Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 1

Case Study: An Analysis of Language Acquisition

Exploring the Nature of Second Language Acquisition of Carlos through an Analytical Lens

Ayana Fletcher-Tyson

Dr. Phillips Galloway

Educ 6530: Educational Linguistics/ Second Language Acquisition

Fall 2016
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 2

I. Introduction

Student Background and Family Life: My subject is Carlos, a sweet student with whom I have

worked since he was in Kindergarten last year. He is now six years old and a first grader at

America Prep in East Nashville. Carlos was born in Nashville to Spanish-speaking parents.

According to Carlos, both his mother and his father are originally from Mexico. At home, Carlos

almost exclusively hears Spanish unless his sister (who is in third grade at America Prep as well)

and him are playing and speaking in English. When his mother came in for parent-teacher

conferences or parent-school community nights last year, she always had the services of a

translator with her as she does not easily understand English either (Allison Grant, Interview).

Carlos is extremely eager to please and does not like to say the wrong thing in English, which I

believe limits his conversational output in academic situations. Having observed him with peers

and larger groups of students at literacy center time or lunch and recess, he is far more talkative

and less prone to stop himself from saying something, or whispering something under his breath

to try it out- he usually will just go for it, usually in a very simple sentence structure. In addition

to many small groups in and outside of the classroom to help Carlos progress and master grade

level material, Carlos also receives the services of seeing a Speech-Language Pathologist two

days a week.

Context: This year and last year, I work as part of the Student Support Team at East End Prep.

Every day, I have the pleasure of working with my case study student, Carlos. Together, we work

on his reading, writing, and language skills in a one-on-one setting for thirty minutes four days a

week. Therefore, I have formed my opinions based on the conversation that came from our

casual conversations and academic conversations between Carlos and myself during our one-on-

one time together. I also formed my opinions based on interviews with his teachers, past and
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 3

present. Finally, I also looked at written work including narrative writing prompts that I provided

and also ones provided by his teacher for his classwork. The conversations between Carlos and

myself have all taken place face-to-face at East End Prep. Some conversations have been casual

in nature; however, the majority have taken place during our one-on-one academic pull-out

group time. Carlos and I have been working together for over a year so he has become more

comfortable with my presence; however, in general, Carlos is more reserved around adults than

he is around his peers, so those observed interactions provide an interesting contrast to the

pragmatic rules Carlos follows with teachers. Also, his group time takes place in a classroom

with up to 3 other teachers also pulling small groups so it is a situation that often has other

conversations happening in the background and multiple students and teachers around.

II. Phonology

Phonological Analysis

One of Carloss relative strengths is English Comprehension during normal speech and

conversation. While he himself is slow to recall the words or is unable to think of the English

words to continue the conversation, when he is able to respond, it is often on topic and matches

what the person was talking to him about. For example, any tasks I asked Carlos to complete,

such as getting a blue folder from across the room and bringing it to the table, he was

immediately able to follow those verbal directions. However, I did notice Carlos struggled when

hearing directions for a task for the first time. When I explained the Narrative Retell task, I had

to repeat and rephrase the directions more simply again before he felt confident enough to get

started. Thinking in terms of the Communicative Competence Theory by Hymes and Canale, I

would say that Carlos discourse competence (his ability to comprehend and contribute to
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 4

conversation and discourse) is usually [coherent] and relevant to the topic; therefore I do

believe the strand of English Comprehension is his strength (Lecture, Week 3, Fall 2016).

However, in regards to Grammatical Competence, his sentences are often not accurate and

complex and therefore, two areas that Carlos will need help in developing is his English

Fluency and his English Pronunciation (Lecture, Week 3, Fall 2016). For example, when Carlos

greets his Speech Language Pathologist Mrs. Melissa, he always says [gu mrn missa] instead

of the more accurately pronounced [gd mrn msz. mls] Also, in order for Carlos to

speak fluently, he keeps his sentences very simple. For example, during his Narrative Retell of A

Ball for Daisy, Carlos used the sentence starter [a si] for every page that he described to me

instead of telling me a flowing story. However, I modeled retelling the entire story with more

detail, Carlos was able to tell me the story with more complex, fluent sentences. For example,

Carlos changed his description from [a si ka] to [dezi mpt n ka tu np.]

Perhaps, this can be attributed to Krashens theory and that Carlos will continue to need high-

quality comprehensible input in order to better learn the complexities of English (Lecture,

Week 3, Fall 2016). In the table pictured below, I have provided a few examples of words I could

understand during our times together, but that he was mispronouncing.

Word Carlos Correct

Pronunciation Pronunciation
Good gu gd
Other d r
Yellow llo jlo
Zoo sju zu
All l
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 5

III. Semantics

Word Choice Analysis

When choosing conversations and also writing samples to analyze, I had to keep in mind

Carlos age and grade level. While our conversations that were analyzed were 250 words or

more, as Carlos is a first grade student, the writing samples I analyzed were usually under 100

words. In order to have accurate observations of Carlos actual level, I wanted to use authentic

writing samples from his classwork; to be grade-level appropriate and truly appropriate for

Carlos level, it would not have been authentic to ask Carlos to produce work with 100 plus

words at this time.

In speaking, Carlos mean length of utterance (his MLU) is 3.05. Carlos spoke 67

morphemes for 20 utterances during one of our conversations concerning his weekend and

describing a picture. Another example of Carlos relatively low level of lexical diversity is found

in a text analysis of a piece of Carlos narrative writing. The total word count for the writing is

43 words; the total unique words is 24 unique words; and the lexical density is 55.81%

(UsingEnglish.com). A copy of this analyzed text can be found in the appendix.

For the most part, Carlos relies heavily on free morphemes. Most of the words he used that

involved bound morphemes were repeated from sentence structures I had provided. One of

Carlos strengths that appeared in his spoken and written utterances is his ability to recognize

when to use the suffix s on verbs with singular proper nouns and when to leave the -s off

when dealing with multiple proper nouns. For example, in a narrative writing sample, Carlos

wrote Kein [Kevin] jumps in the lef [leaves] versus writing Kein [Kevin] and Charlee ras

[race] in [on] the sidewok [sidewalk]. Carlos was able to accurately add an s to the verb for
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 6

the singular subject, Kevin and leave off an s from the verb for the plural subject, Kevin and

Charlee.

Another of Carlos semantic strengths is his ability to use basic, Tier 1 words. He is able to

use those words to label what he observes in his daily and academic life. For example, during

one session, Carlos and I read the childrens picture book, David Gets In Trouble. Carlos was

able to correctly answer simple comprehension questions about the text and use specific labels of

things he saw in the picture such as window, pants, and juice to help him give complete

answers.

However, since Carlos strength lies in his knowledge of Tier 1 words, the main area of

Carlos semantic weaknesses that will need developing lies in higher level exical diversity. He

works hard to express himself in conversation and in his writing, but he is usually only able to

recall the same types of comfortable words to speak and write. For example, he almost always

immediately describes a characters feelings as sad, happy, or excited. It is hard for him to

recall words to use past general nominals and action words (Byrnes and Wasik, 109).

Influencing Factors

In my opinion, Carlos main influencing factor for choosing words is from having to

choose from his seemingly limited amount of known words. Carlos vocabulary especially when

writing or answering questions about books consists of the same words that he appears to feel

very secure in using. For example, when asked how a character feels in story, he usually will

answer with He feels sad; She feels happy; or they feel excited instead of varying his

answers based on the nuances of the characters emotions such as frustrated, angry, nervous,

worried, or joyful. Another influencing factor is Carlos environment. Since the most likely

environmental cause of individual differences in vocabulary size is differences in the level of

 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 7

exposure to words, it seems clear that Carlos level of lexical diversity in English is low in

comparison to his peers as he is not hearing English spoken at home. His parents speak Spanish

to him and know very basic English words; therefore, Carlos has had less exposure for less time

to the English language.

IV. Grammar

Not only must I understand Carlos abilities regarding the phonology and semantics of

language, I must also analyze his language abilities through the lens of grammar. This lens will

include an analysis of the morphology and syntax that Carlos uses in conversation with adults

and in academic writing. For Carlos to be fully fluent in his second language, he must understand

the morphology or word structure and syntax or sentence structure of English (Phillips-

Galloway, Lecture Week 9, Fall 2016). Carlos is able to communicate in a way that is likely to

be interpreted correctly by other listeners however, much of Carlos speech would not be

judged to be well-formed by other listeners (Byrnes and Wasik, 133). Carlos has the basic

skills to link simple nouns and verbs correctly; however, he is lacking to skills to fluently

compose complex sentence structures using a diverse array of words correctly.

Morphological Ability Analysis

Since grammar involves knowing how to add endings onto words called inflections, an

analysis of Carlos Mean Length of Utterance (MLU) is necessary. Based on analyses of both

conversation transcripts and written work, Carlos morphological ability contained an average

MLU of 1.07 based on, among other interactions, a conversation transcript of 64 total

morphemes, per 60 utterances by Carlos and a written narrative of 45 total morphemes, per 42

written words. I divided the total number of morphemes he used by the total number of

utterances to get his average MLU. If Carlos was a native speaker of English, it would be
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 8

expected that by age 5, his MLU would be around 4 to 4.5 (Phillips-Galloway, Lecture 9, Fall

2016). This is definitely an area of weakness for Carlos as his MLU average is about 3 utterances

below the typical average MLU of children in his same age range. It is interesting to see that

there is not a significant difference in Carlos MLU whether he is speaking in conversation or

writing after pre-planning his thoughts.

Carlos demonstrated knowledge of when it is appropriate to use a singular modifier when

he described a picture to me and told me I see one dog versus saying I see dogs or I see one

dogs. He also demonstrated the appropriate use of the forming a singular verb versus plural verb

when talking about one person versus two people in his writing. Carlos was able to correctly

place an s at the end of jump to say that Kevin jumps in the lef and he was able to

correctly write Kevin and Charlee race on the sidewalk. However, he showed that he is not

consistently using singular and plural endings as he did not make the word leaf plural in his

sentence concerning Kevin jumping in leaves. Carlos will need reinforcement on simple noun

and verb endings and need to internalize those consistently before he will be able to move on to

using more complex construction of sentences in his English language to further boost his

MLU (Byrnes and Wasik, 148).

Syntactic Ability Analysis

I evaluated Carlos syntactic ability to see if he possessed a solid understanding of the use

of correct word order in English and how to organize that word order past phrases and into

sentences. What I noticed is that the number one characteristic of Carlos syntactic ability is his

tendency to speak in incomplete phrases unless prompted or provided with a sentence stem. In

conversation, Carlos will frequently answer questions with only the most necessary one or two

words. For example, frequently when someone asks Carlos How are you today? he will usually
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 9

just answer with a simple Good! Another example of Carlos speaking in phrases versus

complete sentences is that he sometimes does not use a subject when speaking and might just

start with the verb. For example, when I asked Carlos how old a child was turning in a picture of

a birthday party, Carlos first instinct was to simply respond Turning 4. Again, I can understand

his basic point (that he does know that the child is turning 4 years old); however, Carlos offers no

more information on which child he thinks is turning 4 years old by starting his sentence with a

subject and he does not offer how he knows that the child is turning 4 years old by adding a

subordinate clause beginning with because. However, I do consider it a strength and something

to build upon that Carlos does not mix up the order of the words he does choose to say. For

example, he could have said 4 turning but he was able to produce Turning 4 as the correct

order for those two words.

Another syntactic skill that I noticed Carlos lacking is that of the use of connectives.

Carlos rarely uses connectives when speaking or writing. For example, during a narrative retell,

Carlos did not connect what had happened on previous pages to what was happening on the

current page through words such as then, next, or after.

Global Grammar Assessment

Carlos has quite a few strengths when it pertains to his skills in English grammar. If the

key goal of language is to communicate effectively and be understood, Carlos is easily

understood and communicates the correct point effectively. Carlos has found sentence structures

that work for him that he knows is correct and uses them often. For example, during our

narrative task together (see appendix), Carlos repeatedly used the sentence structure I see to

inform about the story unfolding on the pages. This is not a complex way of speaking, but it is an

accurate one.
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 10

Carlos also has very similar weaknesses when looking at his oral language versus his

written language performance. Considering that his mean length of utterances were almost the

exact same for oral language and written language, he will need instruction in both more

complex morphology and syntax in both his speaking and written production of English.

V. Pragmatics

Pragmatics Analysis

Carlos most certainly has the desire to communicate yet needs to work on building his

tool-kit so he can even more effectively express his thoughts in front of various audiences

appropriately and clearly (Lecture, Week 4, Fall 2016). In almost all of our beginning

conversations, Carlos did not initiate conversation, but instead only responded to all questions to

the best of his ability. Carlos is clearly still in the pre-basic stage of development in his second

language acquisition as he use the minimum words and least complex sentence structure to get

his point across (Lecture, Week 4, Fall 2016).

In general, Carlos strength when considering Grices Maxims is his observance of the

maxim of quality. Carlos always tries to be truthful in all of his interactions with adults and peers

and does not supply false information knowingly. However, Carlos does not always adhere

faithfully to Grices Maxims of quantity, relation, and manner in our interactions or in the

interactions I observed between Carlos and his peers (Brynes and Wasik 41). For example,

Carlos struggles with the maxims of quantity or manner as he does not elaborate on his answers

to questions. When asked questions, many times Carlos will remain silence or respond with

hmmm. Other times, Carlos frequently responds with one word answers. For example, typical

first graders at East End Prep when asked about their day will go on either about something they
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 11

did that they enjoyed, how their behavior is going, or myriad of other topics related to the life of

a first grader at East End Prep. However, Carlos does not offer any specific details to fill others

in on his day without specific prompting. Another example is demonstrated in our exercise where

he had to tell the story of a picture. I asked Carlos What do you see in the picture? Many of

Carlos answers were one word responses such as candles or cake or else he would fill in the

simple phrase I see the____. In this interaction, and many others, it is clear that Carlos requires

prompting to elaborate his thoughts and ensure that his contributions to the conversation are of a

quantity that is as informative as possible (Lecture, Week 4, Fall 2016). He is also not adhering

to the manner principle as his answers are actually too brief to the point of ambiguity; it is not

clear if he actually notices more of the action in the picture and understands that the picture is

representing a birthday party for someone turning four years old (Brynes and Wasik 41).

Carlos also does not always adhere to the maxim of relation. For example, in a discussion

where Carlos was asked to think of names for boys and girls in a story he was writing, he was

unable to come up with any names on his home. He was given a model of using a name of

someone in his class, but he was still unable to think of a relevant name without guided

assistance and picture cues of current friends in his class (conversation found in appendix).

Another example, where Carlos requires additional prompting to adhere to the maxim of relation

was seen during a narrative task involving the book Goodnight Gorilla. Carlos did not realize the

story line was the gorilla going behind the security guard and unlocking all the animals cages so

that they could escape. Therefore, as he retold the story, his attempt did not actually fully relate

to the actual story told through the pictures at hand.

However, there was a slight improvement in Carlos independent generation of additional

conversation. At the beginning of our time meeting together, I would always say Good morning,
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 12

Carlos! How are you today? Carlos response every day was Good. Then, I would continue to

ask questions to continue our conversation. However, recently, after I greet him, Carlos will say

Good morning Ms. Fletcher-Tyson. He will then also say Good. And you? therefore

continuing the conversation politely by also inquiring about my day.

Influencing Factors

The major influencing factor that is holding Carlos back from adhering to Grices Maxims

is Carlos lack of a complex vocabulary rich in academic language, and his ability to quickly

recall the words he needs to respond appropriately. He is unable to full adhere to the maxims of

quantity and manner because he is often missing the word or term that is necessary to expand his

thought and erase ambiguity. The second influencing factor seems to be Carlos inherent

nervousness to not make a mistake. This perfectionist tendency to only say that correct answer in

front of adults (teachers) is limiting his conversational output and affecting his adherence to the

maxims of quantity, relation, and manner.

VI. Stage of Second Language Assessment

Overall Assessment

As an emergent bilingual, Carlos is currently learning English as his second language. In

my opinion, it seems that Carlos is speaking English at a level 3. He is able to speak in short

phrases and also use simple sentences. However, he makes many mistakes with English

grammar, such as subject-verb agreement, correct pronoun usage, and plural versus singular

nouns. He has the vocabulary to accurately describe many things; however, it is a struggle for

him to imagine or create something in English on his own. This level is consistent with the fact

that Carlos is almost in the middle of his second year in a US school in an English-speaking
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 13

classroom; according to the Language Acquisition Chart, Level 3 students are typically those that

have been in American schools for 1 to 3 years.

Using the Student Oral Language Observation Matrix (SOLOM) to assess Carlos mastery

of the English language, Carlos total score was about a 12. Carlos scored a within category 3 for

English comprehension as he is able to understand most of what is being said in normal speech,

though in academic situations, his understanding is at a slightly slower pace. When he is around

peers, he is able to follow the conversation and occasionally contribute. Carlos also scored within

category 3 for English Pronunciation. I did not ever need have to ask him to repeat himself

because I did not understand what he was trying to say; however, frequently words would be

silently mispronounced, especially in regards to the word endings. For example, during our

reading of A Ball for Daisy, instead of saying a si bl, Carlos said a si ba The parts of

English where Carlos has the most difficulty is with English Fluency, English Vocabulary, and

English Grammar where he scored within category 2. From the two recordings, I felt that Carlos

restricted himself to using very basic sentence patterns when speaking to me and conversation

was often halted as he thought about the words he needed to say. Pictured below, I have included

Carlos rating on the SOLOM and the Assessment of Second Language Acquisition Chart.
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 14

VII. Instructional Recommendations

Carlos is an extremely motivated and hard-working student and with some targeted

instructional strategies will surely move forward with his skills as an English speaker. In general,
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 15

it will be important for all of Carlos teachers to focus first on his oral language expression and

oral language engagement as rich speaking habits will support rich writing habits. Carlos will

need explicit instruction to help close the 4000 word difference in root vocabulary knowledge

before the end of his second grade year since the rate of acquisition [after second grade] is

similar for all (Lecture, Week 8, Fall 2016). Since Carlos strength lies in being able to recall

and use Tier 1 words, he will need focused instruction on Tier 2 words. Since Tier 2 words are

cross-disciplinary, high-frequency, grade-level text words, these will be the most beneficial

words to learn for Carlos spoken language and written English vocabulary (Lecture, Week 8,

Fall 2016). One of the best ways to teach these words to him as an ELL is to include

demonstrations in the vocabulary lessons (Lecture, Week 8, Fall 2016). As Carlos is a first

grader, I also recommend using the Four Squares technique since Carlos will be able to draw a

picture to help illustrate the vocabulary word for himself (Lecture, Week 8, Fall 2016).

Implementing more measures to activate Carlos semantic knowledge will be crucial as it

essentially impossible to become a skilled reader if one has a limited vocabulary (Byrnes and

Wasik, 94). Next, I would recommend that as teachers we celebrate how far Carlos has come

and restrain the urge to correct every grammatical error he makes. Instead we can continue to

engage him in conversation on the topic at hand and model appropriate grammar and syntax that

fits his immediate linguistic needs (Peregory and Boyle, 140). I also recommend that Carlos

teachers use a word study of different verb endings so that Carlos can begin to notice the patterns

in verbs such as s, -ed, or ing and begin applying them more frequently in his speech and

writing.

Moving towards supporting Carlos growth in the domain of pragmatics since it is the

knowledge necessary to use language in a social context, it is crucial that Carlos receive
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 16

instruction in how to respond in conversations in ways that are appropriate to the linguistic

context (Lecture, Week 4, Fall 2016). Another recommendation to improve Carlos

communicative competence through observing his communicative performance is to

continue supporting Carlos vocabulary growth and comfort with the English language (Peregory

and Boyle 41). I would suggest ensuring that Carlos classroom routine includes his participation

in circle time, journal time, literature study circles, process writing, projects, [or] theme studies

because these routines provide a familiar routine with repetition of familiar language [and

norms] that scaffolds student participation and learning (Peregory and Boyle 142).

Turning to thinking about recommendations for Carlos and his acquisition of English phonology,

we know that Carlos main strength is in the comprehension strand. In continuing to develop his

receptive and also productive phonological skills, I would recommend incorporating games to

improve [his] learning and to create an atmosphere of ease, creativity, and fun (Peregory and

Boyle, 142). This way Carlos would be practicing interacting and comprehending English in an

engaging and fun format. On the other side of Carlos acquisition of English phonology, his

relative weaknesses are his English pronunciation, expression, and fluency. Since he is usually

hesitant and often forced into silence by (his) language limitations, I recommend repeated

choral readings as an instructional method to help. Research indicates that choral reading helps

children [improve] their diction and fluency; this strategy could extremely beneficial to

Carlos as children often find great joy in the process as well (Bradley and Thalgott in Peregory

and Boyle, 149). I also recommend that Carlos listen to books on tape to hear correct

pronunciation and proper fluency and expression. As Carlos ages, it would be especially helpful

for his growth in the phonology and grammar domain, if he were to record himself speaking on a
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 17

tape. Then he could review his own language for strengths and think about how he could correct

any mistakes.

Additional Instructional Recommendations

Choral Readings Placed in reading small groups with
students with higher reading comprehension
Repeated Readings Narrating the story in Wordless picture
books
Songs and chants Illustrating vocabulary words (example in
Appendix)
Written Talk journals Audiobooks
Webbing to teach morphological roots Improve vocabulary through the use of
Wide-Reading Application: Context Clues and
Letter-Sound Cues

Before reading, picture walks and verbal Creating personal readers using poetry
predictions

VIII. Critical Reflection

Working through this case study gave me a new and more varied perspective on second

language acquisition. It is now clearer to me now more than ever, that explicit vocabulary

instruction is a critical foundation for second language learners showing progress in their second

language. So many of Carlos language weaknesses stemmed from him not having the necessary

vocabulary to explain or express himself. Through my investigation and listening to my

colleagues thoughts, I also realize how important it is to investigate the differences and

similarities between a second language learners spoken language; their written on command

language; and their language when writing with time to plan and prepare. Finally, I can see the

struggle moving forward in being able to pinpoint the two or three most important points of

instruction towards which to target instructional strategies. While Carlos has many strengths, his

English language weaknesses were also varied; as a teacher, one most think carefully about the

most effective and efficient strategies that must be done to support the learner. Overall, Carlos
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 18

was an absolute pleasure to learn from this semester and I am confident that with careful,

consistent targeted instruction, he will continue his remarkable growth as an English Language

Learner.

References:
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 19

Byrnes, J. P., & Wasik, B. A. (2009). Language and literacy development: What educators need
to know. New York: Guilford Press

"Interview with Allison Grant" [Personal interview]. (2016, September 15).

Peregoy, S. F., Boyle, O., & Peregoy, S. F. (2005). Reading, writing, and learning in ESL: A
resource book for K-12 teachers (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.

Phillips- Galloway, E. (2016) Week 3: Theoretical Foundations of First and Second Language
Learning. Lecture presented at Vanderbilt University, Peabody College, Nashville, TN.

Phillips- Galloway, E. (2016) Week 4: Theoretical Foundations of First and Second Language
Learning Lecture presented at Vanderbilt University, Peabody College, Nashville, TN.

Phillips- Galloway, E. (2016) Week 8: Semantics: Word Meanings. Lecture presented at

Vanderbilt University, Peabody College, Nashville, TN.

Phillips- Galloway, E. (2016) Week 9: Morphology and Syntax: Putting Words Together. Lecture
presented at Vanderbilt University, Peabody College, Nashville, TN.

UsingEnglish.com. (n.d.). Retrieved October 28, 2016, from https://www.usingenglish.com/

resources/text-statistics.php

Appendix
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 20

Narrative Task Transcript 1

Transcript Date: 9/13/16
Transcript Length: 2 minutes 45 seconds
Transcript: Carlos and the Narrative Task
AFT: So this is her book A Ball for Daisy and what I want you to do Carlos is imagine that
youre reading the book to me and I cant see the pictures, okay? So you have to tell me what
happens in the book because I dont know- there are no words! You get to tell me what the
pictures are telling you, okay? So thats Daisy, so you can use her name to help tell the story.
Alright, you may begin.
(Pause)
So you tell me what you see.
Carlos: I see a ball.
AFT: Mhmm
Carlos: I see a couch. (turns page)
I see a pillow. (turns page)
I see a tree. (turns page)
I see person. (turns page)
I see a cage. (turns page)
I see other dog. (turns page)
I see a broken ball. (turns page)
I see the dog sad. (turns page)
I see a sidewalk? (turns page)
I see a trash. (turns page)
I see a girl. (turns page)
I see a boy. (turns page)
I see the dog is happy. (turns page)
I see a other dog.
AFT: And what do we say at the end of a story?
Carlos: The end!
AFT: Good job, Carlos! Thank you for telling me that story!
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 21

After Carlos completed the task the first time, I modeled retelling the entire story with more
detail. Then I had Carlos try retelling a few pages again to see if he would speak in more
complete, detailed sentences. Carlos was able to do more detailed job after I modeled how to
retell. For example, for one page, Carlos changed his description to Daisy jumped on the couch
to nap. On another page, Carlos told me that Daisy feels sad because the other dog popped the
red ball.
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 22

Narrative Task Transcript 2

Transcript Date: 9/26/16
Transcript Length: 8 minutes 11 seconds
Transcript: Carlos and the Narrative Task
AFT models a retell of the picture book Goodnight Gorilla. Then AFT asks Carlos to retell her
the story after she completes the model.
AFT: So Im going to tell you this story called Goodnight Gorilla and at the end, I want you to
tell me the story back to me, okay?
Carlos: Yes
AFT models retell of story. Then tells Carlos it is his turn
Carlos: Good night
Carlos: Good night gorilla
Carlos: The ummm gorilla open the cage.
Carlos: Good night elephant
Carlos: Gorilla open the cage. Out the animals.
Carlos: Good night lion
Carlos: Gorilla had the correct key.
Carlos: Good night hah eh
AFT: Hyena
Carlos: Hyena. Good night giraffe.
Carlos: The Gorilla have a green key. Uhhhh. Hmmm. The key The correct key yellow key.
Carlos: Good night.
AFT: Armadillo
Carlos: Armadillo
Carlos: Monkey. The last key open the uhh door.
Carlos: The monkey lead the animals go to sec
AFT: Security
Carlos: Security house. The all animals get in security house. And to to go sleep.
Carlos: Good night. Dark.
Carlos: Monkey decide to sleep in the bed. Good night. Good night. Good night.
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 23

Carlos: Good night. Monk.. The animals say good night. And the people say good night too. And
the mom open the eyes. See a monkey in her bed.
Carlos: The mom return the animals in the zoo. Good night zoo.
Carlos: The monkey open the. Her him cage and mouse cage too. Good night. Good night.
Carlos: Gorilla get in the bed and the mouse too. Good night gorilla.
AFT: Say the end!
Carlos: The end!
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 24

Conversation Transcript
Transcript Date: 9/1/16
Transcript: Conversation with Carlos and Describing a Picture
AFT: Good morning Carlos. How are you today?
Carlos: Good
AFT: Good. Did you do anything special last night or that you want to tell me about?
Carlos: (pause) uhhhmm
AFT: Did you do something at home or at school?
Carlos: At home.
AFT: At home. What did you do at home?
Carlos: Homework
AFT: So say I did my homework.
Carlos: I did my homework
AFT: Thats good. That was really responsible of you. Today were going to look at this picture
and I want you to try to tell me what you see in this picture. What do you see in the picture?
Carlos: A cake
AFT: Say I see a cake.
Carlos: I see a cake.
AFT: What else do you see in the picture?
Carlos: Person.
AFT: Say I see some people.
Carlos: I see people.
AFT: What else?
Carlos: One dog
AFT: Oh I see one dog.
Carlos: I see one dog.
AFT: What else?
Carlos: I see a hat.
AFT: I like that you said I see a hat. Thats awesome! Where do you think these people are? Or
what do you think they are doing?
(pause)
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 25

AFT: I think theyre having

Carlos: I think having a birthdayparty.
AFT: Awesome! You know what Carlos? I agree with you, I think they are having a birthday
party too. How do you know its a birthday party?
Carlos: Because its ahhh
AFT: Because I see
Carlos: Because I see a cake.
AFT: A cake. What is on the cake?
Carlos: I see a .
AFT: I see four of them. I see four
Carlos: I see four c-c-c
AFT: Its what you blow out on a birthday cake. We call them candles.
Carlos: Candles!
AFT: Say I see four candles.
Carlos: I see four candles.
AFT: Okay so how old do you think the little boy or little girl is turning? Are they turning ten?
How old are they turning?
(pause)
AFT: How many candles are there?
Carlos: 4!
AFT: So how old are they turning?
Carlos: How 4.
AFT: They are turning
Carlos: Turning
AFT: They are
Carlos: They are turning 4.
AFT: 4, awesome! Alright, well we know that we got to have some whos- that means we need to
have some people. And can we just call them boy, boy girl, boy girl? We got to give them some
names. We got to give them some
Carlos: Names!
AFT: Okay, what could this boys name be?
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 26

Carlos: Hmmm hmmm

AFT: What is a boys name in your class?
Carlos: Hmmm
AFT: A boy in my class is
Carlos: A boy in my class is . Hmmmm
AFT: Who sits next to you?
(Silence)
Carlos: Hmmmm
(Silence)
AFT: For example, I might say I know that Trey is in my class. Trey is the name of a boy that
is your class
Carlos: Trey
AFT: So I want you think of another name of a boy that is your class. Just like I thought of Trey,
I want you to think of another boy in your class.
(silence)
Carlos: Trey
AFT: So I said, Ms. Fletcher-Tyson said Trey. I want Carlos to think of one other friend new
friend.
(Silence)
Carlos: Hmmmm
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 27

Written Sample
Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 28
 Final Report: LANGUAGE CASE STUDY 29

Instructional Recommendation Example