Student Name: Addison Student Grade: 7 Student Age: 13 years

Examiner Name: Erica Dwyer Session Dates: 9/16/13-12/5/13 Date of Report: 12/8/2013

Assessments Administered Elementary Reading Attitude Survey Subtest Recreational reading Academic Reading Full Scale Scaled Score could not be obtained could not be obtained could not be obtained %ile rank could not be obtained could not be obtained could not be obtained General Trend positive positive positive

Book Handling Knowledge Guidelines Concept Book Orientation Print Carries Message Directional Understanding Speech to Print Match First and Last Left page read before right Period Recognition Question Mark Recognition Exclamation Point Recognition Comma Recognition Quotation Mark Recognition Level of Mastery Needs Review Mastery Mastery Mastery Needs Review Mastery Mastery Mastery Mastery Mastery Mastery

Lowercase Letter Letter Concept Word Concept First and Last Capital Letter Test of Phonemic Awareness Concept Rhymes Phoneme Isolation Phoneme Identity Phoneme Categorization Blending Phoneme Addition Phoneme Deletion Phoneme Substitution Phoneme Segmentation Alphabet Recognition Assessment Letter Type Upper Case Lower Case # Correct 26/26 28/28

Mastery Mastery Mastery Needs Review Mastery

Level of Mastery Mastery Needs Review Needs Review Needs Review Mastery Mastery Mastery Mastery Needs Review

Level of Mastery Mastery Mastery

Elementary Spelling Inventory: Performance Breakdown Concept Consonant SoundsBeginning Consonant Sounds- Final Number Correct 2/2 5/5

Digraphs Blends Long Vowels Other Vowels Inflected Endings Syllable Junctures Unaccented Final Syllables Harder Suffixes Bases or Roots

6/6 7/7 5/5 5/7 4/5 5/5 2/5 2/5 4/5

Elementary Spelling Inventory: Overview Words Spelled Correctly Feature Points Total Spelling Stage Informal Phonics Inventory Area Assessed Consonant Sounds Consonant Digraphs Beginning Consonant Blends Final Consonant Blends and ng Short Vowels in CVC Words The Rule of Silent e Long Vowel Digraphs Diphthongs Number Correct 20/20 5/5 20/20 12/12 10/10 4/4 10/10 6/6 Level of Mastery Mastered Mastered Mastered Mastered Mastered Mastered Mastered Mastered 18/25 53/62 71/87 Within Word Patterns (Late)

r-Controlled Vowels and -al Total

6/6 93/93

Mastered Mastered

Fry Word LIst Word Lists First 100 Words Second 100 Words Third 100 Words Qualitative Reading Inventory-V Word Lists Level Third Fourth % Automatic 90% 70% Total % Correct 95% 80% Reading Level Independent Instructional # Correct 100 100 100

Qualitative Reading Inventory-V Reading Passage Title Readability Level Total Accuracy Total Acceptability Rate Passage Level Trip to the Zoo Grade 3 95.5% 97.1% 87.47 WPM Instructional

Qualitative Reading Inventory-V Narrative Reading Comprehension Title Readability Level Concept Questions Prediction Task Total Accuracy I See Pre-Primer 1 100% 1 idea 100%

Total Acceptability Rate Retelling Explicit Comprehension Questions Implicit Comprehension Questions Passage Level

100% 140 WPM 5 out of 10 ideas 100% 100% Independent

Title Readability Level Concept Questions Prediction Task Total Accuracy Total Acceptability Rate Retelling Explicit Comprehension Questions Implicit Comprehension Questions Passage Level

People at Work Pre-Primer 2 100% 1 idea 100% 100% 91.88 WPM 2 out of 17 ideas 20% 0% Frustration

**Instructional reading comprehension level could not be obtained** Qualitative Reading Inventory-V Listening Comprehension Title Readability Level Concept Questions Prediction Task Retelling I can Pre-Primer 1 75% 0 ideas (I dont know) 0 out of 12 ideas

Explicit Comprehension Questions Implicit Comprehension Questions Passage Level

20% Not applicable Frustration

**Independent and instructional listening comprehension levels could not be obtained** Burke Reading Interview Question When you are reading and come to something you dont know, what do you do? Do you ever do anything else? Who is a good reader that you know? What makes her a good reader? Do you think that she ever comes to something she doesnt know when shes reading? If yes: What does she do about it? If you know that someone was having difficulty reading, how would you help them? What would your teacher do to help that person. How did you learn to read? What do you do to help you learn? What would you like to do better as a reader? Do you think that you are a good reader? Why? Student Response I dont know. Read it again?

Yeah. Ask Mr. Scott. Issabell, Arthur, Tyler, Joseph. She reads all the books and knows all the words. She can read. Yes.

She looks in the dictionary. Make them read.

Make them read lots. I read about things. I read in my dreams. Issabell was reading a lot. I would like to read about cows and science. I am a so-so reader. I dont know.

QRI-V Expository Reading Comprehension

Without lookbacks Title Readability Level Concept Questions Prediction Task Total Accuracy Total Acceptability Rate Retelling Explicit Comprehension Questions Implicit Comprehension Questions Passage Level Who lives near lakes? Primer 100% 2 ideas 100% 100% 93 WPM 2 out of 18 ideas 0% 0% Frustration

**Independent and instructional expository reading comprehension levels could not be obtained** With lookbacks Title Readability Level Concept Questions Prediction Task Total Accuracy Total Acceptability Rate Retelling Explicit Comprehension Questions with Lookbacks Implicit Comprehension Questions with Lookbacks Who lives near lakes? Primer 100% 2 ideas 100% 100% 93 WPM 2 out of 18 ideas 50% (3 out of 4 explicit questions correct) 0% (0 out of 2 implicit questions correct)

Passage Level

Frustration

**Independent and instructional expository reading comprehension levels with lookbacks could not be obtained** Think alouds Title Readability Level Concept Questions Prediction Task Think-Alouds Living and Not Living Primer 100% 1 idea 0 statements indicating understanding 4 statements indicating lack of understanding Total Accuracy Total Acceptability Rate Retelling Explicit Comprehension Questions Implicit Comprehension Questions Passage Level 100% 100% 91.42 WPM 4 out of 14 ideas 0% (0 out of 4 explicit questions correct) 0% (0 out of 2 implicit questions correct) Frustration

**Independent and instructional expository reading comprehension levels with thinkalouds could not be obtained**

MEAP Narrative Writing Rubric Area Assessed Ideas Organization Style Rating 1 1 0

Conventions

Observations During Testing Automatic Letter, Sound and Word Recognition Book Handling Knowledge Guidelines This assessment is a method to assess concepts of print, such as the knowledge that print moves left to right on a page and that one should start reading at the top left of a page, as well as the concepts of what a makes up a word and what punctuation indicates. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) These concepts are not innately known by our students, so it is important to assess these foundational reading skills before delving into intervention. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) Because they are so basic and usually acquired early on, it is easy to overlook these skills. (Scanlon, et al., 2010) However, they are the basic building blocks of reading (McKenna & Stahl, 2009). On this assessment, Addison demonstrated some weaknesses. She recognized all concepts except those involving first and last (i.e., the front of the book, the first part of a word, the first part of the book). However, this is actually reflective of a vocabulary issue and due to a lack of understanding of the concept of first and last. Addison does know where to start reading and where a word starts and ends, she just did not understand the vocabulary being used. Concepts of print is not a relative weakness, neither is it a strength. These vocabulary concepts (first/last, beginning/end) needed to be taught. Test of Phonemic Awareness This assessment looks at phonological awareness skills, such as knowledge of rhymes, syllables, word duration and the sounds that make up words. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) These skills are not the same as phonics because they are completely auditory and not connected to written language, but they are an important building block for phonics skills down the road. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009 and Scanlon, et al, 2011) According to Scanlon, et al (2011), children who experience significant difficulty in learning to read tend to have difficulty in developing sensitivity to the phonemes in spoken language. (p. 79) The assessment revealed that phonological awareness is a relative weakness for Addison. She was unable to isolate the first sound in a word or identify a common sound between three words. During one trial of the phoneme categorization skill assessment, Addison was able to identify which word did not belong in a group of 3, but in the other trials, she did not repeat this skill. She also demonstrated inconsistent skills in the phoneme deletion and phoneme segmentation trials.

Alphabet Recognition Assessment This assessment asks a student to identify both upper and lower case letters presented out of alphabetic order. McKenna and Stahl (2009) reference the fact that research does not clearly identify the need for a student to learn the alphabet before learning to read, but they do still recommend that children learn the names and sounds of letters. (p. 88) Scanlon, et al (2011), however, discusses that fact that the rate at which kids can name the letters of alphabet is a good predictor of progress in first-grade reading. (p.108) Addison was able to recognize all letters presented with automaticity. Her performance on this assessment indicates that alphabet recognition is a relative strength. Addison did not need further intervention in this area. Elementary Spelling Inventory This assessment allows the examiner to take a detailed look at a students spelling and determine at which developmental level the students spelling falls. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) Those developmental stages of spelling are also linked to students literacy knowledge. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) For example, the within word pattern stage involves learning patterns in words and corresponds with knowledge of basic sound symbol spelling conventions. (McKenna and Stahl, 2009, p. 109) Learning the spelling patterns (orthographies) allows a reader to process words more quickly when reading (Scanlon, et al, 2011, p. 174) which can contribute to fluency development and reading comprehension. On the assessment, Addisons first errors were on the Within Word Pattern set. She had errors on er and ew vowel patterns (target words: serving and chewing). She continued to demonstrate errors on the Syllables and Affixes set and Derivational Relations set. It was interesting that she was able to spell all of the words in the Syllable Junction set (middle Syllables and Affixes stage), despite misspelling words on previous words set. Her error pattern puts her at the late Within Word Pattern stage, which is usually achieved by the end of third or fourth grade (McKenna and Stahl, 2009 p. 110). Given that Addison is in seventh grade, this does put her behind expectations. This area would be considered a relative weakness. Informal Phonics Inventory This assessment allows an examiner to monitor the acquisition of specific phonics skills. (McKenna and Stahl, 2009) Phonics skills are the ability to use letter-sound correspondences to derive the pronunciation of words (McKenna & Stahl, 2009, p. 106) and are closely tied to spelling skills. (McKenna and Stahl, 2009)

Addison completed this assessment without difficulty or errors. She has mastered lettersound correspondences. Therefore, this area was considered a relative strength and did not need to be an area of further intervention. Fry Word List This assessment focuses on sight word knowledge, or automatic word recognition, which is linked to development of reading fluency. (McKenna and Stahl, 2009) A sight word is any word that can be pronounced automatically, without conscious analysis. (McKenna and Stahl, 2009, p. 100) It is important to be able to recognize words with automaticity in order to read increasing text lengths. (Scanlon, et al, 2011) Students will not be able to comprehend text if they have to sound out every word that they read. Frys word list is comprised of 300 high frequency words. Addison was able to recognize all of the words in each list of 100 with automaticity. This indicates that Addison does not have trouble with automatically recognizing any of the words on this list, however, it makes little sense to tally the number of words a child can pronounce at sight (McKenna and Stahl, 2009, p. 102) It can be concluded that automatic word recognition does not interfere with her reading success and is an area of relative strength. Qualitative Reading Inventory-V (QRI-V) Word Lists The QRI word lists are organized by grade level and are a more useful way to estimate[a] students word-identification ability. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011, p. 40) They are also used to estimate a starting point for administering the QRI passages. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) As referenced above, automatic word recognition is important for reading fluency, and therefore, comprehension. Sight word vocabularies go beyond high frequency words and should expand as students move through grade levels. (Scanlon, et al, 2011) Words are added to our sight word vocabularies through multiple exposures across contexts. (Scanlon, et al, 2011) On this assessment, Addison scored at an independent level of 3rd grade and an instructional level of 4th grade. This aligns with her developmental spelling level determined above. This is considered an area of relative weakness for Addison, because her automatic word recognition skills fall below her grade level. QRI-V Fluency on a Narrative Passage The QRI Reading Passages can be used for many purposes, one of them being the ability to assess reading fluency. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) The ability to read fluently is important for reading comprehension. If students have to spend too much time and effort reading a passage, little cognitive effort is available to dedicate toward remembering and understanding what is read. (McKenna and Stahl, 2009) Scanlon, et al, (2011) discuss the fact that proficient readers are able to effortlessly identify virtually

every printed word they encounter. (p. 199) Reading fluency also includes prosody (McKenna and Stahl, 2009), but this is not assessed by the QRI-V. Despite the fact that Addison achieved instructional level on the 4th grade word list, Addison was only able to obtain an instructional reading level for reading fluency on a 3rd grade passage. During the assessment, Addison used appropriate inflections and prosody even though she also demonstrated many hesitations and part word repetitions. These are not counted as miscues in the testing, but they did interfere with her reading rate. Leslie and Caldwell (2011) state that these types of reading behaviors can be indicative of uncertainty on the part of the student or a desire to clarif y meaning that was missed (p. 62) but that they do not truly represent an error. In Addisons case, I feel that they represented the fact that she was uncertain of the word she was reading, which would indicate that those words were not in her sight word vocabulary. Addisons reading rate of 87.47 wpm was clearly affected by these hesitations and part word repetitions. Her reading rate indicates a need for targeted instruction. This would be considered an area of relative weakness for her because it is below her grade level. Language Comprehension The QRI Reading Passages can be used for many purposes in addition to reading fluency; they can also be used to assess both reading and listening comprehension. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) Comprehension is the ultimate purpose of reading. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) Assessment of comprehension can pinpoint how well the underlying reading processes are working together and/or where breakdowns are occurring. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011)

On the QRI-V, assessment of comprehension is done through four methods, 1) addressing prior knowledge, 2) prediction tasks, 3) retelling and 4) comprehension questions. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) If a student is unfamiliar with a topic or has different experiences with a topic that is presented in a text, that can negatively impact comprehension (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011), so the examiner will want to ensure that the student possess sufficient prior knowledge for the ask. Prediction tasks require a student to access prior knowledge and synthesize that with the text title in order to make a guess about the topic of a piece of writing. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) Retelling tasks are considered to be sophisticated tasks (Scanlon, et al, 2011) because they require synthesis of both oral expression and comprehension. They can provide important cues toward a student's knowledge of narrative structure, sequencing skills and the accuracy of the ideas recalled by a student. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) Whereas comprehension questions simply allow the assessor to determine how well a student can recall and understand specific story details. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011)

It is important to assess both listening comprehension and reading comprehension because differences between the two can give important insight into the subprocesses that are interfering with comprehension (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) For example, if a student has higher listening comprehension than reading comprehension, it could be inferred that actual reading difficulties (e.g., decoding, fluency, etc) are interfering with comprehension. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) If the student has difficulty with both tasks, then it may be due to difficulties with language, working memory or vocabulary. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) Additionally, it is important to assess reading comprehension across genres in order to look at possible assessment bias due to motivation/interest in one genre or familiarity with one genre. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) Typically, narrative passages are easier to comprehend than expository passages because narrative passages involve less technical vocabulary and can maintain the students interest during the passage. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) Difficulties in only one genre are also indicative of a need to improve the students knowledge of text structures in order to improve comprehension. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) QRI-V Narrative Listening Comprehension Addisons performance on the narrative listening comprehension task was significantly below her grade level. Although her performance on the concept questions task indicated that she was sufficiently familiar with the passage topic, Addison was not able to retell any ideas for the story and only was able to answer 20% of the comprehension questions correctly. This placed her at the frustration level for the Pre-Primer Level 1 passage. Neither her instructional nor her independent narrative listening comprehension levels could be obtained because Pre-Primer is the lowest level assessed on the QRI-V. Therefore, listening comprehension is a significant area of weakness for Addison. QRI-V Narrative Reading Comprehension Addisons performance on the narrative reading comprehension task was also significantly below her grade level. As evidenced by the concept questions (100% accuracy), Addison was sufficiently familiar with both of the passage topics. Addison performance fell at the independent level on the Pre-Primer Level 1 passage with 100% accuracy on the comprehension questions and she was able to incorporate 5 out of the 10 ideas into her retelling. However, Addisons performance fell to the frustration level on the Pre-Primer Level 2 passage due to only being able to answer 20% of the comprehension questions correctly. She was only able to incorporate 2 of the 17 ideas that she read into her retelling. This places her narrative reading comprehension far below her grade level, though it is at a slightly higher level than her reading comprehension. This is an area of relative weakness for Addison.

QRI-V Expository Reading Comprehension Addisons performance on the expository reading comprehension task fell at the frustration level for the primer level expository passages. As evidenced by the concept questions, she possessed sufficient prior knowledge to comprehend the passage, so this was not a factor in her difficulty. However, she was not able to answer any of the comprehension questions correctly, and was only able to retell 2 of the 18 ideas from the story. The QRI-V does not have expository passages below the primer level, so her true expository reading comprehension level could not be obtained. We can only say that it falls below the primer level. This is an area of relative weakness for Addison. Strategic Knowledge and Motivation for Reading Elementary Reading Attitude Survey This assessment gives a window in the a students attitude toward the reading task (McKenna & Stall, 2009). Reading attitudes are learned and are shaped by each reading experience that the child has over their lifetime. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009, p. 205) This is important for literacy development because negative reading attitudes can be an important cue toward a student who has difficulty reading. As McKenna & Stahl (2009) stated, no one voluntarily engages in an activity that is frustrating (p. 209). This assessment was intended for students who are in the 6th grade and below. However, this assessment was chosen for Addison due to the fact that her Autism negatively affects her language comprehension. This assessment provides more context with visual pictures instead of a numerical rating scale, which facilitates her comprehension and providing more accurate responses. Standard scores and percentiles were not able to be obtained because she is over the intended age for this assessment. Even though we cannot make comparisons to same-age peers, this assessment indicates a relatively positive attitude toward reading. The only negative response (mildly upset Garfield; 2 pts) she gave was to the prompt regarding how she would feel reading on a rainy Saturday (McKenna & Stahl, 2009, p 218). The rest of the responses were either a happy Garfield (4 points) or mildly happy Garfield (3 points). Most students would not indicate enjoyment of many of the tasks that Addison reported enjoying. This area would be considered a relative strength for Addison. Burke Reading Inventory This assessment gives the examiner a window into the readers view of their perceived purpose for reading and what, if any, strategies they are employing while reading. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) The Burke Reading Interview was designed for students in younger grades (McKenna & Stahl, 2009), however, I chose to use this interview with Addison because she presents with listening comprehension difficulties and difficulties with answering more open-ended questions due to her autism. This interview gave

more context than the Awareness of Purposes of Reading Interview (McKenna and Stahl, 2009), which helped Addison understand the questions being asked and give answers that were more useful to analyze. Addisons answers to these questions reflected the idea that good readers read all the words. She did not mention comprehension as the end goal of reading in any context. McKenna and Stahl (2009) state that struggling readers often focus on decoding as the purpose of reading, whereas successful readers focus on comprehension as the purpose of reading. This is an area of relative weakness for Addison. QRI-V By comparing a students comprehension of both narrative and expository texts, the assessor can gain information about a students knowledge of text structures or genre knowledge (Scanlon, et al, 2011, p. 282). Addisons expository reading comprehension levels were not able to be obtained because the QRI-V does not have expository passages below the Primer level. This makes it difficult to compare her narrative and expository comprehension levels with complete accuracy. She was at a frustration level for the Primer level expository passages and at a frustration level when reading the PrePrimer 2 level narrative passage. Obviously, then, she was at a frustration level for the Primer level narrative passage. From this, we can only know with certainty that there is not a large gap between Addisons comprehension of narrative and expository genres, and therefore, it can be surmised that Addisons difficulties with reading comprehension are not due to a lack of genre knowledge (Scanlon, et al, 2011, p. 282). Additionally, on the QRI-V, the assessor can stop the reader at various points during the reading and ask them to verbalize what they are thinking or think aloud. This provides insight into what, if any, comprehension strategies the student is using to make meaning while reading. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) Addisons use of think-alouds were not effective. But, it is difficult to know if she understood this task. Her answers during the think-aloud portion were merely echolalic; she repeated what she had last read verbatim. I did not feel that her answers were indicative of understanding the passage, especially when she failed to correctly answer the comprehension questions at the end of the passage. Her think alouds were not reflective of the use of comprehension strategies, such as paraphrasing, making connections between prior knowledge, making new meaning or identifying personally with text (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). Therefore, this data further supports the need for reading strategy instruction. The QRI-V also provides insight into a students use of memory strategies by comparing performance on comprehension questions both with and without lookbacks. The use of lookbacks removes the memory component from comprehension. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) The use of lookbacks during the expository text did improve Addisons comprehension slightly. She continued to demonstrate an inability to answer inferential

questions correctly, but was able to find some of the answers for some of the explicit questions using look-backs. This suggests that Addisons comprehension difficulties are not necessarily due to an inability to understand what was read, but may be more of a reflection of short-term memory difficulties. (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011) Therefore, this data further suggests a need for intervention in this area. Writing MEAP Narrative Writing Rubric Writing and reading are connected because they both require the same cognitive processes to complete. (Graham & Herbert, 2010) Additionally, reading and writing activities can be combined to achieve literacy goals, such as comprehension. (Graham & Herbert, 2010) Research has shown that understanding of the writing process can improve reading comprehension (Graham & Herbert, 2010); therefore, instruction in this area will support both reading and writing skills. I allowed Addison to choose the writing topic, in order to provide a more motivating writing experience. During lengthy writing tasks, Addison typically types on an AlphaSmart instead of writing due to fine-motor difficulties. Therefore, in order to obtain a more accurate representation of her writing, without fine-motor difficulties interfering, I allowed her to use my laptop and type her writing assignment. The MEAP narrative writing rubric revealed that, similar to reading comprehension, Addisons writing skills fall significantly below grade level expectations. Addison struggled to produce a text with an organized flow of ideas and that used grade level appropriate mechanics and writing style. Writing is clearly an area of need for Addison. Summary of Assessments McKenna and Stahls (2009) Modified Cognitive Model of reading suggest that there are three major building blocks of reading comprehension: automatic word recognition, language comprehension and strategic knowledge. Automatic word recognition is made up of the subprocesses of phonological awareness, print concepts, decoding/sight word knowledge and reading fluency. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) The language comprehension branch is made up of the vocabulary, background knowledge and knowledge of text structures. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) Strategic knowledge is comprised of both general and specific purposes for reading, as well as knowledge of reading strategies. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) All of these subprocesses build upon one another, so difficulties in one area will significantly interfere with the subprocesses that fall above it. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) Therefore, in order to effectively support a student with reading comprehension difficulties, it is important to isolate exactly which subprocess(es) is/are interfering.

When interpreting Addisons assessment data, as well as determining her relative strengths and weaknesses, it is important to remember that all of the assessed skills fell below grade level expectations. However, this is expected due to the cognitive and language delays inherent in Autism spectrum disorders. With this in mind, automatic word recognition would be considered a relative strength for Addison. On the QRI-V, she was able to fluently read a 3rd grade level passage at the instructional level. The assessments conducted revealed strengths in the areas of letter/sound knowledge and sight word knowledge. They also revealed weaknesses with spelling that were likely due to underlying weaknesses with phonological awareness. Even with these weaknesses, automatic word recognition is still an area of relative strength when compared with skills in the other two areas. Addison showed relative weaknesses in the area of language comprehension. On the QRI-V, she was able to comprehend the stories at a slightly higher level when she was reading compared to when she was listening, but her comprehension of both types of material fell significantly below her grade level. It is also a few grade levels below the level of text that she can fluently read. There does not appear to be a large discrepancy between her comprehension of narrative and expository texts, which suggests that her knowledge of text structures is not interfering with her comprehension. Additionally, her vocabulary and background knowledge were sufficient for comprehension of all of the texts, so these areas were not overtly interfering with comprehension. Addisons comprehension of the QRI-V passage did improve with look-backs, which suggests that Addisons difficulties in this area are most likely due to the language and working memory difficulties that are inherent in autism spectrum disorders. Addison also showed significant relative weaknesses in the area of strategic knowledge. She had difficulty in all subcomponents of this area. The Burke reading inventory revealed that Addison does not see comprehension as the end goal of reading. Additionally, the QRI-V think aloud trials revealed that Addison does not actively engage in comprehension strategies while reading. This suggests that intervention in this area is of utmost importance for Addisons success with reading comprehension. Based on her pattern of strengths and weaknesses, instruction over the course of the semester focused on four major goals: 1) Improving phonemic awareness skills, 2) Improving spelling skills, 3) Improving vocabulary and 4) Improving listening/reading comprehension. The objectives for these goals focused on phoneme segmentation, isolating beginning sounds in words, identifying shared sounds in words, vowel patterns, teaching basic concepts, and reading strategy instruction.

Summary of Instruction Addison and I worked together over the course of 12 weeks, from the middle of September 2013 to the beginning of December, 2013. We had 10 sessions together. Assessment was conducted throughout the sessions and ongoing instruction was provided based on the areas of need that were found. It was a pleasure to work with Addison. She initially demonstrated significant behavioral difficulties as she became accustomed to the change in her routine and to working with me outside of school, but she did respond very well to the reinforcement system we established. We also focused on highly engaging reading materials for our interactive read alouds, including horse books and My Little Pony chapter books to help her motivation. Many of the assessments we administered provided significant challenges for Addison, but she was able to persevere through them and always put forth a great effort. Based on her individual profile of strengths and weaknesses, our work focused on weakness in all three of the major components of reading: automatic word recognition, language comprehension and strategic knowledge. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) The major goals and instructional strategies that we attempted are detailed below. Goal 1: Addison will increase phonemic awareness. Objectives: 1a. Addison will segment words into sounds. 1b. Addison will isolate the beginning sounds in words. 1c. Addison will identify common sounds in words. Instructional Strategies: In lesson numbers 2-4, we targeted objective 1a. In order to improve Addisons ability to segment word sounds, we used the phoneme counting activity described in Scanlon, et al (2011, pg. 100). We first began with two phoneme words that began with stretchable consonants (e.g., me, see, new, zoo, low, etc.) and moved to two phoneme words beginning with stops (e.g., be, pea, tea, etc) because this was suggested as the appropriate sequence from least to most challenging. (Scanlon, et al, 2011, pg 101) We also, then, moved through three syllable words in the same fashion. Addison was asked to verbally stretch out each word to isolate the sounds and then write down each sound that she heard/produced. When this activity was introduced, it was very difficult for Addison. In the first session, working with the two sound words with stretchable consonants, she was not able to do the activity correctly without maximal assistance and cues from me. In the next sessions, she gradually increased her independence. During the 4th session, it was as though something clicked inside her head and she was suddenly able to complete the activity. She moved through each of the word lists to the three sound words with stops.

In lesson numbers 2-4, we also targeted objective 1b. Using the same word lists and activities above, I simply asked her to tell me which was the beginning sound. This was based off of the phoneme counting activity from Scanlon, et al (2011, pg 100), but I wanted to also ensure that, in addition to segmenting the sounds, Addison could generalize this knowledge and simply identify the beginning sounds, as well. We also used some picture sorting suggested in McKenna & Stahl (2009, p. 86) to target this skill. SImilar to objective 1a, this skill took several sessions for Addison to learn, but she was able to do it correctly during the 4th session. Once the above objectives were mastered, we began to target objective 1c. This was targeted during sessions 5-8. In order to address Addisons ability to identify common vowel sounds in words, we used picture sorts and word sorts suggested in McKenna and Stahl (2009, p. 86 and 87). We used closed sorts because they are developmentally more appropriate for Addison than asking her to create her own categories for open sorts. Addisons performance on these tasks was similar, again to the tasks above. We also used the sound deletion and sound changing tasks from McKenna and Stahl (2009, p. 87) where Addison was asked to remove the beginning sound from a word and say it without (e.g., remove the /b/ to change bake into ache) She required three sessions with gradually increasing accuracy to achieve this goal, but did achieve it during the 8th session. Goal 2: Addison will increase spelling skills. Objectives: 2a. Addison will correctly use vowel patterns in the late within word stage. Summary of instruction: This goal was targeted during sessions 4-7. We used a word sorting task to target her knowledge of vowel patterns. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) In the beginning, I tried to do this verbally, with me reading the words and Addison writing them in the correct category, but Addison did not respond well to this task. We added picture supports and changed it to a picture sorting task in order to support her understanding. With the added visual component, Addisons accuracy increased significantly. I monitored this activitys progress on her spelling skills by providing her with a mock spelling test at the end of each session. She demonstrated the ability to correctly spell er/ur vowel patterns and oo/ew vowel patterns by then end of the 7th session on this mock spelling test. Goal 3: Addison will increase vocabulary knowledge. Objective: 3a. Addison will demonstrate understanding of the concepts of first and last.

Summary of Instruction: Through the assessments that we conducted, it became apparent that Addison did not understand the concepts of first and last. This became apparent during the concepts of print assessment and impacted her success and understanding of the phonological awareness assessments as well. Therefore, in sessions 3 and 4, we targeted the concepts of first and last through direct instruction activities as discussed in Scanlon, et al (2011). Addison participated in activities where she was asked to identify the target concepts in pictures of real world applications (e.g., people in line). I also reinforced this concept during the phonemic awareness tasks of phoneme counting by asking her to identify and label which sounds that she had written were the first and last sounds in the word. Goal 4: Addison will increase listening and reading comprehension. Objective: 4a. Addison will employ the comprehension strategy of paraphrasing after listening to a 3 sentence paragraph. 4b.Addison will employ the comprehension strategy of paraphrasing after reading a 3 sentence paragraph. Summary of Instruction: It was revealed that Addison does not view comprehension as the end goal of reading and that she struggles significantly with comprehension. Additionally, the assessments revealed that Addison does not actively engage in meaning making while reading. Therefore, I decide to engage Addison in some reading strategy instruction in order to get her focused on comprehension while reading and to help change her view of the purpose of reading from decoding to comprehension. (Scanlon, et al, 2011) I decided that the comprehension strategy of paraphrasing would not only help her to actively engage while reading, but also help her to increase her retelling ability. (Scanlon, et al, 2011) This goal was implemented during sessions 7-10. Minimal progress was seen on either objective. Addison would most frequently repeat the last sentence she had read or heard in an echolalic fashion. This tendency was difficult to work through, but by the end of the sessions, when provided with scaffolding through visual supports and models, she was paraphrasing short paragraphs with 30% accuracy. Further Recommendations At this point, after the sessions we have conducted throughout the semester, Addisons skills in all three areas (automatic word recognition, language comprehension and strategic knowledge) continue to fall below grade expectations. However, she did demonstrate improvement after focused instruction in phonological awareness and

spelling skills, which would place automatic word recognition as her relative strength. It is imperative that her language comprehension and strategic knowledge continue to be targeted in order to bring them closer to grade level expectations. Improvement in the automatic word recognition area will also need to take place in order to further advance Addisons reading skills. The following are suggested goals that should continue to be targeted with Addison and some recommendations on instructional strategies that could be employed to help achieve these goals. Goal 1: Addison will improve knowledge of strategies of reading. This goal is imperative for Addisons reading success. As McKenna and Stahl (2009) suggest in their modified cognitive model, strategic knowledge is one of three important building blocks of comprehension. Addisons overall comprehension was the biggest area of weakness identified during testing. On the QRI-V, both her reading and listening comprehension fell at the pre-primer level. Administering the think aloud trials of the QRI-V showed that she does not actively engage in meaning making self-talk while reading. Furthermore, the fact that Addison was able to answer more comprehension questions on the QRI-V successfully after being allowed to look-back through the passage she had read suggests that she has difficulty with short term memory rather than actually understanding what she read. Therefore, teaching her strategies to actively engage while reading should help her hold the information in her short term memory. I suggest that the strategies of visualizing and questioning be introduced to Addison using direct instruction and modeling. (Scanlon, et al, 2011, p. 286) I also suggest that the process of interactive read alouds continue to be implemented with Addison so that modeling of metacognition self-talk and question while reading could be provided to her. (Scanlon, et al, 2011, p. 292) Goal 2: Addison will view comprehension as the general purpose of reading. This goal is also imperative for Addisons reading success. Understanding of purposes for reading is another important component of the strategic knowledge building block that McKenna and Stahl (2009) discuss in their modified cognitive model. As discussed above, reading comprehension was a relative weakness for Addison. Her performance on the QRI-V suggests difficulties with reading both expository and narrative texts. Addisons answers on the Burke reading inventory suggest that she views decoding as the purpose of reading and not comprehension. It will be very difficult to improve her reading comprehension if does not see reading as a process of meaning making. Therefore, I suggest that this area continue to be targeted with Addison so that she can actively engage in meaning making. Writing was also shown to be an area of weakness for Addison on the MEAP narrative rubric and writing sample, so incorporating writing into comprehension instruction is suggested. Addison should be encouraged to keep a written learning log that is modeled after the KWL format (Scanlon, et al, 2011, p. 294). Through this, she can record her thoughts in the Know

and Want to Know columns to activate prior knowledge before reading and then record new knowledge in the Learned column. Charting like this should help her to focus on meaning making while reading. Another suggestion would be to have Addison write her own pieces that are modeled after a text that she recently read or that draw on knowledge from recent readings. (Scanlon, et al, 2011) Goal 3: Addison will improve sight word knowledge. Although automatic word recognition was an area of relative strength for Addison, her performance in this area still fell below grade level expectations. McKenna and Stahls (2009) modified cognitive model suggests automatic word recognition is made up of phonological awareness, print concepts, decoding/sight word knowledge and fluency in context. Addison has improved her phonological awareness skills this semester, but we did not target her sight word knowledge. Addison was able to recognize all 300 of the Fry word list, which shows that she has mastered high frequency words. However, her performance on the QRI word lists placed her at the instructional level on the 4th grade lists. Improving the number of words she can read with automaticity will improve her reading fluency. (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) The majority of words are learned through reading, therefore, a wide reading approach (McKenna & Stahl, 2009) is suggested to expose Addison to new words and improve her ability to to recognize them when encountered again. It is suggested that the Interactive Strategy Approach (Scanlon, et al, 2011, p. 202) be employed to improve her ability to decode and recognize unknown words while reading. Teaching Addison strategies to learn new words will improve her independence and improve the effectiveness of the wide reading approach to word learning. My Professional Learning Through this course, I have gained a significant amount of new knowledge. I entered the MATC program to learn more about how speech and language difficulties affect my students reading skills. This course aligned exactly with my own learning goals. I have learned a significant amount about reading and spelling development. Through the Modified Cognitive Model, I learned how all of the processes of reading interact to ultimately result in, or wreak havoc with, comprehension. I learned that a students view of the purpose for reading can have a significant effect on their comprehension. Additionally, I learned just exactly why fluency is important for reading comprehension and that they way it is instructed and emphasized at my school is not helpful for the end goal of comprehension. Regarding assessment, I learned several possible new assessment approaches that I can use for progress monitoring on my speech and language students. I can now use the comprehension portion of QRI-V to compare skills across genres and across

modalities to tease out underlying difficulties with comprehension (vocabulary, background knowledge, reading strategies, working memory, etc). I can use these methods for progress monitoring and it also will allow me to communicate with teachers in a way they understand (e.g., grade levels) instead of simply with standardized scores and developmental milestones. Also, I learned about the Test of Phonemic Awareness and the Elementary Spelling Inventory that I can use with my articulation students to quantify how their errors interfere with success in the curriculum. These can be used for progress monitoring, too. Regarding my own teaching applications, I have learned strategies for improving phonological awareness that I can incorporate with my articulation therapy exercises in order to help my intervention have the maximum effect possible on a students reading skills. I also plan to take my learning about curriculum based assessments and how they apply to speech therapy goals back to the speech therapists in our department. I have always used the line that articulation is important for reading development when talking to parents, but never truly understood how much of an impact beyond letter/sound correspondence it could have on a students reading. This clas s has taught me how to design well-rounded therapy that will truly connect with the school curriculum. Specifically to this project, my student taught me a significant amount about how to accommodate these assessments for the special education population. I also learned how to adapt reading activities to best meet her needs as a student with autism. She further reinforced the idea that motivating reading materials not only help with motivation to read, but also help to improve comprehension. She was the first student with whom I had the pleasure to work on reading skills.

References Graham, S., & Herbert, M. (2010). Writing to Read Report: Evidence for How Writing Can Improve Reading. Retrieved from: http://www.all4ed.org/files/WritingToRead.pdf Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J. S., (2011). Qualitative reading inventory-5 (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson. McKenna, M.C. & Stahl, K.A.D. (2009). Assessment for reading instruction (2nd ed.). New York: Guildford. Scanlon, D. M., Anderson, K. L., and Sweeny, J. M. (2010). Early intervention for reading difficulties: The interactive strategies approach. New York: Guilford.

Appendix My session plans and summaries can be accessed through the following link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mgbLdkUiiqNLQGTwnaUWQQqYx_jJFCh5wilSAfIEbJA/e dit