I.

Name: Steven
Gender: Male
Birth date and Age: 8/26/2001 13 years old
Grade: 7
School: Pine Middle School
Case Study Clinician: Elyssa Place
Reading Instructional Grade Level: 7th Grade
Lexile Instructional Level: 1000 (This is below the Target Common Core Lexile for Grade 7 of
1045)
II. Background Information
Steven is a male 7th grade student at Pine Middle School. He is 13 years old and the youngest of
6 children. His family is very active in sports, and there is a big emphasis placed on academics.
He is very interested in reading and writing. He does not receive any special services for literacy.
In his 7th grade class there is a focus on fostering the enjoyment of reading. They have
independent reading time, and are allowed to read books that interest them. In English class they
focus on a novel and read it together. The teacher follows her own pace and curriculum.
III. Summary of Interviews
Steven and his mother were interviewed on August 30th. The interviews allowed me to
learn more about Steven. Both of Stevens parents work jobs with long hours. His mother is a
nurse, and his father is an accountant and a volunteer firefighter. Growing up he learned to read
through a whole language approach, and his Catholic elementary school used Accelerated
Reading software created by Renaissance Learning Inc. This software has students take
comprehension quizzes after reading a book at their reading level. Stevens mother explained that
when Steven was in 5th grade, he was struggling with reading. His teacher explained that he was
reading below grade level, and gave the parents some ways to help Steven improve. Stevens
father began to read to him and with him for 30 minutes every day. This improved Stevens
reading level, and his mother explained that he is now around where he should be.
Steven is a well-rounded child. He plays basketball, football, and baseball, and has
developed a love of reading and writing. He has a bookcase in his room filled with books that he
likes to read. His interests focus on sports books, and historical fiction books. Books of his
preference at his independent level (sixth grade) include M.C. Higgins, the Great by Virginia
Hamilton (Lexile Measure 620L and grade level equivalent 6.2), and Daniel's Story by Carol
Matas (Lexile Measure 720L and grade level equivalent 6.3). Books of his preference at his
instructional level (seventh grade) include The Winter Hero by Christopher Collier and James
Lincoln Collier (Lexile Measure 750L and grade level equivalent 7.1), and The Adventures of
Ulysses by Bernard Evslin (Lexile Measure 860L and grade level equivalent 7.4) . Other reading
that he enjoys includes sports statistics, and cereal boxes. He explained that reading is done to
learn more about something, and writing is done to put something on paper. As a reader, he
believes that he needs to improve his comprehension, and that he should read faster. His mother
explained that her husband and she are avid readers. Steven has had good examples of adults
enjoying reading. Last year he did fall behind in school when he missed 3 weeks because his
appendix had to be taken out.

IV. A. Assessment Results

A. Overview Statement
To find Stevens reading levels and access his skills, I administered the Stanford
Diagnostic Reading Test Fourth Edition, and the Basic Reading Inventory. I met with him on
two separate occasions to administer the assessments. The Stanford was on August 30th and the
Basic Reading Inventory was on September 22nd. Steven was very cooperative during the
administration. He did not complain, but during the Stanford Test, he was anxious to meet up
with a friend. During the Basic Reading Inventory, he was very focused.
B. Test Results
a. Stanford Diagnostic Reading TestThis test looked into both comprehension and vocabulary using multiple choice. Steven was
given a booklet with the questions and a bubble page to record his answers.
1. Comprehension:
88%
Grade Equivalent: 5.2
i.
This part of the test had 54 questions. Steven had to read many different passages
and then answer comprehension questions based on the passages. The different
types of questions included, recreational, textual, functional, initial
understanding, interpretation, critical analysis, and process strategies.
ii.
According to this subtest Stevens comprehension is below where he should be.
He answered 33 out of the 54 questions correctly, which put him at the early 5th
grade level. He got 8/15 for recreational, 8/18 for textual, and 15/21 for
functional. The percentage of questions he got wrong for recreational and textual
is a lot lower than the functional questions. For the other set of questions he got
12/18 for initial understanding, 15/25 for interpretation, 2/6 for critical analysis,
and 4/5 for process strategies. He did the best with the process strategies then the
next best with interpretation and initial understanding. For the critical analysis
questions he only got 33% correct.
iii.
This subtest compared to the other subtest in the Stanford Diagnostic Reading
Test, and the subtests in the Basic Reading Inventory, is very low scoring for
Steven. In the other tests his grade equivalent is higher.
2. Vocabulary:
99% Grade Equivalent: 12.3
This part of the test had 30 questions. Steven had to answer vocabulary related
questions. The question types were synonyms, classification, word parts, and
content area.
ii.
According to this subtest Stevens vocabulary is above where he should be. He
answered 25 out of 30 questions correctly, which put him at the early 12th grade
level. He answered all 4 of the word parts questions correctly, got 3 out of 4
correct for both classification and content area, and 15 out of 18 correct for
synonyms.
i.

iii.

When comparing his comprehension and vocabulary scores from the Stanford
Diagnostic Reading Test, there is a discrepancy between the two subtests. His
comprehension placed him below his current grade by 2 grades, but his
vocabulary placed him above his current grade by 5 grades. It is observed that
his vocabulary skills are significantly higher than comprehension skills.
Independent Reading Level: 6th Grade
Instructional Reading Level: 7th Grade
Frustrational Reading Level: 8th Grade
This assessment looked into many different areas of Stevens reading to help find
his reading levels. The areas include word lists out of context, word recognition in
context, oral reading comprehension, and silent reading comprehension.
I prefer the results of this assessment over the results of the Stanford Diagnostic
Reading Test when it comes to determining Stevens reading level. He was a little
distracted during the Stanford because his friend was present and waiting for him
to finish. He did have better results on this test. Often when assessing a child the
assessments with the better results are used. This is because there are many more
reasons for why a student did not do well, but should have done well, than for
why a student did do well, but should not have.

b. Basic Reading Inventoryi.

ii.

1. Word Lists Out of Context:

i.

ii.

iii.

Independent Reading Level: 5th Grade

Instructional Reading Level: 7th Grade
Frustrational Reading Level: 8th Grade

This subtest looked into Stevens word recognition out of context. He read from
a list of words and I wrote down his reading of the words. I used the word lists
from the Basic Inventory Book Form A. There are 20 words per list. 20 and 19
correct are independent level, 18, 17 and 16 correct are instructional, 15 and 14
correct are instructional/frustrational, and 13 or less are frustrational.
According to the sub-test Stevens words out of context independent level is at
5th grade. His instructional level is at 7th, which is right at his grade level, and his
frustrational level is 8th grade. He missed the consonant digraphs of ch in orchid
and th in ruthless. He added the consonant digraph of ck into the word
vacancy. I also noticed that he had trouble distinguishing between the long and
short a sound. In the word ventilate, he pronounced the a as a long i. With the
word vancany, he pronounced the second a as a long a. He also missed the
long g in the word gangster.
This measure does not match up with the vocabulary section used in the Stanford
Diagnostic Test. According to the Stanford Stevens vocabulary was at the 12.3
level. The word lists out of context, showed that Stevens spelling of the words,
does not match up with his vocabulary knowledge. He has the sight of the words,
but when asked to spell, them he does not do as well.
2. Word Recognition in Context

Independent Reading Level: 6th Grade

Instructional Reading Level: 7th Grade
Frustrational Reading Level: 8th Grade

i.

ii.

iii.

This assessment looked into Stevens word recognition when reading. I had
different readings from the Basic Inventory Book Form A. As Steven read the
stories aloud, I took notes on his miscues. There are 100 words for each story. 01 miscues is independent, 2-4 is independent/instructional, 5 is instructional, 6-9
is instructional/frustrational and 10+ is frustrational.
According to the sub-test Stevens word recognition in context independent level
is at 6th grade, below his grade level. His instructional level is at 7th, which
is right at his grade level, and his frustrational level is 8th grade. Stevens reading
was very fluent. Many of his miscues came from mispronouncing words by
saying the long vowel sound or short vowel sound when it should be the
opposite. Other miscues include using the wrong suffix or prefix of words like
saying clothes instead of clothing or missing them like saying tropic
instead of tropics. He said mortal instead of immortal and press instead
of impress. He also missed the dg sound in trudge.
Like the words out of context subtest, Steven had trouble with the long and short
vowel sounds. His independent level was a grade higher than in the words out of
context subtest. This lines up better with his vocabulary knowledge from the
subtest of the Standford. It shows that he does better when seeing the word, than
when having to spell and write it.
Independent Reading Level: 6th Grade
Instructional Reading Level: 7th Grade
Frustrational Reading Level: 8th Grade
This assessment looked into Stevens reading comprehension after orally reading
a passage. After he read the passage that I looked at his word recognition in
context, I asked him comprehension questions from the Basic Inventory Book
Form A. I marked down his answers and wrote whether they were correct or not.
There were ten questions for each passage. 0-1 miscues is independent, 1 -2 is
independent/instructional, 2 is instructional, 3-4 is
instructional/frustrational and 5+ is frustrational.
According to this sub-test, Stevens oral reading comprehension independent
level is at 6th grade, below his grade level. His instructional level is at 7th, which
is right at his grade level, and his frustrational level is 8th grade. For the passages
for grades 5 and 6, Steven got three factual questions wrong and one inferring.
He was able to get all the evaluating and vocabulary correct. For the grade 7
passage, Steven continued to get some factual questions wrong, and one inferring
question wrong. He again, answered the vocabulary question and evaluating
question correctly. For the 8th grade passage, he missed 5 of the factual questions
wrong and none of the other questions. The comprehension sub-test showed that
Steven got all of the vocabulary and evaluating questions right and most of the
inferring questions, but does need to focus on comprehension when it comes to
remembering key facts.
When I compare the reading of the word recognition subtest to the
comprehension subtest for the grade 8 passage, I see that Steven was unable to
read the word immortal right, but he did know the definition. This is a

3. Oral Reading Comprehension

i.

ii.

iii.

reoccurring theme that has been seen when comparing the vocabulary subtest
from the Standford assessment with the word lists out of context and the word
recognition in context from the Basic Reading Inventory. When Steven has to
spell the word or read it aloud, he may not have it correct. When he sees the
word and reads it either in his head or aloud, he knows the meaning.
Independent Reading Level: 6th Grade
Instructional Reading Level: 7th Grade
Frustrational Reading Level: 8th Grade
This assessment looked into Stevens reading comprehension after silently reading a
passage. After he read the passage in his head, I asked him comprehension
questions and used the readings from the Basic Inventory Book Form E. I marked
down his answers and wrote whether they were correct or not. There were ten
questions for each passage. 0-1 miscues is independent, 1 -2 is
independent/instructional, 2 is instructional, 3-4 is instructional/frustrational
and 5+ is frustrational.
According to this sub-test, Stevens silent reading comprehension independent level
is at 6th grade, below his grade level. His instructional level is at 7th, which is right at
his grade level, and his frustrational level is 8th grade. For the 5th and 6th grade
passages, he answered all of the questions correctly. For the 7th grade passage, he
answered two of the factual questions wrong. For the 8th grade passage, he
answered 4 of the factual questions and one of the inferring questions wrong. This
shows that Steven needs to work on his reading comprehension when it comes to
remembering the factual information. His vocabulary and evaluating
comprehension questions were all correct.
Steven got all of the vocabulary and evaluating questions correct just like with the
oral reading comprehension questions. He also had trouble with the factual
questions. Compared to the oral reading comprehension questions the levels are the
same. The silent reading comprehension questions were more directly recognizable.
The oral reading 6th grade level was independent/instructional, while the silent
reading was independent. The 7th grade worked out similarly. The oral reading was
instructional/frustrational, while the silent reading was instructional. This shows
that he did do slightly better when he read silently. He read the 5th and 6th grade
passages with no mistakes, while for oral reading he had 4 questions wrong all
together.

4. Silent Reading Comprehension

i.

ii.

iii.

IV. B. Assessment Results

A. Overview Statement
On October 26th I met with Steven to administer 5 different assessments to look further
into his strengths and weaknesses. We started with the Diagnostic Screening Test: Spelling to
look into his spelling needs more closely. Next Steven answered questions from the
Metacomprehension Strategy Index to help evaluate his knowledge of reading processes before,
during and after he is reading. Steven then read a passage and answered questions found online
for the Common Core State Standards, to see how he would do with these questions at his
instructional grade level. The Nifty Thrifty Fifty list of words helped me look into what specific

prefixes and suffixes that Steven did not know the meanings of, and which ones he needs help
with. To look into his writing, he wrote a writing sample and I assessed it based on the 6+1 Traits
of Writing.
B. Test Results
a. Diagnostic Screening Test: Spelling

Overall Grade Level Equivalent: 8.1

Phonics Words Grade Level Equivalent: 8.7
Sight Words Grade Level

Equivalent: 7.2
i.
ii.

iii.

This test looked into Stevens spelling ability. After using the pre-test words to
find where to start, I read the word to Steven and he spelled them on the student
worksheet provided. It included phonics and sight words.
Overall on this test, Steven scored above his grade level. He got 4 phonics word
wrong and 9 sight words wrong before he reached the ceiling. The words spelled
wrong began in 6th grade words and went up until he reached the ceiling in 10th
grade. The mistakes were sporadic with more mistakes made on the sight word
side. The sight words did not follow the phonics rules. The shows that he can
follow the phonic rules better than recognizing the sight words. For the words that
dealt with phonics, he made mistakes by doubling consonants that should not
have been doubled. The words were musseum instead of museum, and
appex instead of apex. In majority he changed the j to a g, and he
forgot the i in platinum. For the sight words Steven switched the ie in
brief, and spelled business like bissnuss. When you look at how he spelled
these words phonetically, it makes sense. He focused on the sounds that he heard.
He missed the h in character, the first r in surprise, and the second i in
officially. He switched the c in precious with an s. When looking at his
spellings of appreciation as apreseasion and conscience as consiouns, you
can infer that he has not seen these sight words many times. They are both above
his grade level.
When comparing the overall results of this test with past tests that had to do with
spelling and word recognition, one might expect Steven to not have had scored
above his grade level. The results from the Stanford and the Basic Reading
Inventory showed that his spelling and word recognition in and out of context
were his lower areas. He would spell or say the words incorrectly, but he still
knew the meaning. This spelling test showed that his spelling is above where it
should be. It did point out some weaknesses that can be addressed to help him
improve. Steven also had problems with the g sound, and ch sound in this test
like he did on the BRI.

b. Metacomprehension Strategy Index

i.

48% Correct (12/25)

This test used multiple-choice questions to look into Stevens metacomprehension

strategy awareness. The questions asked him about his reading before,
during, and after. There are six item clusters including Predicting and

Verifying, Previewing, Purpose Setting, Self-Questioning, Drawing from

Background Knowledge, and Summarizing and Applying Fix-up Strategies.
This test definitely showed that there are some areas that Steven should work on
when it comes to metacomprehension. The only cluster where he answered all the
questions correctly was Previewing. This included questions that asked him about
activating prior knowledge. For the Predicting and Verifying cluster he got 4 out
of 7 correct. He got all of the before reading ones correct, one out of three correct
for during, and one out of three correct for after. For the Purpose Setting questions
he got one out of three correct. This means that his strategies for active and
strategic reading can be improved. The two incorrect questions had to do with
before reading. He does not set up a purpose before beginning the reading. For the
Self-Questioning questions he got two out of three correct. The one incorrect
question had to do with before reading and figuring out questions you would like
answered when reading. For Drawing from background knowledge he answered
one out of 6 correctly. The one correct came from after reading. He understood
that after reading it is a good idea to think about yourself as the main character.
For the first three questions that he answered incorrectly for this cluster, were all
answers that were not about before reading. The answers he put were all about
what you do during or after reading. For example he said that before reading it is
a good idea to retell all of the main points. The next two questions that were
wrong in this cluster were during and after. He answered that it is important to
recognize new vocabulary words when reading and look up big words in the
dictionary after reading. For the final cluster, Summarizing and Applying Fix-up
Strategies, he answered two out of 4 correctly. He answered one before and one
during incorrectly. He put that while he is reading it is a good idea to read the title
to see what the story is about, and he did not understand what to do while he is
reading if something does not make sense.
This test shows that Steven needs some work on metacomprehension. He had the
most trouble with what to do before reading. His score on this test is connected
with the BRI and Stanford tests. His comprehension on the Stanford was very
low. For the BRI he needed more help with factual questions. The low score on
the metacomprehension test connects with this finding. He does not utilize many
metacomprehension strategies when reading. He does not utilize a strategy to
help him know what to do when he does not understand something.

ii.

iii.

c. PARCC Sample Comprehension Questions

i.
on

0% Correct (0/6)

Using the PARCC website I used sample questions to look further into Stevens
comprehension and how he would do on questions related to the common core
and his instructional level. The assessment included a non-fiction reading
Amelia Earhart and 6 questions.
ii. Steven did not do well with the questions. I had another reading and set of
questions that I chose not to give him when I saw his response to this one. He
tried his best, but was unable to answer any of the questions correctly. The
questions went further than knowing facts. They asked Steven to infer and analyze
what he read. The questions were in two parts. Part A would ask a factual

question that included understanding what was read and determining the meaning
of words. Part B asked Steven to infer the Part A answer by choosing the sentence
that supported Part A answer. For the last question, Part A asked Steven to pick
one claim out of 3 that is supported by the most relevant and sufficient evidence
from the article. Part B asked Steven to pick 2 sentences out of 5 that supported
the answer to Part A. These also asked Steven to make inferences. If Part A was
wrong, most likely Part B would be too.
iii. The results match prior assessments. With Steven being at a 7th grade instructional
level and the Common Core levels being a year and a half a head of where the
students are at, Steven tried to answer questions above his level. Compared to the
metacomprehension assessment, you can further see that Steven does need to
work on strategies to help him understand before, during, and after reading. On
the BRI he answered most of the factual and inferring questions wrong, and this
assessment asked inferring questions. With this test he was able to go back and
look through the reading when answering questions, unlike the BRI.
d. The Nifty Thrifty Fifty
64% Correct (14/23)
i. This assessment looked into Stevens ability to recognize multisyllabic words
with prefixes and suffixes out of context. Using a list of words, I asked Steven the
meanings of the prefixes and suffixes that were part of a word. I stopped when he
missed 8 meanings.
ii. Steven missed 4 out of 7 prefix meanings. He missed dis-, com-, sub-, and
in-. For the first three he did not have a guess. For in- he guessed that is was
having it. For the suffixes he missed 5 out of 16. The ones that he missed
include ive, -ion, -ify, -ity, and ous. He had no guesses for these
suffixes.
iii. Steven left off prefixes and suffixes when reading words in and out of context for
the BRI. This assessment helped look at what specific prefixes and suffixes he
will need help with.
e. 6+1 Writing Traits

Scores out of 5:

Ideas- 5
Organization- 4
Voice- 5
Word Choice-

3
Sentence Fluency- 4
Conventions- 2
Presentation5
i. This assessment included Steven writing a sample piece of writing. He was
instructed to write about an exciting sports game that he watched or was in. After
he wrote it I used the rubrics in the 6+1 Writing Traits book to score him on his
ideas, organization, voice, word choice, sentence fluency, conventions, and
presentation.

ii. Using the rubrics in the book I scored Steven from 1 to 5. 1 is not yet, 2 is
emerging, 3 is developing, 4 is effective and 5 is strong. For ideas, voice and
presentation he scored a 5. I scored him with a 5 for ideas because he chose a
manageable topic and wrote from his own experience with relevant and quality
details. It was not predictable and he picked significant details. For voice I scored
him a 5. I was really impressed. I could sense the writer behind the words and it
was an honest and engaging narrative. His presentation received a 5 because his
handwriting was very neat with margins and consistent spacing. I gave him a 4 on
organization and sentence fluency. For organization he had his information in
sequential order with good transitions. He should work on writing a better
introduction that is more inviting. For sentence fluency, the sentences do flow and
vary in length. There are some parts where the reader has to search for how the
sentences connect, though. I gave him a 3 for word choice. The words helped with
meaning. Some words were interesting and striking like snatched, but he could
have used more. The word exiting was used repeatedly. For conventions he
scored a 2 because he had some spelling and grammar errors. He said gonna
and messed up his tenses one time. He spelled exciting, receiver, beginning, a lot,
experiences wrong. His punctuation and capitalization were all correct.
iii. This assessment connects with his spelling in the Diagnostic Screening Test and
the words in and out of context oral reading. He spells and does not recognize
words all the time.
f. Common Core Writing Standards
i. Using the same writing sample as above I looked into how Steven performed
using the Common Core Writing Standards 7.3 and 7.4. They are designed for 7th
grade. 7.3 is: Writes narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events
using effective technique, relevant details, and well-structured event sequences.
7.4 is Produce clear and coherent writing in which development, organization,
and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.
ii. For the 7.3 standard Steven. He used transitional words to help with the flow of
his writing. He could have established the context better by setting the scene and
using more details around the context. The narrative techniques he used include
his own thinking, pacing, and adding descriptions. He could have used more
narrative techniques by including dialogue, and developing himself as a character
more. He used details, but more precise wording and sensory language would
have conveyed the experience better. The conclusion did tie the whole writing
together and included voice that narrated the experience. For the 7.4 standard, he
included all the requirements. The writing was clear and coherent. The purpose
was set and he included the details in a logical and organized pattern. All of the
components of his writing were appropriate for the task that he was presented
with.
iii. This assessment falls inline with the 6+1 Writing Traits. It addressed his use of
transitional words and using sequence to help with organization. It addressed
using sensory and precise words, like 6+1 did with word choice. For both he is on
his way to mastering. It went beyond the previous assessment because it included
the use of narrative techniques when writing. The standards I looked at did not

include conventions. In the previous assessment it was noted that his conventions
need help when it comes to grammar and spelling.
C. Diagnostic Conclusions
Steven responded very well to the lessons. The use of the crosschecking
strategy showed that Steven could read with accuracy when he pays attention to
his reading. He did not like the hand motions, but the questions allowed him to
slow down his reading and read with accuracy. The brainstorming strategy
allowed Steven to think about what he was about to read and what he knows
about it. I chose to teach him this because on the metacomprehension test he did
not know that this was a good skill to use. He responded well to this strategy, and
it showed that Steven just needed to learn how to brainstorm background
knowledge about a topic. Inferencing was another area he needed help with. After
the lesson it was apparent that he understood the concept, but he did not like the
Getting to Know My Character sheet when he had to use it with a reading he did
not like. He will need more instruction on nonfictional text structures, he does
understand how to fill out graphic organizers when they are already matched with
a text. I did a running record on a passage that was at his instructional level, and
with Common Core State Standard questions about the reading. He scored a 96%
accuracy, which is at Betts Criteria for Word Recognition level of independent,
and a 90% on comprehension, which is at Betts Criteria for Comprehension level
of independent. This shows that Stevens reading accuracy is increasing. The
comprehension question that he answered wrong was about finding a sentence in
the passage to support a claim. The reading accuracy and comprehension scores
showed that Stevens levels are at the same place and they are where they should
be.
I carried out a pre and post assessment on Stevens ability to remember the
meanings of specific prefixes and suffixes. I chose 5 words that he did not know
to work on the first day and assessed him after the lesson. Each meeting I assessed
him before and after the lesson. I added words to make it so there were always 5
words that were new or ones that he did not master yet. I ended up teaching 8
words, and he ended up having 7 correctly answered on the post assessment. This
shows that he needs to go through lessons to remember the meanings of the
prefixes and suffixes.
V. Diagnostic Hypotheses
For the RTI classification of Steven I would place him at Tier 1. He is instructionally at
his grade level according to the Basic Reading Inventory. This includes word lists out of context,
word recognition in context, oral reading comprehension and silent reading comprehension. He
has good vocabulary knowledge, which was shown in the vocabulary subtest of the Stanford
Diagnostic Reading Test and in both the oral and silent reading comprehension subtests of the
Basic Reading Inventory. He should work on his reading comprehension when it comes to
remembering factual information, and answering questions about inferences. He will also need
help on knowing how to find sentences from a text to support a claim. He has no problem with
the evaluating comprehension questions. The metacomprehension test showed that Steven should
learn to predict and verify, draw from background knowledge, and summarize. His word lists out

of context and word recognition in context miscues show that he needs to work on distinguishing
between when to use the long vowel sound, compared to the short vowel sound. He should focus
on suffixes and prefixes when spelling and reading. The specific ones that he missed the meaning
of include dis-, sub-, in-, ive, -ion, -ify, -ity, and ous. After 4 meetings that
included direct instruction with them, he mastered them all, but -ify and -ous. He is where
he should be when it comes to spelling sight words, that do not follow the phonics rules, in
relation to his grade level, but there are words that he missed from the lower grade levels. For
writing Stevens ideas, voice, and presentation were perfect. He had small improvements for
organization and sentence fluency. His word choice and conventions need some work. For
conventions he needed to work on spelling, grammar, and punctuation. He responded very well
to using an editing checklist that included the three areas. Commas are an area he could use more
instruction on.
VI. Instructional Suggestions
A. For Parents:
Steven would benefit from reading 100 minutes a week. I know that he plays multiple
sports and takes part in other activities; so striving to reach this number a week should be
manageable. He can prioritize his time. Two books that I recommend based on his interests and
independent reading level include: The Forgotten Heroes: The Story Of The Buffalo Soldiers by
Clinton Cox (grade level equivalent 6.6) and The Arkadians by Lloyd Alexander (grade level
equivalent 6.5). I suggest that when his reading level increases you have him read The Enchanted
Forest Chronicles series by Patricia C. Wrede (grade level equivalent 7.2), the Redwall series by
Brian Jacques (grade level equivalent 7.8), and the Bloody Jack Adventure Series by Louis A.
Meyer (grade level equivalent 8.6).
For Stevens writing, I would begin to work on building his word choice. Teach him the
difference between salsa and rice cake words. Rice cake words are words that you hear all
of the time and that are boring. Salsa words are exciting words that you do not hear a lot. For
example, walk is a rice cake word and strutted is a salsa word. For vacations when he is
not in school, I would have him write about a topic of his choice or a prompt found online that
interests him. After he writes go through with him, or have him go through on his own and
highlight the rice cake words. He can use the Internet or a dictionary to change the words to
salsa words.
Another suggestion is to have Steven keep track of his metacomprehension when reading.
He can keep notes in a notebook about how he addressed two metacomprehension strategies for
before, after, and during reading. He will write two examples of each. When doing this he will
use a sheet of paper with the strategies printed on it.
B. Classroom Teacher
Instruction for Steven was successful at a 7th grade level. Some readings that I suggest for
him at this level and that correlate with his interests include: The Dark is Rising by Susan
Cooper (grade level equivalent 7.1), Homer Price by Robert McCloskey (grade level equivalent
7.3), and Anthony Burns: The Defeat and Triumph of a Fugitive Slave by Virginia Hamilton
(grade level equivalent 7.1).
To individualize instruction for Steven to help address specific needs of his, I would give
him a checklist for him to use after he finishes writing. On it I would include things that we want

him to double check for after he writes. I would put on it: verb tenses, grammar mistakes,
spelling mistakes, and salsa words. This way he can get into the habit of checking over his
work, and specifically looking his areas of weakness. When there are readings in class I would
provide him with a piece of paper that has the metacomprehension strategies on it, so that he can
be reminded of what a reader should think about before, during, and after reading. Him knowing
the strategies and having them with him has helped improve his comprehension when I have
worked with him. You could also have him keep track on a piece of paper what strategies he is
using specific to a book. A word wall in the classroom with the sight words of the grade level
could be helpful to him and other students. This way they can become familiar with the words.
He has become more familiar with the words when working with me by saying the words and
writing them in sentences.
VII. Diagnostic Teaching Lessons
A. Meeting One: 30 Minutes
1. Objectives
* Steven will be taught the crosschecking strategy in order to determine
how he responds to using an accuracy reading strategy
* Steven will be taught how to use a checklist to edit a piece of writing
that he wrote in order to determine how he corrects spelling,
punctuation
and grammar errors.
* Steven will be taught five Nifty Thrifty Fifty words using a strategy
from Improving Reading Strategies & Resources (Johns & Lenksi,
2001)
in order to determine how he responds to learning 5 new sight
words using
pre and post assessments
Common Core Standards Used:
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.7.5
With some guidance and support from peers and adults, develop and strengthen
writing as needed by editing.
2. Procedures
* I met previously with Steven to talk to him about some series and
authors that he might like. We researched some online together
around his
independent/instructional level. He responded positively to
the books by
Philip Pullman.
*I will use Golden Compass (grade level equivalent 6.7) by Philip
Pullman to teach Steven the crosschecking strategy. This includes
hand
motions along with questions to use when you come to a word or
phrase
that you do not know. Steps: *Does the word I am reading match the
letters
written or the picture? (right hand to left shoulder) *Does it sound
right? (left
hand to right shoulder) *Does it make sense? (both hands
come down and
point to the ground)
*He will practice the strategy on his own while continuing to read the book
* Using the writing that Steven wrote from the assessment, I will introduce
him to a checklist that includes checking for grammar, spelling, and
punctuation. I will model for him how to do it on another
writing that I wrote.
Then I will watch him as he edits his writing.

* I will begin by writing: discovery, expensive, impression,

independence, and submarine on a white board. I know from the
assessment that he did not know the meaning of these prefixes
and suffixes.
* Together we will chant the words 3 times each and discuss the
meanings. We will chant the words again and underline the prefixes
and
suffixes. Then we will brainstorm other words with the same
prefixes or
suffixes.
* I will assess him on the words again and go over the answers.
3. Evaluation- The crosschecking strategy worked for Steven, but he did not like the
hand motions. I allowed him to not use them because he was asking the questions as
he read. The questions allowed him to keep track of what he was reading exactly. He
stopped many times to reread and his accuracy improved. He liked the book, and I let
him keep it. This showed that he was the ability to monitor his reading and improve
his accuracy. He was able to edit his paper when he went back and re-read it. It was
interesting that he was able to correct all of the grammar, spelling, and punctuation
errors that he made. The only thing he did miss was a comma. For the sight words we
went through each one. At the end I did assess him on the words. He got dis- and
in- wrong. He got the other three right. This showed that he is able to learn the
prefixes and suffixes when taught.
B. Meeting Two: 30 Minutes (this lesson ended up lasting up to an hour. Steven and his
mother did not have a problem with this.)
1. Objectives
*Steven will be taught the brainstorming strategy (Johns & Lenksi, 2001)
in order to determine if activating prior knowledge will help him
comprehend when he reads.
*Steven will use the brainstorming strategy before reading an article at his
instructional level and answering questions based on the Common Core
State Standards in order to see his performance on the CCSS and
his
reading level for word recognition and comprehension for Betts
Criteria
* Steven will be taught five Nifty Thrifty Fifty words using a strategy
from Improving Reading Strategies & Resources (Johns & Lenksi,
2001)
in order to determine how he responds to learning sight words
using
pre and post assessments
Common Core Standards Used:
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.7.1
Cite several pieces of textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says
explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.7.2
Determine a theme or central idea of a text and analyze its development over the
course of the text; provide an objective summary of the text.
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.7.3
Analyze the interactions between individuals, events, and ideas in a text
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.7.4
Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text.
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.7.5

Analyze the structure an author uses to organize a text, including how the major
sections contribute to the whole and to the development of the ideas.
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.7.6
Analyze how an author develops and contrasts the points of view of different
characters or narrators in a text.
2. Procedures
*I will teach Steven the brain storming strategy. I will explain the
importance of thinking about a topic before we read. Then together we
will do this using an article on sea stars (grade equivalent level 7.3). We
will brainstorm everything we know about sea stars, and write our ideas in
a graphic organizer.
* I will then give Steven another fiction article titled An NFL Team Could
Have Home-Field Advantage in London (grade equivalent level 7.3). He
will brainstorm on his own, then read the story out loud as I take a running
record, and then answer comprehension questions based on the CCSS.
* Then I will assess him on the five Nifty Thrifty Fifty words we went
over last visit. Based on what he gets right I will have five words for us to
go over. We will write the words and chant them again. This time we will
brainstorm other words with the same prefixes or suffixes.
* I will assess the words again and go over the answers.
3. Evaluation- The brainstorming activity went very well. He enjoyed the brain
storming for the NFL passage and I do think that it helped him with the reading.
Instead of just going right to reading, he now understands that there are benefits to
read a title and think about what you already know about the topic. For the running
record on the article he got 96% accuracy, which puts him at the independent level
for the 7th grade level equivalent passage. With the Common Core questions, he
did very well. He got a 90%, which is an independent level on Betts Criteria. The
one questions that he got wrong was about finding a sentence from the reading to
support an answer. He also got this wrong during the previous Common Core
assessments I took. For the assessment before the doing the sight words, he got
sub- and -ion correct. We then went over -in, -ive, and dis-, and added
-ify, and com-. He did well during the lesson and thought of many other words
that use the prefixes and suffixes. For the final assessment for this lesson Steven
got dis-, -ion, sub-, and com- correct. He is slowly learning the prefixes
and suffixes that I am teaching him.
C. Meeting three: 30 Minutes
1. Objectives
* Steven will be taught the Getting to Know My Character Chart (Johns &
Lenksi, 2001) in order to determine his response to inference strategies.
* Steven will be taught five Nifty Thrifty Fifty words using a strategy
from Improving Reading Strategies & Resources (Johns & Lenksi, 2001)
in order to determine how he responds to learning sight words using pre
and post assessments
Common Core Standards Used:
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.7.1

Cite several pieces of textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says
explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.7.3
Analyze how particular elements of a story or drama interact (e.g., how setting
shapes the characters or plot).
2. Procedures
* I will teach Steven how to use the Getting to Know My Character Chart to
make inferences about fictional characters. I will use the story provided in the
Improving Reading Strategies & Resources (Johns & Lenksi, 2001) book.
* Steven will read a portion of Golden Compass (grade level equivalent
6.7) by Philip Pullman and fill out the character chart on his own. We will
talk about how the main character, Lyra Belacqua, is shaped by other
characters, the setting and other story elements.
* Then I will assess him on the five Nifty Thrifty Fifty words we went
over last visit. Based on what he gets right I will have five words for us to
go over. We will write the words and chant them again. Then we will
brainstorm other words with the same prefixes or suffixes.
* I will assess the words again and go over the answers.
3. Evaluation- The Getting to Know My Character Chart started out a little shaky.
Steven was not very interested in the sample I used. I ended up not finishing it
with him and doing the one using the book he is interested in. We filled out the
chart together and talked about inferencing. I do not think he will use the chart
again, but it did help him understand the concept. For the Nifty Thrifty Fifty
words the first assessment showed that Steven retained the words, because he got
the same ones right as the end of the last lesson. We went over the words from the
last week and I added in -ity. He could not think of any words with -ity at the
end, so we went on the Internet and found some. This time for the assessment he
was able to answer them all correctly except for -ify.
D. Meeting Four: 30 Minutes
1. Objectives
* Steven will be taught how to use graphic organizers from the Improving
Reading Strategies & Resources (Johns & Lenksi, 2001) book to look at
how authors organize text to determine how he responds to understanding
nonfiction text structure and finding main ideas from readings
* Steven will be taught five Nifty Thrifty Fifty words using a strategy
from Improving Reading Strategies & Resources (Johns & Lenksi, 2001)
in order to determine how he responds to learning sight words using pre
and post assessments
Common Core Standards Used:
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.7.2
Determine two or more central ideas in a text and analyze their development
over the course of the text; provide an objective summary of the text.
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.7.5
Analyze the structure an author uses to organize a text, including how the major
sections contribute to the whole and to the development of the ideas.

2. Procedures
* Steven and I will read about and look at the different graphic organizers
in the Improving Reading Strategies & Resources (Johns & Lenksi, 2001)
book. Then we will match short passages to the graphic organizers, and fill
them out. Steven will be able to keep the graphic organizers to help him in
the future.
* Steven will be taught five Nifty Thrifty Fifty words using a strategy
from Improving Reading Strategies & Resources (Johns & Lenksi, 2001)
in order to determine how he responds to learning sight words using pre
and post assessments
3. Evaluation- Steven responded very well to the graphic organizers. He said that
they helped him understand the different types of nonfiction text structure. He
also said that he will use the graphic organizers again. He needed help matching
the passages to the graphic organizers, but he did not need any help putting in the
information. This shows that he will need more instruction on the text structures,
but he knows how to fill out graphic organizers. For the Nifty Thrifty Fifty words,
Steven missed -ive, in-, -ify, and -ity. The last meeting before did have a
longer time frame between then and now, than the other ones. After we went over
the prefixes and suffixes again, Steven got them all correct, expect for ify.

References
Boushey, G., & Moser, J. (2009). The CAFE book: Engaging all students in daily literacy
assessment and instruction. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Culham, R. (2003). 6+1 traits for writing: The complete guide grades 3 and up. New York, NY:
Scholastic.
Johns, J., & Lenski, S. (2002). Improving reading strategies & resources. Dubuque, IA:
Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.