was not able to fully express herself so we finished by taking her dictation. Alexis dictated using 113 words. In total three narratives were composed where each was edited once before typing the final draft.Recommendations for Alexis would be partner writing (strategy called sharing the pen) of four-sentence accounts evolving into independent story writing by herself. Graphic organizers must be used as they are important to mapping out Alexis’s thoughts before writing. The key is to allow her to freely express herself which can be done by the teacher taking down her dictations. Also, the voice recognition computer software program would really help so that she can truly express herself. Through this program she does not have to focus on any spelling, just telling. As her word knowledge and self-confidence increases, she will begin to write independently and not rely so much on having someone spell each word for her. During a two hour language arts block 30% (about 36 minutes) of the time should be spent writing. Word Study:Each tutoring session, I had Alexis sort words by the spelling and sound recognition and spelling assessments had shown to be confusing. Her spelling revealed that she was in the Late Letter Name to Early Within-Word Pattern stage. As she mastered sorts, she took spelling assessments to check for mastery. She read and sorted mastered lists for speed and accuracy. Each day ten minutes were set aside for word sorts. The purpose of a word study is so that Alexis can see the true meaning of words in isolation due to their patterns and sounds, thus becoming amalgamated. Furthermore, this will help with spelling. When sorting words Alexis sorted words based on their sound and pattern. Words were sorted into columns based on if they shared the same sound and the same spelling pattern. To ensure both sound and pattern are attended to I mixed in pictures. The only words sorted were the ones that Alexis could read in isolation. Other words that were sorted had contrasting patterns which at times she confused one for another. Throughout blind sorts and spell checks were done. A blind sort is where the teacher says the word and the child points to the column it belongs. I then lay it in that column and have her turn it over to check answer. To do a spell check the teacher calls out the word and then she is to try and spell it. She successfully did both the blind sort and spell check missing not words for all sorts until the last one. She was able to sort, but could not spell all of the words which meant she was not ready to journey forward with a new sort. Alexis recognized from the beginning that she must attain to both the spelling pattern and sound. Across three weeks Alexis has been working on three sorts during our sessions: short a, o, and i (as in the words had, got, and pin); short a, o, and i with blends and digraphs added (as in the words flag, thin, and lost); short e, o, and u with blends and digraphs (as in the words desk, drop, and plum). She was very thoughtful when working on these sorts, reading the words several times if she was uncertain of the vowel sound. If she did place a word in the wrong column I would then redirect her by having her go back and re-read down the column to see if she could hear the pattern and figure out her mistake. When taking turns sorting I would trick her by purposely placing the cards in the wrong column to see if she would or would not correct my mistake. Every time she was able to correctly place it in the right column. Also, timed sorts were conducted on several occasions to check her speed as she progressed through not only learning a sort but also automatizing the pattern. She does not like timed sorts because of the pressure she is put under.It is my recommendation that Alexis continue sorting short vowels containing digraphs and blends. All short vowels must be done before moving on. As she becomes better with this the teacher can introduce long vowels. For example, short a can be contrasted to CVCe pattern. During a two hour language arts block 20% (24 minutes) of the time should be spent sorting words on her spelling level. Being Read To: I read to Alexis at the 2nd grade level because anything lower books did not contain rich book language. The books read to her contained rich language and compelling content. Each day five to ten minutes were allotted for reading to Alexis. The purpose of reading to Abbey is so that she can learn rich book language as well as exercise her own sense of book language. I followed the directed-listening-thinking-activity (DLTA) format as I read aloud. The books that I read were: Sweet Briar goes to School, Who Am I? Curious George takes a Train and Frederick the Frog. A DLTA is one activity that helps children listen to stories actively and critically, requiring them to engage all of their thinking abilities and prior experiences as they listen. Children must first examine illustrations and listen to part of a story being read aloud, then predict what might happen in upcoming events based on what they have already heard. Clues are grasped from the title, illustrations, own experiences, and prior knowledge. They should be listening so that they can either confirm or disprove their predictions, and they are encouraged to modify their predictions as the story unfolds. Children are predicting what might happen rather than answering questions about what did happen. Also, they are engaged in differing thinking where they may have to create alternatives. The best piece is that there are not right or wrong answers, but there are more likely and less likely alternatives, which they must weigh and evaluate. When doing a DLTA you can read above the students’ instructional reading level because they need exposure to book language; this can be done with the whole class. Remember that vocabulary is only learned through the act of reading!Steps in preparing and conducting a DLTA include: 1. Select a story with an obvious plot structure and attractive illustrations. Look for one that has some conflict or problem to be achieved, some clear attempts at the goal, and a clear resolution. Fairy tales and folk tales are great. 2. Plan to stop reading several times just before some important events or revelations so that students can predict what might happen next. Don’t stop too often; two to four stops. 3. Allow children to look at the title and illustration for their first predictions. Since they have little information about the story at the beginning, their predictions will probably be hazy and unspecific. 4. At each stopping point, ask for summaries of what has happened so far, and then for prediction of what might happen next. This procedure encourages children to use what they already know. They can later refine their predictions which will help clear up misconceptions. 5. Accept all predictions noncommittally; the creation of alternatives, not “guessing right,” is the point of a DLTA. Ask students to use prior story events and logic to back up their predictions if they can. Avoid using terms like “right” or “wrong”; instead, use terms like “likely” or “unlikely.” Ask what “might happen” rather than what “will happen,” and say “Why do you think so?” rather than “How do you know?”6. When confirming predictions, focus on the idea rather than on who delivered it. “Which idea turned out to be true” or “…was the most likely?” are better than “Who gave the best guess?” The latter response turns the children’s attention away from the story itself.7. Perhaps the most important is to keep the discussion short and lively. Alexis enjoyed being read to, although she lacked in making predictions about what might happen in the book. After I finished reading the book I would have her retell it to me while looking at the pictures. When having her re-tell Sweet Briar goes to School I quickly saw that she did not remember the text. So I then went back and re-read each page at a time, but included more words than she could possibly retain. During her retelling she focused more on the pictures than what had been read to her.In the classroom, I recommend that the teacher should read aloud using this DLTA format. During a two hour language arts block 10% (12 minutes) of the time should be spent reading to the child at her listening level. In assessing comprehension have her re-tell the story while looking back at the pictures in the order in which it was read, while covering up the words to grasp her true sense of story. It is recommended that Alexis continue to receive extra help in reading. She has made much progress this summer. I have enjoyed working with her. If you have any question, please feel free to contact Dr. Tom Gill, the ASU summer reading clinic director, at gilljt@appstate.edu or 828-406-7794. Candace B. HeffingerASU Graduate Reading ClinicianTom Gill, EdDASU Associate ProfessorDear parent,It has been a pleasure to work with Alexis this summer. She has worked hard and been cooperative during the tutoring lessons. Alexis’s instructional reading level is late primer (approaching late-first grade). This means that she is challenged by primer materials but has adequate word recognition, fluency, and comprehension to learn and move forward at this reading level. Alexis has read in preprimer 3, early primer, and late primer materials this summer at the Reading Clinic following the 3-Day Cycle. She ended having read a total of 16 books. For example:Tom’s Pool (preprimer 3)Tiger runs away (early primer)Same Find’s a Monster (primer)Joey (late primer) One area of strength for Alexis is that she self-corrects her own mistakes and decoding unknown words. While reading if she says a word wrong she automatically knows to stop and go back and reread the word. With repeated readings of the story (she reads each story three times), Alexis is able to improve the fluency and accuracy with which she reads. One are Alexis needs to improve is reading prosody (how smooth or choppy she reads) along with her reading rate (how many words she can read in a minute). Also, at times she would try to read too fast causing her word recognition to decrease. To this end, we have been working on reading fluency while keeping a smooth tone as she reads. Alexis has increased from reading a primer level text at a rate of 45 words per to reading the same level at rate of 86 words per minute. Our recommendation is that Alexis continues to get extra support in reading. She will continue to benefit from the one-to-one instruction we are able to offer. You can support Alexis at home by (1) reading aloud good books to her (consult your local librarian for suggestions), and (2) having Alexis read to you books her tutor sends home this Fall.Thank you for the opportunity to work with Alexis this summer, it has been a pleasure.Sincerely,Candace B. HeffingerGraduate Reading Clinician Tom Gill, Ed. DAssociate ProfessorAppalachian State University ................
................

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

Google Online Preview   Download