Special Educator Program

Academic Field Experience

SpEd 609 Spring 2008

Work Sample #1

Submitted by:

R S

Phone Number: (541) xxx-xxxx E-mail: studentX@wou.edu

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.2

Identifying Information: Student: J.U. Age: 11 years, 2 months Grade: 5 School: Somewhere Mentor Teacher(s): B Teacher WOU Supervisor: Bob Brownbridge

Student Background Information:

J.U. is a 5th grade student at Somewhere. At the first assessment meeting he was quiet and emotionally withdrawn. He has a love of sports, animals, and science. J enjoys working with his dad on school holidays and vacations. He is polite and even when given material that is too difficult he tries his hardest. He told the examiner that he doesn’t like to be a ‘quitter’.

J. has a vision problem. He is legally blind in one eye and he is supposed to wear a contact lens but the financial status of the family has prevented the purchase of the lens. Currently family life is very unstable for J and he is emotionally very fragile. He struggles academically in all subjects and his behaviors indicated a risk of ADD, especially in the school setting.

J. qualified as needing special education services in reading, math, written expression, study skills, and speech/language during the final quarter of 4th grade with a specific learning disability in the areas of written expression and basic reading skills. A full educational assessment was done in 2007. His intellectual assessment as measured by the WISC-IV showed a low-average FSIQ (85) with even subtests. His academic achievement as measured by the WIAT-2 (100 is the mean score) was 80 in reading, 88 in math, and 65 in written language. The subtests in word reading (76) and Pseudoword decoding (77) were both in the borderline area.

His oral reading fluency as measured by DIBELS (Dynamic Indicator of Early Literacy Skills) is:

Date Correct Words per Minute (cwpm)

9/2006 29 cwpm

9/2007 42 cwpm

12/2006 43 cwpm

12/2007 44 cwpm

1/2007 53 cwpm

1/2008 38 cwpm

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.3

Pre-test/Baseline & Post-test Results

Assessment(s) Administered & Rationale for Use

The following assessments were administered.

Test/Subtest/Skill Description Rationale for Use Pre-test (√)

Post-test (√)

Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory/ San Diego Quick Assessment

The San Diego Quick Assessment is a word list assessment that gives a quick method for determining a student’s independent, instructional, and frustration reading levels.

This assessment was used to determine a starting point for the rest of the Ekwall-Shanker Reading Inventory. √ √

Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory/ Passage Reading (Test 2)

The Ekwall-Shanker passage oral and silent reading tests are a series of graded reading passages each with a set of comprehension questions (fact, vocabulary, and inferential). The test gives the examiner a more in-depth picture of the students reading strengths and weaknesses as well as their independent, instructional, and frustration reading levels for both silent and oral reading. There is also a protocol for determining the student’s listening comprehension and thus determine if the student can comprehend the oral instruction in their classroom.

This assessment was the backbone to all of the reading assessments done. It gives a very accurate determination of the student’s reading current reading level. It also gives information regarding their comprehension, vocabulary skills, and their ability to infer meaning from a passage. √ √

Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory/ Quick Check for Basic Sight Words (Test 4a)

Test 4a, Quick Check for Basic Sight Words, is an approximately 2 minute quick assessment of a student’s knowledge of 36 common sight words. This assessment is designed as a screening tool to see if more in-depth sight word and phrases assessments need to be done.

During J.’s passage reading in Test 2, the examiner noticed that some of the decoding errors were on basic sight words. This test was done to see if there was a significant deficiency in J.’s knowledge of basic sight words.

√

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.4

Test/Subtest/Skill Description Rationale for Use Pre-test (√)

Post-test (√)

Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory / Basic Sight Words (Test 4b)

The Ekwall-Shanker test of basic sight words is a flash card administered test where 220 common sight words are shown to the student in a very quick fashion (1/2 – 1 second per card) and they need to respond instantly to the word.

J. did not demonstrate mastery on test 4a, the quick check of basic sight words so this more in-depth assessment was done. √

Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory / Basic Sight Phrases (Test 4c)

The Ekwall-Shanker test of basic sight phrases is a flash card administered test where 143 common sight phrases are shown to the student in a very quick fashion (1/2 – 1 second per card) and they need to respond instantly.

J. did show mastery on Test 4b so this test was done to see if it is when the sight words are in phrases that he has trouble automatically recognizing the word. √

SRA Corrective Reading/Comprehension Skills/Comprehension Placement Test

SRA’s Corrective Reading Comprehension Placement Test is a tool to determine proper placement in the program. It is a two-part test, the first given orally and the second part is a written part. Performance on this test determines if the student should begin in levels A, B1, B2, or C.

The Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory showed that J. has weaknesses in all areas of reading. However, J. is receiving reading intervention from other specialists on decoding. This intervention is going to focus on comprehension, fluency, and vocabulary. Thus, the placement test was administered to see where J. should start in the Corrective Reading/Comprehension Skills program.

√ √

The Six-Minute Solution: A Reading Fluency Program/Passage Reading Assessment

The Six-Minute solution program has developed a passage reading assessment tool to use with their program. This tool is a series of graded reading passages. The student reads the passage for 1 minute. The number of words read and the number of errors made are recorded. From this numbers, a corrected words per minute (cwpm) rate is calculated.

√ √

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.5

Student Pre-test & Post-test Behavior & Performance

Test/Subtest/Skill Pre-test Behavior Pre-test Score

Strengths/ Weaknesses/ Patterns Post-test Behavior

Post-test Score

Strengths/ Weaknesses/ Patterns

Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory / San Diego Quick Assessment

J. was interested in doing the test well since he had been promised a science activity at the completion of the days testing. He was cooperative and tried his best.

Indep. 2

Instr.

N/A

Frus.

3

Strengths: • He could read the PP

and P early sight words fluently

• His attitude – he didn’t give up until he was told to stop.

Weaknesses: • Given that J. is a 5th

grader, he shows a severe deficiency in reading words in lists.

Patterns: • In the first part of the

test he was making errors with the vowel ‘o’.

• Later errors were all word substitutions – he did not try to decode but replaced the correct word with a similar looking word.

J. was emotionally at the best he had been in the last few days. This should be a fairly accurate accounting of his current reading level.

Indep. 2

Instr.

3

Frus. 4

Strengths: • J. was able to read the

first grade words fluently and all but one 2nd grade word.

• His confidence has improved and he really worked at sounding the words out.

Weaknesses: • Still has difficulty with

multi-syllabic words at the 3rd grade level and higher.

Patterns: • Multi-syllabic words

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.6

Test/Subtest/Skill Pre-test Behavior Pre-test Score

Strengths/ Weaknesses/ Patterns Post-test Behavior

Post-test Score

Strengths/ Weaknesses/ Patterns

Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory / Passage Reading (Test 2) – Oral Reading Results

J. tried very hard during the passage reading. He was very cooperative and even when given a 4th grade passage that was too difficult, he tried it because he didn’t want to be a quitter.

Oral:

Indep.

N/A

Instr.

2

Frus.

3

Strengths: • His attitude. Weaknesses: • Decoding Patterns: • At his independent and

instructional reading levels, his errors in decoding and comprehension were balanced.

J. was very comfortable with the examiner after spending the last 9 weeks together. He was more relaxed than during the pre-test. However, he is under severe emotional stress and we needed to limit how much testing was done in a single day.

Oral:

Indep.

1

Instr.

3

Frus. 4

Strengths: • Comprehension Weaknesses: • Decoding multisyllabic

words Patterns: • At his instructional and

frustration levels his comprehension was better than his decoding.

Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory / Passage Reading (Test 2) – Silent Reading Results

J. was observed using sub vocalizations while reading the silent reading passages. He also used his fingers to following what he was reading.

Silent:

Indep.

1

Instr.

2-3

Frus.

4

Strengths: • His attitude. Weaknesses: • Sub vocalizations during

reading • Decoding the harder

passages Patterns: • Because the examiner

could hear the sub vocalizations, the many decoding errors at the 3rd grade level were noticed. Thus, while he was able to answer many of the comprehension questions at the 3rd grade level to receive an instructional rating; it appeared that he was using logic rather than knowledge gained from the passage to answer many of the questions.

J. was very comfortable with the examiner after spending the last 9 weeks together. J was under severe emotional stress and we needed to spread the testing over 3 days.

It is very difficult to obtain accurate silent reading data since it is not possible to tell if he is indeed reading the passage silently or just skimming the material – especially in J.’s emotional state.

Silent:

Indep.

2

Instr.

N/A

Frus. 3

Strengths: • His attitude. Weaknesses: • Recalling material that is

unfamiliar to him • Making inferences Patterns:

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.7

Test/Subtest/Skill Pre-test Behavior Pre-test Score

Strengths/ Weaknesses/ Patterns Post-test Behavior

Post-test Score

Strengths/ Weaknesses/ Patterns

Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory / Passage Reading (Test 2) – Listening Comprehension

J. really enjoyed this test since he didn’t have to do the reading!

Listen:

2

Weaknesses: • The listening

comprehension score is troubling since this means he doesn’t comprehend most of what is said in his 5th grade classroom.

Patterns: • J. tended to use prior

knowledge rather than facts/details in the passage to answer the questions.

This test was conducted right on the last day of testing. J. was not very interested in completing the test but seem to try his best.

Listen: 2

Strengths: • J. did a good job

answering the questions. He used information from the passage and not just prior knowledge.

Weaknesses: • Remembering small

details. • Making inferences Patterns: • J. remembers the big

picture but if 2 sub-topics are introduced in the same passage, he has a difficult time remembering both.

Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory / Quick Check for Basic Sight Words (Test 4a)

J. readily participated in this test. It was very short and the last one of the day.

29/36 Strengths: • Pretty good command

of many of the basic sight words.

Weaknesses: • Did not exhibit

mastery (36/36) Patterns: • none

N/A

Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory / Basic Sight Words (Test 4b)

J. enjoyed this test since he could pretend he was a D.J. as he spoke into the microphone. He also liked to see if he could answer quicker than the examiner could flip the cards.

207/220 Strengths: • Did reach mastery

(200/220). Weaknesses: • Still missing some very

common words. Patterns: • none

N/A

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.8

Test/Subtest/Skill Pre-test Behavior Pre-test Score

Strengths/ Weaknesses/ Patterns Post-test Behavior

Post-test Score

Strengths/ Weaknesses/ Patterns

Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory / Basic Sight Phrases (Test 4c)

J. was cooperative and again enjoyed speaking into the tape recorder. However, when holding the recorder he must have hit the stop button. We didn’t discover this until the end of the test. He was too defeated that the test couldn’t be repeated. However, he only missed 3-4 phrases so he did hit mastery.

Mastery – testing glitch so exact score is not available.

Strengths: • Very good at reading

phrases Weaknesses: • none Patterns: none

N/A

SRA Corrective Reading/Comprehension Skills/Comprehension Placement Test

J. was cooperative but seemed truly puzzled at the questions on this test. He really wasn’t comprehended what was being asked. He would try to answer from his prior knowledge.

Errors

21

Strengths: • Willingness to try Weaknesses: • This test showed that

this is an area of extreme weakness for J.

• Scored very low – recommended starting point is Level A.

Patterns: • He really wanted to

answer every question. Even when it was apparent that he didn’t understand what was being said, he would .just give an answer he thought was reasonable.

J. was comfortable with the material and relaxed during the test.

Errors 13

Strengths: • Starting to use logic

correctly when answering questions.

Weaknesses: • Difficulty with

analogies • Difficulty with

remembering sentences presented orally.

• Difficulty with deductions

Patterns: Deductions are very difficult for J. He has trouble remembering the rule and then how to apply the rule.

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.9

Test/Subtest/Skill Pre-test Behavior Pre-test Score

Strengths/ Weaknesses/ Patterns Post-test Behavior

Post-test Score

Strengths/ Weaknesses/ Patterns

The Six-Minute Solution: A Reading Fluency Program/Passage Reading Assessment

J. is in another fluency program at school: Reading Naturally. He was very familiar with 1 min. timed readings and participated willingly.

Level 1 68 cwpm

Level 2

59 cwpm

Strengths: • His Level 1 score (1st

grade) is above the 50% for Spring 1st grade.

• His Level 2 score (2nd grade) is near the 25% of Spring 2nd grade.

Weaknesses: • Since J. is a 5th grader,

his fluency is low even when measured at his instructional reading level of 2nd grade.

Patterns: none

J. was not at his best. He came in tired and emotionally drained. He seemed to try his best but given his current family problems, it may not be possible to get an accurate fluency reading before the end of the school year.

Level 2 55 cwpm

Strengths: • J.’s attitude. Weaknesses: • This is an overall low

score for J. Patterns: Unknown words slow down J. He seems to read slower even after being told how to pronounce the troubling word.

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.10 WS-1 p.10

Intervention Plan Based on the assessment findings outlined above and input from the writer’s mentor teacher, the following intervention plan was implemented.

Based on the results of the Ekwall-Shanker Reading Inventory and the SRA Corrective Reading Comprehension Placement Test, J. will receive intervention in reading and listening comprehension. The SRA Corrective Reading/Comprehension Skills program, level B1 was used for J. J.’s placement test placed him at level A, however, in consultation with Becky Mitchell it was decided that with the support J. would receive with one-on-one instruction he would be able to do level B1 and thus hopefully make larger gains. A strong emphasis was placed on listening comprehension since J. will advance to middle school next year and needs to have stronger listening comprehension skills in order to survive the lecture style teacher that dominates the middle school classrooms.

Based on the results of the Ekwall-Shanker Reading Inventory, J. received intervention in vocabulary. The SRA Corrective Reading/Comprehension Skills program, level B1 was used for J. as it contained intervention in vocabulary along with reading and listening comprehension.

Based on the results of the results of Ekwall-Shanker Reading Inventory, specifically the timed reading rates (slow) for the silent reading passages, and the results of the The Six-Minute Solution: A Reading Fluency Program/Passage Reading Assessment (Sopris West), J. received intervention in fluency. Instruction used the Six-Minute Solution program, Primary level. It is a direct instruction style intervention package designed to increase a student’s reading through repeated passage reading. One passage was read each week with one minute timings taken every day. The daily timings were recorded and graphed as a way to monitor progress. The passages were graded and J. will start with the 2nd grade passages. The goal rate for J. for the 2nd grade passages was 90 cwpm. If J. had reached 90% on his first cold readings on Monday’s for 2 consecutive weeks, he would have moved up to the 3rd grade passages.

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.11 WS-1 p.11

Long-term Goal #1 with

Short-term Objectives

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.12 WS-1 p.12

Long-term Goal # 1 and Short-term Objectives

Number Goal

LG1 Given a 4th grade passage, J. will listen to the passage and then answer 8 comprehension questions with at least 70% accuracy in 2 of 3 consecutive trials.

Number

SO1.1 Given a 3rd grade passage, J. will listen to the passage and then answer 8 comprehension questions with at least 70% accuracy in 2 of 3 consecutive trials.

SO1.2 Given a 3rd grade passage, J. will listen to the passage and then answer 8 comprehension questions with at least 90% accuracy in 2 of 3 consecutive trials.

Related IEP Goal(s) and Objective(s)

Number Related IEP Goal (IG) & Objective (IO)

IG1.1 By January 2009, J. will improve receptive and expressive language in the areas of listening comprehension and verbal reasoning.

IO1.1 J. will listen and respond to questions about a passage or material presented verbally for the main idea, details, and message content.

Related Oregon Content Standard(s) & Benchmarks

Number Related Oregon Content Standard & Benchmark

CS1.1 EL.03.SL.07 Retell in own words and explain what has been said by a speaker. CS1.2 EL.03.SL.08 Connect and relate prior experiences, insights, and ideas to those of

a speaker (e.g., through mapping, graphic organization)

Instructional/Remedial Methods and Materials

Remedial Instruction Methods The SRA Corrective Reading, Comprehension Skills program was used to address J.’s listening comprehension. The program is a direct instruction program that uses carefully designed sequential instruction to improve the areas of reasoning, information classification, vocabulary, sentence structure, basic comprehension skills, and writing. Each lesson took approximately 40 minutes and one lesson was done each day. Integrated into the program were a formative evaluations as well as midterm and final evaluation.

A typical lesson followed a format of:

(a) Oral group work using model/lead/test for each item. Mastery was expected and any item not mastered was re-taught immediately.

(b) Workbook exercises covering the same material. The first of these were done as guided practice and as J. became comfortable and exhibited mastery, he moved on to independent practice.

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.13 WS-1 p.13

Materials SRA Corrective Reading, Comprehension B1 Teacher’s guide, student workbook, and Teacher’s Presentation Book.

McCall-Crabbs Standard Test Lessons in Reading Books A and B. These graded passages were used for periodic listening comprehension tests.

Reinforcement/Fading Reinforcement was critical for J. due to his lack of confidence and fragile emotional state. Verbal praise for effort was used extensively. In addition, he was on a sticker reward system for all of his pull-out classes where he was eligible to turn in a full sticker sheet for a prize. For his work with me, I set up a science reward system. For each day that he worked his best, we spent the last 10 minutes doing a science experiment. This was very motivating for J. and made him eager to come to our sessions. I didn’t fade the reinforcement with J. this quarter. He needed all the encouragement he could get. Pictured below is the solar model of a Ferris wheel he built. This was a highlight for J. and one that he was able to share with other students at the school. (Picture used with permission from J.’s father.)

Prompting Strategy/Fading Normal Direct Instruction prompting was used. These were very teacher directed lessons and the scripts had full teacher prompting built in.

Error Correction Normal Direct Instruction error correction was used. Error correction was included in the teacher scripts.

Setting/Place, Time

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.14 WS-1 p.14

Instruction took place in the LRC from 12:15 to 12:45 each day. At the beginning, 12:45 – 1:00 was reserved for science activities. However, by the end of the term, J. was with me until 1:30 – 1:40 working on science and other activities.

Description of Data Gathering Procedures

Formative Assessment Daily data was collected in this program with points awarded for both oral and written work. Every 5 lessons there was a mastery test. The results of these mastery tests were tracked. In addition, 1-2 weeks a week a listening comprehension test was administered and the results tabulated and graphed.

Schedule of Recording Data was recorded daily, every 5-10 days, and every 1-2 weeks.

Decision Rules & Patterns/Trends: For the daily data, the ideal trend was a line with zero slope – always 95 – 100% correct. The mastery tests were also expected to be 90-100% correct. If a mastery test or individual lesson fell below 80%, then that material was re-taught.

The listening comprehension test results were expected to be continually improving. I was monitoring for 70% and 90% accuracy rate that would signify meeting each objective.

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.15 WS-1 p.15

Results of Intervention

Data-based Analysis of Intervention(s)

Data Charts & Graphs

J.’s progress in the SRA Corrective Reading, Comprehension Skills program is shown below. The first 5 lessons in the program did not have any independent practice as they were focused on teaching the student how to do each type of problem. The results given below for lessons 6-9 show that J. was mastering the material as it was taught. Lesson 9 results were from a tough emotional day for J. His scores rebounded in Lesson 10 and since the material is very repetitive, his low scores for just one lesson were not a large concern.

J. also took two mastery tests for this program, one based on lessons 1-5 and the second on lessons 6-10. He scored 88% on the first test and 100% on the second.

Periodic assessments using the McCall-Crabbs Standard Test Lessons in Reading Books A and B were also done to obtain formative data on J.’s listening comprehension. Book A contained a set of 2nd grade level reading passages each with 8 comprehension questions. Book B was at the 3rd grade level. J.’s scores are shown below.

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.16 WS-1 p.16

Analysis and Evaluation of Instructional Intervention:

J. made excellent progress in his listening comprehension through the Corrective Reading program. He was mastering the material and his recall even after missing days due to family problems or field trips; he still was able to retain the material taught and demonstrate it on mastery tests. This intervention is very effective for J. and should be continued next year. The results from the McCall-Cabbe listening comprehension probes are more scattered. However, these passages really varied in the topics and on the focus in each passage. If the passage was on a topic for which J. had no prior knowledge, such as churches in border towns in Mexico, J. struggled. The vocabulary introduced as well as trying to understand information for which he did not have the necessary foundation knowledge was very difficult. In addition, if the passage was really on 2 closely related topics, J. struggled to keep the facts separate between the 2 topics. This was clear when the passage was on 2 different dogs. He mixed up facts about each of the dogs. This gives an important clue with respect to J’s learning style. He needs information present in singular chunks with related material separated. The data from these probes need to be used with caution since they probably do not reflect J.’s full listening comprehension capability.

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.17 WS-1 p.17

Long-term Goal #2 with

Short-term Objectives

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.18 WS-1 p.18

Long-term Goal # 2 and Short-term Objectives

Number Goal

LG2 Given a vocabulary list of 40 words taken from his comprehension skills workbook in lessons 1-40 inclusive, J. will read the words with 95% accuracy and then orally define each word with at least 90% accuracy in 2 of 3 consecutive trials.

Number Objective

SO2.1 Given a vocabulary list of 10 words taken from his comprehension skills workbook in lessons 1-10 inclusive, J. will read the words with 95% accuracy and then orally define each word with at least 90% accuracy in 2 of 3 consecutive trials.

SO2.2 Given a vocabulary list of 20 words taken from his comprehension skills workbook in lessons 1-20 inclusive, J. will read the words with 95% accuracy and then orally define each word with at least 90% accuracy in 2 of 3 consecutive trials.

SO2.3 Given a vocabulary list of 30 words taken from his comprehension skills workbook in lessons 1-30 inclusive, J. will read the words with 95% accuracy and then orally define each word with at least 90% accuracy in 2 of 3 consecutive trials.

Related IEP Goal(s) and Objective(s)

Number Related IEP Goal (IG) & Objective (IO)

IG2.1 By February 2009, with instruction and practice, J. will increase reading accuracy, fluency, and comprehension as measured by oral reading fluency (e.g., DIBELS), MAP (Measure of Academic Progress), Oregon State Assessments, running records, and/or probes.

IO2.1 J. will answer comprehension questions based on passage read that involve main idea, details, vocabulary meaning, sequence and inference.

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.19 WS-1 p.19

Related Oregon Content Standard(s) & Benchmarks

Number Related Oregon Content Standard & Benchmark

CS2.1 EL.04.RE.09 Understand, learn, and use new vocabulary that is introduced and taught directly through informational text, literary text, and instruction across the subject areas.

CS2.2 EL.04.RE.10 Develop vocabulary by listening to and discussing both familiar and conceptually challenging selections read aloud across the curriculum.

Instructional/Remedial Methods and Materials

Remedial Instruction Methods The SRA Corrective Reading, Comprehension Skills program was used to improve J.’s vocabulary. The program is a direct instruction program that uses carefully designed sequential instruction to improve the areas of reasoning, information classification, vocabulary, sentence structure, basic comprehension skills, and writing. Each lesson takes approximately 40 minutes and one lesson was done each day. Integrated into the program was formative evaluation as well as midterm and final evaluation. To evaluate his growth in vocabulary, an additional formative assessment was done. Every week, J.’s retention of the newly learned vocabulary was assessed using a verbal quiz. The results were charted and examined for the appropriate growth patterns.

A typical lesson followed a format of (vocabulary is integrated into the exercises): (c) Oral group work using model/lead/test for each item. Mastery was expected and any

item not mastered was re-taught immediately.

(d) Workbook exercises covering the same material. The first of these were done as guided practice and as J. became comfortable and exhibited mastery, he moved on to independent practice.

Materials

SRA Corrective Reading, Comprehension B1 Teacher’s guide, student workbook, and Teacher’s Presentation Book.

Reinforcement/Fading

Reinforcement was critical for J. due to his lack of confidence and fragile emotional state. Verbal praise for effort was used extensively. In addition, he was on a sticker reward system for all of his pull-out classes where he is eligible to turn in a full sticker sheet for a prize. For his work with me I set up a science reward system. For each day that he worked his best, we spent the last 10 minutes doing a science experiment. This was very motivating for J. and made him eager to come to our sessions. I didn’t fade the reinforcement with J. this quarter. He needed all the encouragement he could get.

Prompting Strategy/Fading Normal Direct Instruction prompting was used. These are very teacher directed lessons and the scripts have full teacher prompting built in.

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.20 WS-1 p.20

Error Correction Normal Direct Instruction error correction was used. Error correction was included in the teacher scripts.

Setting/Place, Time Instruction took place in the LRC from 12:15 to 12:45 each day.

Description of Data Gathering Procedures

Formative Assessment Daily data was collected in this program with points awarded for both oral and written work. Every 5 lessons there was a mastery test. The results of these mastery tests were tracked. In addition, every week a vocabulary quiz was given over the material that had been covered in the finished Corrective Reading lessons. Scores on these tests were recorded and monitored to see if the objectives were being met.

Schedule of Recording Data was recorded daily, every 5 days, and every 3-4 weeks.

Decision Rules & Patterns/Trends For the daily data, the ideal trend was a line with zero slope – always 95 – 100% correct. The mastery tests were expected to be 90-100% correct. If a mastery test or individual lesson fell below 80%, then that material was re-taught. The vocabulary test results were expected to be continually improving. If not, re-teaching was done. I was monitoring for the 90% accuracy that would signify meeting each objective.

Results of Intervention

Data-based Analysis of Intervention(s)

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.21 WS-1 p.21

Data Charts & Graphs

J.’s progress in vocabulary portion of the Corrective Reading program was monitored after lesson 5. There was no individual practice in the first 5 lessons. The results are show below.

A vocabulary mastery test was included after lesson10. There are additional tests which occur every 5 lessons after 10 but due to J.’s family emergency at the end of the term, we were not able to complete the material necessary for the second vocabulary test. If J. was working with this program for a year as it is designed for, the vocabulary program would include more comprehensive testing.

Corrective  Reading:    Comprehension    

Level  B  Vocabulary  Tests            

Date   Lessons     Number  Correct   Number  Possible   %  correct  

5/13/2008   1-­‐10   10   10   100  

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.22 WS-1 p.22

Analysis and Evaluation of Instructional Intervention: I was impressed with J.’s ability to retain new vocabulary. It took some repetition when a new word was learned but he worked very hard to retain the word and the Corrective Reading program was excellent for J. in that it kept reusing the new words in different exercises. J.’s scores in his independent work for vocabulary were almost perfect except for lesson 9 where he was having a difficult day. His retention of the new vocabulary was also excellent as shown by his score of 100% on the mastery test.

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.23 WS-1 p.23

Long-term Goal #3 with

Short-term Objectives

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.24 WS-1 p.24

Long-term Goal # 3 and Short-term Objectives

Number Goal

LG3 Given a 3rd grade leveled reading passage, J. will read the passage at 100 correct words per minute (cwpm) in 2 of 3 consecutive trials.

Number Objective

SO3.1 Given a 2nd grade leveled reading passage, J. will read the passage at 90 cwpm in 2 of 3 consecutive trials.

SO3.2 Given a 3rd grade leveled reading passage, J. will read the passage at 80 cwpm in 2 of 3 consecutive trials.

Related IEP Goal(s) and Objective(s)

Number Related IEP Goal (IG) & Objective (IO)

IG3.1 By February 2009, with instruction and practice, J. will increase reading accuracy, fluency, and comprehension as measured by oral reading fluency (e.g., DIBELS), MAP (Measure of Academic Progress), Oregon State Assessments, running records, and/or probes.

IO3.1 J. will increase his oral fluency.

Related Oregon Content Standard(s) & Benchmarks

Number Related Oregon Content Standard & Benchmark

CS3.1 EL.02.RE.08 By the end of second grade, read aloud unpracticed grade-level text at a target rate of 90-100 wcpm (words per corrected minute).

CB3.2 EL.03.RE.05 Read aloud unpracticed grade-level text at a target rate of 110-120 wcpm (words per corrected minute).

Instructional/Remedial Methods and Materials

Remedial Instruction Methods Fluency instruction will use the Six-Minute Solution (Sopris West), a reading fluency program, primary level. This program is a direct instruction program that uses regular repeated readings to increase a student’s fluency. Each week started with a graded passage which J. had read to him, then read with the teacher for decoding. Once J. was are able to decode the passage, a timed read for 1 minute was done. The number of words read minus the number of errors made was recorded (cwpm). This same passage was then read every day that week and the cwpm is recorded. On each Monday a new passage was selected.

A typical lesson followed a format of:

1. Monday: Read new passage to J. and then read the passage with J.

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.25 WS-1 p.25

2. Monday – Friday: Timed one-minute read of the passage. 3. Record and chart time

Materials

Six-Minute Solution: Reading Fluency Passage graded reading passages, timer, and a chart to record the daily cwpm.

Reinforcement/Fading The general reinforcement of a science experiment will still be in place. However, for this activity there will be the additional reinforcement of a daily plot of progress. J. will plot his improving cwpm each day and will be able to monitor his progress.

Prompting Strategy/Fading Prompting took the form of my reading the passage, co-reading of the passage, and then J.’s solo reading of the passage. Error Correction

During the timed readings, the programs protocol was to just give the student any word he doesn’t know.

Setting/Place, Time Instruction took place in the LRC from 12:15 to 12:45 each day.

Description of Data Gathering Procedures

Formative Assessment

Daily data on the cwpm was collected and graphed by the student. Schedule of Recording

Data was recorded daily. Decision Rules & Patterns/Trends:

The expected trend was to see an increase in the cwpm each day and then a smaller increase from Monday to Monday.

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.26 WS-1 p.26

Results of Intervention

Data-based Analysis of Intervention(s)

Data Charts & Graphs

J.’s daily progress on the one-minute timed fluency readings is shown below.

Analysis and Evaluation of Instructional Intervention: All of the readings were 2nd grade passages. J. was able to improve his time for each reading. His cold readings were also improving except for passage 204 which was a difficult passage in that it had some vocabulary which was unfamiliar to J. By the end of the week, J. was able to read this difficult passage at 94 cwpm. Even though J. was not able to reach his goal, this intervention improved his fluency.

Work Sample #1

WS-1 p.27 WS-1 p.27

Summary of Instructional Intervention J. made progress this quarter, especially given his emotional state. He started the term very tired and trying to avoid coming for an extra reading class. By the start of the second week, he was beating me to the room and looked forward to our sessions (both reading and science). J found out during the 3rd week of the term that his 4 year old sister had terminal brain cancer. This has hit J. very hard and when her health radically deteriorated during week 9, J. had a very difficult time concentrating. Lessons were modified and our sessions became an important emotional safe place for J. In spite of these difficulties, J. did make progress in his reading. His vocabulary scores are impressive and his Ekwall-Shanker Informal Reading Inventory post-test results show a gain from 2nd grade instructional reading level to 3rd grade for oral reading.

Recommendations

School

It is recommended that J. continue in the SRA Corrective Reading/Comprehension Skills program. J. was starting to really understand the program and he could really benefit from the logic and listening instruction it provides. He is now comfortable with the structure of the program. It is also suggested that material for J. be presented in small chunks with frequent checks for understanding. J. has a strong desire to do well and is a hard-worker.

Parents

J. is very proud of his ability to help his father with his business. The work they do together could be used to help J.’s reading. Take any opportunity to have J. read labels on the cleaning products or instructions for the equipment he operates. This would help him understand the importance of reading. It would also greatly benefit J. if he read aloud 10 minutes a night to a parent, older friend or sibling. The material read could be anything of interest to J. He is very good at estimating his ability to read a passage and independently picks material at his reading level.

WS-1 p.28 WS-1 p.28

Special Educator Program

Appendices

1-A. Weekly Schedules, Lesson Plans & Evaluations, WIGLs

1-B. Student Work Samples

WS-1 p.29 WS-1 p.29

Special Educator Program

Appendix 1-A

Weekly Schedule, Lesson Plans

Lesson Evaluations WIGLs

Arrange the above in the order indicated on a week-by-week

basis.

WS-1 p.30 WS-1 p.30

Special Educator Program

Appendix 1-B

Student Work Samples

Pre-test materials Instructional probes/products

Post-test materials