Tara Kivett by K6p19B

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 14

									                                                                Tara Kivett

Case Report___________________________________________________
FOR SUMMER 2010 CLINIC TUTORS: RE 5725

Introduction:

Cassie is a 10 year old girl who will be in 5th grade this upcoming
school year. She was recommended for receiving additional reading
instruction during the summer. As a graduate reading clinician in
Appalachian State University’s Master’s Degree Program in Reading
Education, I conducted these initial assessments on June 23, 24, and
25.



Initial Literacy Assessments
A number of informal, diagnostic literacy assessments were
administered including: an interest inventory and reading attitude
survey, a Spelling Inventory, a Word Recognition in Isolation (WRI)
test, a contextual reading test, a listening comprehension test, a
Sense of Story evaluation, and analysis of oral and written
composition. These assessments were given to determine Cassie’s
independent, instructional, and frustration levels in the areas of
Reading, Writing, Word Study, 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. Cassie’s affect was favorable during the
testing period. She worked diligently at the tasks and seemed focused
at doing her best. When we got to the contextual reading assessment
she seemed less sure of herself and was not as willing to make
mistakes. By the end of the assessments Cassie was ready to move
on to another task.


Reading and Interest Inventory
      The interest inventory consisted of eighteen fill in the blank
questions that I asked Cassie. Her answers allowed me to get to know
her interests for possible books and writing topics. Cassie reported
liking the subject of Math as well as the hobbies of softball and
shopping. She expressed an interest in horses and the beach.
      The Elementary Reading Attitude Survey is a pictorial survey
made up of twenty questions. It provides quantitative estimates of
children’s attitudes toward reading. The child circles her answer using
Garfield who shows different emotions for each question. Cassie’s
responses seem to indicate that she does not like to read for
enjoyment when given free time at home but she seemed to be okay
with reading at school when she is asked to by a teacher. Cassie
needs to read books on her instructional and independent level on
topics that she is interested in to develop a more positive attitude
toward reading.


Spelling
This assessment consists of eight grade leveled word lists, each having
12 words, ranging from 1st to 8th grade that the student is asked to
spell to the best of his or her ability. It allows us to see what
orthographic knowledge the student has and it provides a list of words
containing features (word patterns) typically learned at each grade
level. The highest level at which the student can spell correctly at
least 90% of the words is considered to be the independent level in
spelling and phonics. At this level the student has most likely
automatized spelling to sound correspondences and can use these
words freely in writing without having to “sound them out”. The
highest level at which he or she can spell at least 50% of the words
correctly is considered to the instructional spelling/phonics level. At
this level the student can be guided by a teacher and can
accommodate new words and patterns into their existing knowledge of
how letters work in spelling. The frustration level is when the student
spells fewer than 40% of the words correctly. Errors made at this
level cannot be analyzed for areas of need or possible instruction as
they are making guesses beyond their current orthographic
knowledge.
Here are Cassie’s results:
Level              2nd                3rd and 4th        5th
Score              100%               58%                33%


Cassie was independent at level 2 with a score of 100%. She is
instructional at levels 3rd and 4th with a score of 58% and she made
five errors on both lists. I chose to use 58% as her instructional level
due to her mastery of the 2nd level words. Her frustration level is 5th
where she spelled 33% of the words correctly and made eight errors.
Cassie is a phonetic speller and writes the sounds that she hears in
words. She has a mastery of blends and diagraphs (short, train) and
is using long vowel patterns correctly (scream, queen). She is in need
of instruction in knowing when to double consonants, drop e, or do
nothing when adding inflected endings. This is evident in her spellings
on list 3 and 4. She spelled chasing (chaseing), batter (bater), and
stared (starred). Cassie also made errors in words that contained r-
controlled vowels spelling thirsty (thursty), scurry (scury), and
preparing (prepareing).
Word Recognition in Isolation
This instrument tests the child’s automatic recognition and word attack
of printed words and has ten 20 word lists at levels of preprimer to
eighth grade. The words on each list are flashed to the student for
about ¼ of a second each until they misread a word. Then the word is
opened up, untimed and they try again. The highest level at which a
student can identify 90% of the words on the flashed presentation is
the independent level of word recognition. These sight words if found
in text should be able to be read fluently and without decoding by the
student with no help from the teacher. The highest level where the
student can read 70-89% of the words on a flashed presentation is the
instructional level of word recognition in isolation. When the child’s
recognition falls below 50% it is considered his or her frustration level.
Cassie’s results are charted on the next page:




                         Word Recognition
Level                    Flash                     Untimed
PP2                      100%                      100%
P                        100%                      100%
1-2                      85%                       100%
2nd                      100%                      100%
3rd                      95%                       100%
4th                      60%                       80%
5th                      65%                         75%


Cassie was independent on level 3 in word recognition in isolation
where she scored 95% on the flash presentation and 100% on
untimed. She is instructional on level 4 at which she scored 60% on
flash and 80% on the untimed presentation. Cassie had similar results
at her frustration level 5 with 65% on flash and 75% on untimed.
Cassie read the words on lists preprimer through level 3 mostly with
ease. I chose level 5 as the frustration because when given the
untimed presentation she scored 5 % lower than at the untimed
portion on level 4. When Cassie got to level 5 she made guesses that
didn’t include appropriate vowel sounds and in some cases real words
as she had been guessing on other levels. For example instead of
saying frontier, Cassie guessed “forest” and “farnister” and “server” for
surrender. She made up the words “circumstack” for circumstance
and “ramchanging” for rampaging. Cassie’s spelling performance
predicted she would be reading at levels 3 and 4 instructionally and
Cassie’s instructional word recognition in isolation correlated with
these results as she was instructional at level 4.
Contextual Reading
Cassie read passages at increasing grade levels of difficulty both orally
and silently. This was used to assess her ability to read words in the
context of a passage. The independent reading level is where he or
she can read with at least 98% accuracy, good fluency (rate and
prosody), and score at least 90% on comprehension. At the
instructional level, the student is expected to read with at least 95%
accuracy, acceptable fluency, and 70% comprehension. The student’s
frustration level is when he or she can not recognize at least 90% of
the words of the words accurately, reads disfluently, and answers less
than 50% of the comprehension questions correctly.
Cassie’s results are charted below:
                   Oral Reading                           Silent Reading
Level   Accuracy    Prosody   Rate   Comprehension   Rate     Comprehension
                              in                     in
                              wpm                    wpm

1-2     96%         3         107    100%
2       93%         3         120    80%             149      100%
3       89%         2         103    83%             135      15%
4       89%         2         107    32%
I started the test at level 3, form A because Cassie scored 95% on the
flashed presentation in word recognition in isolation. At this level
Cassie read with 89% word accuracy, acceptable speed and 83%
comprehension. These numbers indicate that this is Cassie’s
frustration level but her speed was pretty good at this level and she
made 16 errors. However, of those errors she inserted 4 words in one
spot and she self corrected four errors. I was curious to see how she
would do at level 4 which was also her instructional level in word
recognition in isolation so I had her read this passage. Her scores
were very similar to the level 3 passage with 89% accuracy, 107
words per minute but this time her comprehension fell to 32%. Given
this data 3rd and 4th grade levels are frustrational for Cassie. This did
not match up with her results from the Spelling inventory and word
recognition in context as I had expected. Cassie scored 93%
accuracy, very fluent reading, 120 words per minute, and 80%
comprehension on level 2. I chose this as Cassie’s instructional level
because comprehension was still good and she read fluently. Out of
the eight errors that she made only two were meaning change errors.
Cassie’s independent reading level appears to be level 1-2 where she
read with 96% accuracy, very fluently, 107 words per minute, and
100% accuracy. Cassie did make four errors on this passage but she
self corrected three of them and only one affected the meaning of the
passage. Cassie seems to know a lot of words and how letters work in
words but she is less confident in reading them when in a passage.
She seemed to read the words that she thought were going to be in
the passage rather than concentrate solely on what the words were.
For example, she read “Thud was the sound (supposed to be noise) I
hear, and then I saw my pup laying (supposed to be lying) in the
street” on the level 2 passage. At level 2 in silent reading, Cassie
scored 100% on comprehension and 149 words per minute. Her
scores at level 3 were 15% comprehension and 135 words per minute.
Her independent silent reading level seems to be 2nd grade which is
not far off from the oral reading in context results. These results also
indicate that comprehension is a weakness in silent reading as well.
Cassie’s difficulties, therefore, seem to be in attending to the words on
the page and slowing her reading pace to attend to comprehension.
She needs much practice in reading at levels where she can trust her
ability to depend on her sight vocabulary and her knowledge of how
letters work in words at level 2.


Listening Comprehension
For this assessment I read Cassie passages beginning at her grade
level 5 to assess her comprehension when she does not have to attend
to word recognition on her own. After listening to the 5th grade level,
Cassie scored only 15% on comprehension. When I read her the 4th
grade level material she scored 85% which is her instructional listening
level. This result was higher than Cassie’s oral reading in context for
comprehension but still lower than expected for her grade level. It
seems that Cassie’s difficulties in comprehension are due to her lack of
attention to words in passages as well as concepts and language used
in stories at her current grade level.


Sense of Story
This can be assessed by asking a child to retell a story that has been
read to him/her. In their retelling it is noted if they include story
elements, organization of ideas, and sentence structure. I first read
Cassie the story of “Goldilocks and the Three Bears.” Afterwards I had
her retell it to me. She included 6 of 8 story elements (setting,
characters, sequenced events, descriptions, conversation, and an
ending). Using a scale of a to e with e being the most complete
information give, Cassie achieved a score of C using chronological
sequence linked by the words and then. In sentence syntax, Cassie
got a score of C which means that she used complete sentences. The
highest that she could have gotten was E which would have meant she
used the book language from the story throughout her retelling.
When I had Cassie listen to another story called “Poor Old Dog”, one
that she had never heard, she gave me a retelling that warranted the
same scores that she received on her first retelling. This retelling was
shorter but included the same elements and still lacked feeling of
characters and book language for transitions in the story. Cassie can
retell a familiar or unfamiliar story with many details yet leaves out
feelings of the characters and did not add any emotion into the story
such as when the bears discover their things have been tampered with
after arriving home. Also, she tends to link her ideas with words like
“and” and “then”. I later found that this was similar to the way that
she writes in connecting ideas.


Writing
To assess Cassie’s ability to compose a story I had her first tell me a
story orally that I transcribed and then asked her to write the same
story down without listening to it. The reason for this assessment is to
see how free the child is to get his or her thoughts down on the paper
as compared to how freely they communicate their ideas orally.
Through their oral and written compositions I can monitor story
elements that are included as well as sentence structure and spelling.
I had Cassie tell me a story of a time that she was happy after I
shared my own story. When telling me her story, she included 5 out
of 8 story elements (setting, characters, sequence, description, and an
ending. When she wrote her composition down she also included the
same 5 out of 8 elements. She left out a beginning, feelings, and
conversation. Feelings is an element that Cassie did not include in
either of her retellings so this makes me think that she needs
assistance in using this to get her message across in her writing.
When she told her story she again used “and then” in her composition
so she scored a C in organization for chronological sequence and
syntax. However, in her written piece she got a score of D, using
introductory, closing, and connecting words and phrases. She included
phrases like “but when”, “a week later”, and “you could tell”.
Although her phrasing was better she seemed to not be sure of where
to end a thought and often put periods in the middle of a sentence. It
seems that Cassie needs help organizing her ideas into coherent
thoughts and varied sentence structures to make it more interesting to
readers. While Cassie included some details, they were not developed
and work in this area is also needed.


Instructional Plans and Progress
Plans 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
Cassie Sain’s progress and needs.


Reading
I selected text on Cassie’s instructional level of 2. I conducted
Directed Reading Thinking Activities (DRTA) with materials on her
instructional level. Throughout the reading I stopped at points of
anticipation to have her predict and recall information from the text
with questioning such as “What do you think will happen next?” and
“What did you read that makes you think that?” Cassie has read one
level 2 book and two level 3 books. After Cassie read a level 2 book I
realized that Cassie could probably read a level 3 book based on her
word recognition and fluency. She was able to make predictions and
give reasons to support them. I moved her to level 3 books because
of this for DRTAs. While this material was more challenging, Cassie
read fluent enough to maintain comprehension and was able to make
reasonable predictions. Fluency is a concern for Cassie 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 recorded this so she could see her progress, and
she and I rated her prosody on a range of 1 (choppy), 2 (somewhat
fluent), and 3 (very fluid and smooth). The books that Cassie read
were Seabiscuit, How Not to Babysit Your Brother, and Shoeshine Girl
(chapter book). Cassie needs to continue to read books on her
instructional level of 3rd grade and practice fluency for 40% of the time
allotted for literacy instruction.
Writing
I asked Cassie to dictate and write personal narratives and
compositions in areas of interest with an emphasis on organization and
revising successive drafts. We worked on five pieces with successive
drafts. Cassie told me her story orally and then she wrote her story
down. On the next day we discussed details that she could add to the
piece and revised it. She included more details as we progressed in
her own writing, often finding the places on her own and using
complete sentences when she edited. Cassie still had trouble
organizing her ideas so we focused on this in her last two pieces. We
worked on punctuation in two pieces and Cassie became more mindful
of this in her next piece. Cassie needs to continue writing for 30% of
the time allotted for Literacy instruction during the day, focusing on
organization and stretching out moments by zooming in on one
focused event and adding many details about it so that the reader can
picture it in their mind.


Word Study
Each tutoring session, I had Cassie sort words by the spelling and
sound patterns that her word recognition and spelling assessments
had shown her to be confusing. Cassie has been working on four sorts
during our sessions. These are the sorts in the order that they were
introduced:
short a           long a                   ?
flat               chase            what
back               space            have
that               flame            want
trap               shake            saw
                                    was
1st syallable long vowel    1st syllable short vowel           ?
bridle                   juggle                           circle
noble                    cattle                           tickle
fable                    middle
maple                    settle
beagle



Double            E drop              Nothing
setting           hiking               reading
cutting           moving               floating
stopping          living        spelling
begging           coming               adding
grinning          having               feeling
jogging           taking               talking

short e           long e              er                           ?
check       sheep       serve         curve
shed              keep                nerve       nurse
dress       bleed       herd
pledge            sleet               germ
spell             peek                clerk
mend

Cassie was very thoughtful during this time and enjoyed sorting the
words. She often corrected herself if she made mistakes by reading
down each column to hear the pattern. Cassie had a harder time with
the last e sort and seemed to still be confusing r controlled vowels. I
timed her on several occasions to check her speed as she progressed
through not only learning a sort but also automatizing the pattern. I
also conducted oral spell checks to make sure she was retaining and
applying the patterns we had studied. I called out a word, she spelled
it without looking at the word, and pointed to the column that it fit
into. Cassie needs continued work in her r controlled vowel patterns
and needs to be working on word sorts for 20% of the time allotted for
literacy block.
Being Read To
I read to Cassie from texts that were above her reading level and
contained rich language and compelling content. Similar to guided
reading, I stopped at points of anticipation to have her predict and
recall information from the text. I read Cassie the following texts:
Rumplestiltskin, Coolies, Milo and the Mysterious Island, and The
White Cat. When I asked Cassie for predictions she provided rational
predictions about what might happen next and increased her ability to
use the text for support after the first two stories. I also asked her to
retell these stories in her own words, while looking at the pictures to
exercise her sense of book language. Cassie needs to continue to be
read to from rich language stories for 10% of the time allotted for
literacy book and make predictions as the story is being read to her,
as well as retell the story.


It is recommended that Cassie continue to receive extra help in
reading. She has expressed that she likes reading now and is
eager to do word sorts. Her confidence seems to be developing
as a reader. I have enjoyed working with her. 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.




Tara Kivett
ASU Graduate Reading Clinician


Tom Gill, EdD
ASU Associate Professor

								
To top