Questions:1. Does the Conclusion and Reflections section address the student’s weaknesses?

2. Are there any areas that do not flow or that seem unorganized?

3. Are there any comments that seem biased or harsh?

4. Are the recommendations for future instruction adequate?

Case Study

Name: MGrade: 3Age: 8Dates of testing: September-November, 2010Examiner: Katherine BarroodDate of report: December 17, 2010

A. Introduction

PhilosophyBeing a proficient reader is imperative to becoming a lifelong learner. Developing proficiency in reading is a cumulative task. A child’s learning progresses through developmental stages, with subsequent skills building on previous knowledge. I believe in using a variety of techniques to teach the many skills and strategies that good readers need. Literacy instruction involves teaching multiple strategies to decode words, read fluently and read for meaning. A reading specialist should teach decoding skills and fluency within the context of comprehension-oriented reading instruction. The learning environment should be inviting and child-centered, nurturing and supportive. Every student should feel comfortable enough to take risks.

A child is an individual, each with his or her own maturity and pattern of growth. A reading specialist understands that children learn things differently and that they learn at their own pace. Furthermore, a reading specialist understands the need to teach in different modalities such as auditory, kinesthetic, and visual. Effective literacy instructors take the time to understand each child. The instructor accepts each child for who they are and works to move them forward. The instructor promotes individualized education and is committed to developing instruction which meets the needs of all students.

1

Assessments are used to guide teacher decisions about instruction. Reading assessments should be used to determine a student’s instructional level, specific areas of difficulty and to document growth. The reading specialist should use student assessments as well as evaluations of lesson effectiveness to improve teaching as necessary.

Word recognition difficulties underlie the vast majority of reading problems. I believe that sound literacy instruction includes lots of time for reading both orally and silently, vocabulary instruction, word study, explicit instruction of a variety of decoding strategies, fluency practice, writing and opportunities for listening and speaking. The ultimate goal of a reading specialist is to teach children that proficient readers apply multiple strategies flexibly as needed to make sense of text.

As a reading specialist I anticipate working with students as well as teachers. In addition to offering support to teachers in regards to literacy instruction, I will be assessing and diagnosing students who have reading difficulties. Working with individual or small groups of students, I will use assessments to guide my teaching of a variety of reading strategies. In this occupation I can give children two of life’s greatest gifts, a love of reading and the capability of becoming a lifelong learner.

Overview of Case StudyPresented in this case study is a summary of my time spent with a student who has reading difficulties as reported by his parents and teachers. I worked with him individually over the course of several weeks. I have indicated the assessments that I administered and stated the results of each. I have included an analysis of the various test results followed by recommendations for future instruction.

B. Background Information

My tutee M, is a third grade boy at a suburban public school. He is 8 years old and he is the middle child of three boys. He lives with his mother and father, both of whom work full time. He plays football, basketball and baseball. His father coaches teams for all three of the boys in the family. M likes to read and he sometimes reads before bed at night. He likes to read Horrible Harry, Diary of a Wimpy Kid and fairy tale books. Overall, M is a friendly and cooperative young boy.

For the past few years M has been receiving basic skills instruction in reading. He is reading six months below grade level according to his second grade teacher. When M was tested at the end of second grade, he was deemed borderline for receiving services in third grade. In lieu of receiving basic skills instruction this year in third grade, M was placed in a regular education classroom that has an in-class special needs support teacher. M often works with the support teacher for his reading instruction.

M and I met for ten one-hour sessions in the evening at his home. M’s mom reported that he looked forward to our sessions together. M was attentive, cooperative and maintained a positive attitude for the better part of our sessions. There were occasions, however, when M appeared tired and restless or was easily distracted.

2

I spent the bulk of our time together assessing M in a variety of areas related to his reading ability. I planned activities for M based on the assessments I administered in an effort to improve M’s reading ability. I usually alternated activities and assessments during our one hour session.

C. Tutoring Summary

Reading AttitudesI gave M an interest survey, Tell Me What You Like. He graded 32 topics with a grade of A (really like it), B, C, D and F (can’t stand it). I found out that he likes sports, outdoor activities such as camping and fishing, animals, science fiction, and his family. He’s not too fond of spiders, ghosts, or cooking and he can’t stand sharks.

I interviewed M with the Burke Reading Interview. I discovered that M likes to read and he expressed a desire to read more challenging books. He stated two reading strategies that he usually uses when he comes to a word he doesn’t know. He “taps out” the word, or he skips the unknown word and reads on to see if can figure it out in context. He knows that his friend is a good reader because, “he knows every word in the book.” M mentioned the same two reading strategies whenever he was asked how to help another person who was having difficulty reading. He mentioned that his mother taught him how to read, and that he is a good reader because he, “never gives up.”

I used the knowledge I gained from the interest survey and the reading interview while selecting reading material that I thought would interest M. I also made an effort to turn our learning activities into games so that M would develop a positive attitude toward our sessions together.

Informal Reading AssessmentsI used the Qualitative Reading Inventory-5 to assess M’s oral reading, silent reading and listening capabilities. I administered the QRI-5 over the course of several weeks. I determined M’s independent, instructional and frustration levels in all three reading modes using the QRI-5.

I administered the QRI-5 graded word lists in an effort to determine a starting point for the reading assessments. M tested independent at the Primer Level, instructional at Level 1, and reached frustration at Level 2. M had the following miscues when reading the graded word lists:Father as featherheard as hardbrain as bran

I note that M’s attempts at the words included correct initial and final sounds as well as a close approximation of the medial sounds. As the words got more difficult, M’s attempts at the word did not always include correct initial and final sounds, and the approximations of the medial sounds were incorrect. For example he read the following:

3

Shiny as singPieces as passSuit as shout

Based on the graded word list results, I began with a Level 1 oral reading assessment. I have summarized the results of all the informal reading assessments into three categories as follows:

Oral readingM tested independent at the Pre-Primer 3 Level. He tested instructional at the Primer Level through Level 3. He reached frustration at Level 4.

I administered the PP3 Level twice on separate occasions because the first time I administered the PP3 Level, M exhibited an overall lack of focus during our session. Though he read the first PP3 passage quickly and with only two miscues, he was not able to retell the story or answer the comprehension questions. He noted that the passage rhymed, so he may have been primarily focused on the rhyming words at the end of each line instead of attending to the meaning of the passage. When I re-administered a second PP3 QRI a week later, M read the passage without any miscues, retold the story with great detail and answered all the comprehension questions correctly.

Though M tested instructional at Level 3, I note that he did not self-correct as many of his miscues toward the end of the passage. I have seen a trend in M’s behavior where he seems to give up instead of working it out when the material is at a difficult level, and he has been working for a length of time.

M had a lot of miscues with the Level 4 passage and spent a great deal of time trying to decode the unfamiliar words. He was only able to retell 6 out of 68 ideas and his comprehension was at the frustration level. I conclude that M had difficulty comprehending the Level 4 passage because he focused all of his attention on decoding the words and thus was unable to understand the meaning of the passage.

Silent ReadingBefore beginning his first silent reading assessment M stated that he preferred to read silently and that he usually reads silently in school and at home. M read the Primer Level passage with a reading rate of 124 words per minute. That was the fastest reading rate for him to date.

M tested instructional at the Primer Level through Level 3. He reached frustration at Level 4. As the reading passages became increasingly difficult, M’s reading rate slowed down. Overall, however, his silent reading rate remained faster than his oral reading rate for the same level passage. Thus, M reads faster when he reads silently.

I note that when M was reading the Level 4 passage he used his finger to mark each line as he read it. I hadn’t noticed M using that strategy with easier text. He also had a lot of difficulty coming up with ideas for the retelling. In fact, before beginning his last silent

4

reading passage M expressed a strong dislike for the retelling portion of the assessment. He said that he disliked retelling the passage because he “can’t remember everything in the story.” The retelling may be more difficult for M as the text becomes more difficult. M could be focusing on decoding the words and thus has trouble remembering the content of the text.

ListeningM’s first listening assessment was also his first expository passage. He was quickly and easily able to recall 19 out of 54 ideas in the passage. However, while he answered all the explicit questions easily, he missed three out of four of the implicit questions.

M tested independent at Level 3 and instructional at Level 4. He reached frustration at Level 5.

Reading ComprehensionI primarily used the retelling and comprehension question portions of the QRI-5 to assess M’s comprehension abilities. I note that M had an easier time retelling the passages for which he obtained an independent comprehension score.

I administered the San Diego Quick Assessment. I started M with the preprimary card and stopped him at the Grade 4 card. He read all the words on the preprimary through grade 2 cards. He missed three out of ten words on the grade 3 card. He was able to read two out of ten words on the grade 4 card. These results indicate that M reads independently at the second grade level and reaches frustration at the third grade level.

I assigned an independent reading book, Marvin Redpost Kidnapped at Birth by Louis Sacher. M was asked to read a chapter or two as homework between our sessions. I used the book as a tool to address M’s reading comprehension, retelling and fluency.

Phonemic Awareness and PhonicsI administered the Informal Phonics Inventory. M was attentive and cooperative during the assessment. He scored 74 out of 93 total points. More specifically, M knows most, if not all, consonant sounds, digraphs and initial and final consonant blends. He had a lot of trouble with the short vowels and long vowel digraphs. He had miscues with the following words:Led, sup, hug and rotLoaf and coalGain and aimHeatTown

I administered the Test of Phonemic Awareness. M was able to identify teacher generated rhyming words, but he had difficulty generating a word that rhymes with a teacher prompt. He was able to isolate, identify, categorize, blend, add, and delete phonemes. However, M did have difficulty substituting one phoneme for another to make a new word. I note that both times M was required to generate new words on his

5

own; he experienced difficulty with the task. M also had difficulty segmenting beginning and ending cluster phonemes.

M has not mastered the short vowel sounds yet; and though he did seem familiar with the fact that vowels make two sounds, he didn’t know which sounds were short and which were long. He also had no idea what causes a vowel to change its sound. He vaguely remembered a rule about an ‘e’ at the end of a word, but he couldn’t verbalize what the rule was.

I created a set of short vowel picture-cue cards. I laid out the cue cards at each of our subsequent sessions so we could review each of the short vowel sounds every week. I told M to refer to the cards whenever he was unsure of the short vowel sounds while we worked.

I played rhyming word games with M during our sessions. I asked him to generate rhyming words for my prompt. I also played phoneme substitution games. I was very explicit in my request, “Change the /m/ in ‘melt’ to a /b/ to make a new word.” M was able to substitute phonemes easily for beginning and ending sounds, but had more difficulty substituting medial vowel sounds such as, “Change the /i/ in ‘snip’ to a /a/ to make a new word.” He also had trouble when I asked him to, “Change the /w/ in wept to /sl/ to make a new word.”

SpellingM was given a spelling screening inventory for which he was asked to spell 20 words of increasing difficulty. He wrote the words quickly and without complaint. His results show knowledge of initial and final consonants, digraphs, and blends. He had difficulty with vowels, vowel digraphs and VCV patterns.

Based on the results of the screening inventory, M was given a Letter Name feature spelling test. He scored 17 points on the assessment. Analysis of the words he misspelled reveals that his strengths are initial and final sounds, and his weakness is short vowel sounds.

M was also given a Within Word feature spelling test. He scored 15 points on the assessment. Analysis of his spelling indicates that M’s strength is complex consonants and that he needs further instruction on long vowels, R-controlled vowels and abstract vowels.

I administered the Elementary Spelling Inventory. M spelled 10 out of 25 words correctly. More specifically, M showed a weakness with long vowels. His results show that he is at the Within Word Pattern stage of development.

I obtained a writing sample by asking M to write a retelling of a picture book titled, Pancakes for Breakfast. I analyzed his writing sample with the Qualitative Spelling Checklist. I observed the use of short and long vowels in M’s writing, however, they were often confused. I also observed the use of common consonant digraphs and blends.

6

I did not observe the use of harder consonant digraphs and blends such as speck, switch or smudge. I also did not observe the use of other vowel patterns such as spoil, chewed or serving. I determined that M is at the Within Word stage of spelling development when writing independently.

I used two spelling-based approaches, making words and word sorts, to teach phonics and spelling during my sessions with M. I used the results of M’s spelling tests to guide my selection of words for the words sorts that I prepared each week. I began with comparing short vowel sounds and moved on to comparing short and long vowel sounds. Eventually M was comparing different spelling patterns for one long vowel sound.

Word RecognitionOver the course of our sessions together M was given different sets of 24 words to read and sort. He was asked to sort the words using the spelling patterns and vowel sounds in the words. Word sorts were a new activity for M and he really seemed to enjoy it. Initially M was only able to sort the words by initial and final consonant, and did not have any ideas of how the words might be sorted a different way. Each week after sorting the words we looked for similar spelling patterns in the words. After we sorted and discussed the different spelling patterns, I asked M to write the sort into his notebook.

After working with word sorts for several weeks, M was able to sort words by common beginning letter, common final letter, common vowel and common rhyme. As I zeroed in on M’s difficulties with long and short vowels, I prepared sorts featuring long and short vowel words including three different spelling patterns for the long vowel. Eventually M was able to read and sort words with vowel patterns such as ie, ea and ee He was even able to indicate whether the sound was short or long. I taught M how to use the spelling patterns and pronunciations of the words that he already knew to figure out any unknown words. M was able to read each word on the first try when asked to use the known words to figure out the unknown words.

I noted the following miscues over the course of several weeks during our word sorting activity:mad as mademeet as metbrand as brendcrest as creestwept as wipedGlobe as glubQuote as cutStripe as stripprice as prissyield as yelledcheat as chatchief as chef

7

I assessed M’s sight word knowledge with the Fry Sight-Word Inventory. I administered all three 100 word lists. M read 97% of the first 100 words correctly, 86% of the second 100 words correctly and 84% of the third 100 words correctly. This tells me that he has a broad sight-word vocabulary. I wrote the 25 words that M misread on flash cards, and then put them all on a word ring. I used the flash cards for playing a quick word recognition game each week called, “Three Strikes and You’re Out”. By the end of our tenth session M had mastered all 25 of the words.

Book KnowledgeI administered a Picture Walk assessment in order to evaluate M’s book handling skills, ability to create a coherent story and to determine whether or not he uses comprehension strategies to self-correct. I used Tomie dePaola’s wordless picture book, Pancakes for Breakfast. M handled the book correctly and told a coherent story. He commented on the main idea in the picture on each page as he told the story, but didn’t add specific details. Although M did self-correct his misunderstandings sometimes, at other times he would continue on with his storytelling when I knew through his body language that he realized he had made an error or left out an important part of the story.

I administered the Index of Reading Awareness interview. I read the interview aloud to M and told him that there was no right or wrong answer, that he should be honest with his responses. The results of the interview indicate that M knows it’s important to understand the story he is reading, and that he knows some strategies for retaining information after he has read it. The interview also indicates that M doesn’t understand the difference between the general meaning of a story vs. everything in the story.

FluencyI used an early grade three text, The Magic Finger by Roald Dahl (Guided Reading Level N), for M to read aloud as a fluency assessment. He read at a rate of 78 words per minute. According to the Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) Target Rate Norms, M is reading with the fluency rate of a third to fourth grader.

I also used the NAEP ORF Scale and determined that M is reading between a Level 2 and a Level 3. This means that he is reading in two to four word phrase groups. His word groupings are awkward at times, but occasionally he does have expressive interpretation of the text.

I used a third tool to assess M’s fluency. Using the Multidimensional Fluency Scale, I gave M a score of 2 for Expression and Volume. He has some expression, but his focus remains largely on saying the words. I gave him a score of 2 for Phrasing because his reading is choppy. I gave him a score of 3 for Smoothness because there are occasional breaks in his smoothness. Lastly, I gave him a score of 3 for Pace because his oral reading is a mixture of fast and slow reading.

I did some paired reading with M using his independent reading book in an effort to improve his fluency. As we read the text aloud together, I tried to set the pace and model reading with expression while paying attention to punctuation.

8

WritingI asked M to write a retelling of a picture book titled, Pancakes for Breakfast. I instructed him to include the beginning, middle and end of the story in his retelling. His written retelling included the setting, characters, the goal, the problem and the solution of the story. When I asked M to read his retelling aloud to me, he had difficulty reading some of the words he had just written. There aren’t clear spaces between each word, so the words appear to run into each other making it difficult to read his writing. He also had a lot of spelling mistakes. Some of his spelling errors are as follows:pancacks for pancakesingredens for ingredientsstartidid for startednader for neighborasck for asked

I note that M wrote the correct initial and final sounds in the words he misspelled. I believe he reversed the ‘b’ in nader. The ideas in M’s retelling are sequential, but limited. The retelling does not include any punctuation. Each sentence is connected with the word “and.”

I tried to incorporate more writing into our sessions each week by asking M to record the word sorts into his notebook.

Tests Administered

Reading Attitudes

Title Information gatheredBurke Reading Interview M likes to read and he expressed a desire to

read more challenging books. He stated two reading strategies that he usually uses when he comes to something he doesn’t know. He “taps out” the word, or he skips the unknown word and reads on to see if can figure it out in context. He knows that his friend is a good reader because, “he knows every word in the book.” M mentioned the same two reading strategies whenever he was asked how someone might help another person having difficulty reading. He mentioned that his mother taught him how to read, and that he is a good reader because he, “never gives up.”

Tell Me What You Like! M likes sports, outdoor activities such as camping and fishing, animals, science-

9

fiction and his family. He is not too fond of spiders, ghosts, or cooking and he can’t stand sharks.

QRI-5 Principal Results

Graded Word Lists

Automatic Total Correct LevelPrimer 85% 90% INDOne 75% 75% INSTTwo 55% 55% FR

Oral Reading Passages

Passage Level

Passage Type

Word Recognition

Reading Rate

Retelling Comprehension Overall

PP3 N IND 98cwpm 4/28 FR FRPP3 N IND 104cwpm 16/21 IND INDP N INST 70cwpm 16/30 IND INST1 N INST 49cwpm 8/44 INST INST2 N INST 93cwpm 18/38 IND INST3 N INST 54cwpm 15/55 INST INST4 N INST 44cwpm 6/68 FR FR

Silent Reading Passages

PassageLevel

Passage Type

Reading Rate

Retelling Comprehension Overall

P N 124wpm 14/36 INST INST1 N 94wpm 26/44 INST INST2 N 79wpm 21/52 INST INST3 N 69wpm 15/55 INST INST4 N 66wpm 11/47 FR FR

Listening Passages

PassageLevel

Passage Type Retelling Comprehension Overall

3 E 9/47 IND IND

10

4 N 24/47 INST INST5 E 19/54 FR FR

Phonemic Awareness and Phonics

Assessment ResultsTest of Phonemic Awareness

M was able to identify teacher generated rhyming words, but he had difficulty generating a word that rhymes with a teacher prompt. He is able to isolate, identify, categorize, blend, add, and delete phonemes. However, M did have difficulty substituting one phoneme for another to make a new word. I note that both times M was required to generate new words on his own; he experienced difficulty with the task. M also had difficulty segmenting beginning and ending cluster phonemes.

Informal Phonics Inventory M scored 74 out of 93 total points. More specifically, M knows most, if not all, consonant sounds, digraphs and initial and final consonant blends. He had a lot of trouble with the short vowels and long vowel digraphs.

Spelling

Assessment Score ResultsGanske Screening Inventory 4/20 Letter NameLetter Name Inventory 17/25 End of Letter NameWithin Word Inventory 15/25 Within WordElementary Sp. Inventory 10/25 Within WordQualitative Sp. Checklist Within Word

Word Recognition

Assessment ResultsFry Sight-Word Inventory

First 100 words 97%Second 100 words 86%Third 100 words 84%

San Diego Quick Assessme. Independent- Grade 2Instructional-Frustration- Grade 3

11

Book Knowledge

Picture Walk Assessment With this assessment I was able to evaluate M’s book handling skills, ability to create a coherent story and if he uses comprehension strategies to self-correct. I used Tomie dePaola’s wordless picture book, Pancakes for Breakfast. M handled the book correctly and told a coherent story. He commented on the main idea in the picture on each page as he told the story, but didn’t add more specific details. Although M did self-correct his misunderstandings sometimes, at other times he would continue on with his storytelling when I knew through his body language that he realized he had made an error or left out a part of the story.

Index of Reading Awareness Evaluation 10/10Planning 7/10Regulation 6/10Conditional Knowledge 8/10

Fluency

Assessment Results/ConclusionsORF Target Rate Norms 76 CWPM 3rd to 4th gradeNAEP ORF Scale Between levels 2 and 3 M is reading in two to four

word phrase groups. His word groupings are awkward at times, but occasionally he does have expressive interpretation of the text.

Multidimensional Fluency Scale

Expression and Volume 2- some expressionPhrasing 2- choppySmoothness 3- occasional breaksPace 3- mix of fast & slow

12

D. RecommendationsUpon analysis of all the assessments I have given M and in consideration of my observations during our tutoring sessions, I have been able to determine strengths and weaknesses in a multitude of areas related to M’s reading ability. I have offered an analysis of the test results and have indicated recommendations for future instruction in each area.

Reading AttitudesAfter careful review of the Tell Me What you Like interview, M’s many and varied interests are noted as a strong point. His scores indicate a variety of topics that would be of interest to him making the selection of materials that would interest him an easy process. The fact that M enjoys reading is another strong point.

Upon review of the Burke Reading Interview, I note that M’s responses to questions 3, 5, 6 and 7 orient toward decoding strategies and/or a limited set of reading strategies. I conclude that M needs to build his repertoire of decoding strategies.

Informal Reading AssessmentsM reached frustration on the QRI graded word lists at a Level 2, but didn’t reach frustration with the oral reading passages until Level 4. It appears, then, that M reads words better in context than in isolation.

I compared M’s results on the San Diego Quick Assessment (SDQA) with his QRI graded word list and reading assessment results. In order to provide an accurate comparison, I have organized the results as follows:

Test Independent Instructional FrustrationSDQA Grade 2 Grade 3QRI Word List Primer Grade 1 Grade 2QRI- Oral PP3 Grades P-3 Grade 4QRI- Silent (no text available) Grades P-3 Grade 4 M’s independent level on the QRI word list assessments given in September is very different from the SDQA independent level which was administered in November after eight weeks of tutoring. I administered the QRI word list assessment at our first tutoring session which may have also had an effect on his results. M’s oral and silent reading levels are consistent even though they were administered weeks apart. Based on my own observations of M during our time together I think the SDQA offers an accurate estimate of M’s ability.

I have drawn a few conclusions after comparing M’s oral, silent and listening assessment results from the QRI-5. I note that his oral and silent reading results are consistent with each other overall. He is instructional up to level three and he reaches frustration at level four. I would suggest using a late grade two/early grade three text as his instructional

13

text. On the QRI-5, M was independent at a pre-primer level; however, I would suggest using a grade one text for his independent reading, noting that he may require extra support with comprehension tasks. I suggest a grade one text because M’s the QRI test results were determined primarily by his incorrect responses to the comprehension questions. His word accuracy was not an issue at level 1.

M’s listening levels differ from his oral and silent levels in that he is independent at level 3, instructional at level 4 and reaches frustration at level 5. It appears that M comprehends better when listening to a passage than when he is reading it independently. This indicates that his decoding is affecting his comprehension of the text. It is important to note that M will have difficulty completing work when listening to text at a level of grade five or above.

I have determined two goals that could improve M’s reading. One is to teach him new decoding strategies, such as looking at the spelling patterns in order to decode. Another is using words you know to figure out the words you don’t know. Both of these strategies can be achieved through word sorting activities as well as with making words activities.

The other goal I have is to teach M to read with fluency and expression. As M focuses on reading with fluency and expression, he will begin reading for meaning instead of reading as a way to decode all the words in the text. As M learns to read for meaning, he will be improving his decoding as well as his comprehension. Improving fluency and expression can be achieved by doing paired reading and by doing oral phrasing activities.

Reading ComprehensionI noticed that when M has a faster reading rate, he has an easier time answering comprehension questions. That leads me to conclude that when M is able to decode the words in the passage easily he is able to focus on comprehension.

M has limited strategies for constructing meaning from text. I have ascertained that M would benefit from explicit teaching of a variety of comprehension strategies. He needs to be taught how to use each strategy and when each is most useful.

Upon analysis of M’s comprehension scores on the QRI, I note that he has trouble with both the explicit and implicit questions. Thus, M has difficulty understanding and remembering information stated directly by the author and he has trouble using clues in the text to make inferences.

As indicated by the results of the Index of Reading Awareness interview, M needs some instruction on how to imagine a story in his mind, as well as how to recognize important and unimportant parts of the story. M would benefit from using a graphic organizer to chart the main idea and supporting details.

14

It appears that M is not accustomed to thinking about the text while he is reading. It is my opinion that he is primarily focused on decoding the words and not focused on reading for meaning.

I suggest that M be given ample time to practice using new reading strategies. He should be given opportunities to retell what he read independently and should be given the chance to discuss what he had read with his peers.

Phonemic Awareness and PhonicsBased on M’s reading miscues and my observations while working with M, it is evident that M should work on mastering the long and short vowel sounds. Currently, he is inconsistent with his performance in that at times he reads short vowels with their long sound and vice-versa, and sometimes he confuses the short vowel sounds like when he reads short e as short i.

M’s performance on the Informal Phonics Inventory also indicates a need for instruction which focuses on short and long vowel sounds. Until M has mastered the short vowel sounds, he would benefit from the use of short vowel picture-cue cards. In addition, two activities which are effective in teaching short and long vowels are Word Sorts and the Making Words game.

SpellingI assessed M’s spelling ability with a variety of tools. I used several developmental spelling tests, the Elementary Spelling Inventory and the Qualitative Spelling Checklist. I found M to be at the Within Word stage of spelling. This means that M is spelling words with short vowels correctly a lot of the time, is beginning to notice patterns in words and is making the distinction between long and short vowels. It is clear that M’s immediate needs are instruction on short and long vowel sounds and vowel combinations. It is also obvious that M has a serious need for instruction with VCV pattern words.

M needs to continue to learn word patterns. He should be studying words with similar spelling patterns and he should be given the opportunity to generate his own words with the same spelling patterns. During the time that we worked together, I noticed an increase in M’s analysis of words. I believe the word sorting activity that we did each week helped to develop the habit of analyzing and looking for patterns in words. In fact, when asked to tell me how he sorted a group of words, M named the vowel patterns, e, ie, ea and ee. When asked what vowel sound each pattern had, M was able to indicate whether the sound was short or long. This shows a significant improvement in his ability to analyze words.

Word RecognitionUpon analysis of M’s oral, silent and listening assessments I have noted that decoding and vocabulary are issues for him. It is obvious that M has not internalized the fact that most words that have the same letters also have the same sounds. Though I have noticed that M has become more attentive to letters in words since we began working together, he still hasn’t realized that the new words he encounters are related to words he already

15

knows. I conclude that M needs more instruction on the transfer of his knowledge. One way to promote the transfer of knowledge is to ask M to write down word sorts and then ask him to add new words to the sort.

Book KnowledgeSince M doesn’t understand the difference between the general meaning of a story vs. everything in the story based on his responses to the Index of Reading Awareness, I suggest instruction on how to determine the main idea and supporting details of a passage. Another suggestion is to teach M how to write a summary of what he has read. I think M would benefit from working with graphic organizers to diagram story elements.

FluencyUpon analysis of M’s QRI accuracy and reading rate scores from his oral reading assessments, I found that as the text became more difficult M’s reading rate was slower. For example he read a Pre-Primer 3 passage with a reading rate of 104 CWPM and he read a Level 4 text with a reading rate of 44 CWPM.

I initially thought M needed fluency instruction focused on automaticity because his oral reading is slow and choppy. However, upon analysis of the ORF Norms, it appears that M’s fluency appropriate for a child his age. After careful study of the NAEP Scale and the Multidimensional Fluency Scale, it seems as if what M needs is instruction on how to group words into larger phrases and how to add more expression to his reading. In summary then, M reads grade appropriate text with sufficient accuracy and automaticity, but he needs to improve his prosody.

WritingM couldn’t read his own writing back to me because when he writes there aren’t clear spaces between each word. The words run into each other making his writing difficult to read. In addition, the writing sample I obtained did not include any punctuation. Each sentence was connected with the word “and,” so the lack of punctuation also made the writing difficult to read. As M learns proper word spacing and punctuation he will be able to read his writing with confidence.

E. Conclusion and ReflectionsIt was a pleasure to work with M. He worked hard and kept a positive attitude throughout our sessions. One of M’s greatest strengths is that he enjoys reading. He also responds enthusiastically to instruction when the lesson is turned into a game. However, I have noticed that M has difficulty with unfamiliar games and activities. He shows marked improvement the second time around, so I suggest familiarizing M with a task before judging his true ability.

There are several areas that should be addressed in order for M to improve his reading ability. Most importantly, M needs a lot of instruction and practice with medial vowel sounds. He needs to work on both long and short vowels and vowel combinations. Phonics inventories, phonemic awareness tests, graded word lists, developmental spelling

16

tests and performance tasks have all indicated a glaring deficiency in M’s proficiency with vowel sounds.

M also needs to work on developing a variety of word attack strategies. As indicated by the QRI-5, M reads words better in context. He has a limited set of strategies for figuring out unfamiliar words. Knowing a variety of decoding strategies will enable him to approach unfamiliar words with confidence which will improve his fluency, and will ultimately allow him to focus on comprehension. In fact, I think M’s current focus on decoding the words is making his fluency choppy and is affecting his comprehension of the text. He has a fast reading rate for passages that he scores at the independent level for comprehension. This leads me to believe that when M reads fluently he comprehends more effectively. I believe that M is not accustomed to thinking about what he is reading. One way to get him thinking about what he is reading is to have him make connections with the text. Another way is to provide opportunities for him to talk about his reading with others.

It is important to address the fact that M has trouble with both explicit and implicit comprehension questions. This fact tells us that M has difficulty understanding and remembering information stated directly by the author, and he has trouble using clues in the text to make inferences. I suggest providing a note taking device for M to use while he is reading independently so that he can record his thoughts and important information from the text as he is reading. The note taking device will prove to be a valuable resource as M is completing comprehension tasks.

Struggling readers especially need a variety of reading strategies, and M is no exception. I suggest an individualized education plan that combines spelling pattern instruction along with reading and writing instruction. The reading instruction should incorporate decoding skills and fluency within the context of comprehension. Writing should be used as an opportunity for M to transfer his new knowledge into actual practice.

A final recommendation is to provide more time for practice. Although M comes from a literate home, no one in his family is an avid reader. Though M sometimes reads before bed at night and he likes being read to, he has not made reading before bed a nightly ritual. I feel that M could make significant improvement in reading if he dedicated at least 20 minutes a day to reading appropriate level books at home.

F. ResourcesCunningham, Patricia M. (2009). Phonics They Use. Boston: Pearson.McKenna, Michael C. & Stahl, Katherine A. Dougherty. (2009). Assessment for Reading Instruction. New York: The Guilford Press.Leslie, Lauren & Caldwell, JoAnne Schudt. (2011). Qualitative Reading Inventory-5. Boston: Pearson.Ganske, Kathy. (2000). Word Journeys. New York: The Guilford Press.Sachar, Louis. (1992). Marvin Redpost: Kidnapped at Birth. Random House Books.dePaola, Tomie. ( ). Pancakes for Breakfast.

17

Pinnell, Gay Su and Fountas, Irene C. (1998). Word Matters. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

18