Green 1

Case Study #1: Brian

(For the sake of privacy, Brian’s last name is omitted.)

1. Description of student’s physical, linguistic, creative, social, and academic strengths and

weaknesses noted through my personal observations and interactions with him.

Firstly, Brian has been suspected of having a learning/processing disability. His mother

is up front about his sibling being in la clase especial. He is slow to commit new information to

memory, which is exponentially more difficult when also acquiring a second language. Simple

number recall causes a challenge, though he is completely unaware of the fact. In teaching a

subtraction is which we ate cookies to make the cookies “disappear,” he struggled to remember

how many were present before one was eaten. Then, we represented the “take away” with proper

notation. By writing it down, he was given access to the problem. This demonstrated that the

issue did not lie in number recognition, rather in recall. In this light, Brian benefits from multiple

modalities. Chances are, the neurons will fire with at least one.

Brian displays the typical characteristics of a young boy. For free choice, he runs straight

to the train set or blocks. In social situations, he exhibits the traits of a leader, taking charge in

the goings-on of his peers. He is expressive—makes himself known by calling out in group

instruction and by making sure that he loudest in social conversations. Though his expression is

admirable and even encouraged, it can be disruptive. Brian is slow to think and fast to respond.

He is considerably more engaged when using manipulatives. His capacity to acquire vocabulary

was increased in the implementation of my hands-on science lesson (see Culturally Responsive

Unit). By providing the experience, he was given something tangible to relate to the vocabulary.
 Green 2

Brian’s soft side is demonstrated when his mamá is present for family reading time. She

reads with him nearly everyday, even acting as the “surrogate” to students whose parents could

not be there. She is in actively developing English-language skills, even makes a point of

conversing with the teacher and the other English-dominant adults. She displays concern of

grammar, asking the teachers for clarification. These qualities are echoed in Brian. He flourishes

when given the opportunity to work in cooperative groups. He is concerned with “correctness,”

which is most often demonstrated in academic situations. For example, he displays considerable

discomfort was asked to spell independently. He simply responds, “I can’t,” when asked to use

invented spelling in journal writing. This pain will be eased over time, the more he is encouraged

to generate his own thoughts. Up until recently, most writing activities involved copying the

teacher’s model off the whiteboard. It comes as no surprise that he is uncomfortable when he is

suddenly required to write on his own. With his take-charge personality, I do not anticipate that

this issue will continue for long.

2. Administered SOLOMS and specific analysis regarding their English language fluency.

In formal/academic setting, Brian’s English-language capacity is fairly low as detailed by

the SOLOM assessment below. In terms of comprehension, he benefits greatly from teacher

speech adjustment. The teacher’s soft, slow, and repetitive speech patterns are well-received as

demonstrated by his ability to generate his own thoughts. For example, the teacher asked

students to complete the following sentence: “I like Peter Rabbit because...” She paused for a

considerable amount of time before asking the student to respond. For Brian, this lapse of time

allowed time for processing. He responded with, “...because he is sweet.” In terms of oral

fluency, Brian is not easily forced into silence because of his outgoing nature. However, when
 Green 3

the question is perceived to have a “right” answer, he often freezes with the fear of getting it

“wrong.” In terms of vocabulary, his academic language is very limited (especially terms of

comparison). For example, the terms bigger/smaller were challenging descriptors for Brian to

understand. Though he could easily name the characters Peter Rabbit and Benjamin Bunny

(tangible stuffed animals the teacher had on hand), he struggled to identify which one was

bigger/smaller. In terms of pronunciation, he is compelled to repeat himself even though he is

well-understood. This goes back to his obsession with “correctness.” In terms of grammar, he is

limited to basic patterns. He generates short, practiced sentence structures such as “the cat ran

fast” (noun-verb-adjective).
 Green 4

In non-formal/play settings, Brian’s language capacity is a mixed bag detailed by the

SOLOM assessment below. The social interaction observed included expression in both Spanish

and English. In terms of comprehension, his score is considerably higher because he engaged

himself with Spanish-dominant speakers (his peers being the most resistant to the use of

English). In terms of fluency, he had little trouble searching for the correct manner of expression

because he had two languages to pull from. He responded in English, then felt compelled to

repeat himself in Spanish (often with more detail). In terms of vocabulary, he is a culprit of

misusing words, most often a result of simple translation. In terms of pronunciation, his mind

speaks faster than his words. For this reason, he slurs words together occasionally leading to

misunderstanding. In terms of grammar, Brian misuses conventions in both languages. There is

little consistency in sentence structure, which is a matter of practice.

 Green 5

3. Additional assessment or activity completed along with a summary of what it tells me about

the student and how this information is useful to me as a teacher.

The interests inventory pictured below was created by Brian, but details facts about

Alvaro. The activity was created to evaluate his ability to dialogue and record the responses

appropriately. The order of events were as follows: (1) trace partner’s hand, (2) ask given

questions, and (3) record responses. The questions were generated by me, but it was the

students’ job to ask them to each other. The questions were as follows:

(1) What is your favorite book?

(2) How many siblings do you have?
(3) What is your favorite color?
(4) What is your favorite animal?
(5) What is your favorite holiday?

Similar activities often encourage a sense of “all about me.” In dialoging and recording with a

partner, the sense is rather “all about we.” First, the product assesses the student on his ability to

organize the given information. I modeled how to do so by recording my partner’s responses, one

on each finger (angled vertically). Though Brian did not organize the information in the exact

same way, his is no less valid. However, his product demonstrates an inability to both organize

and record Alvaro’s responses appropriately. The lack of structure was not beneficial for Brian’s

success. In the future, I would provide structure by simply asking Brian to record his partner’s

responses on the backside of the paper. Moreover, Brian’s use of drawing to communicate

Clifford the Big Red Dog (thumb) demonstrates resourcefulness. Especially in the lower grades,

drawings should be validated as a mode of communication. Third, the completed product

demonstrates ability to effectively interview a classmate. Even though the questions were

generated by me, Brian dialogued with the proper call/response technique.

 Green 6

4. Any additional documents or activities and how they were or were not useful to you in

determining their strengths and weaknesses.

With the teacher’s direction, I implemented a whole class instructional lesson in the

students’ writing journal. At the start of every journal entry, the students write the date in a

sentence. The format is consistent and is modeled by the teacher. Second, the class generates one

sentence collaboratively. In this case, the class butterflies hatched out of their crysallis over the

weekend. The students had the opportunity to observe and talk about the event amongst

themselves. The collaborative sentence was generated and written on the whiteboard for the

students to copy. Then, the students had to generate one sentence on their own with the prompt,
 Green 7

“They are...” Brian’s writing sample (below) demonstrates that he has not processed word/

sentence structure. Many of the words blend together, demonstrating that he needs additional

reminders to add a space or “finger” between each word. His self-generated sentence is short, but

demonstrates an understanding of phonemes. I can attest that this spelling was generated

personally (I sat beside him, exaggerating each letter sound).

“Today is Monday, May 2, 2011. The butterflies came out of the crysallis. They are cute.”
 Green 8

The following are document copies from

Brian’s cumulative files and are intended for my

personal use only. The initial identification (to the

left) details his scores on the California English

Language Development Test (CELDT). The

purpose of the test is to identify new students who

are ELs, monitor student progress, and help decide

when students are fully proficient in academic

English. Brian was assessed before he entered

kindergarten, providing the school information for

placement. Surprisingly, his scores are on par with

his “late bird” counterparts. This is most likely

because of expressive nature.

The second document (below) details

Brian’s basic phonics skills, ability to read one syllable words, and oral blending. In his first

assessment of the Basic Phonics Skills Test (BPST), it is evident that Brian had little or no letter

recognition. The records demonstrate a series of guesses, even saying numbers for letters.

However, his records of phonemic awareness demonstrates an understanding of sound blending.

He appropriately responded six times out of ten, a score expected in his first trimester. The

disparity between the scores lies in the mode of assessment. He struggles with visual processing

demonstrated by his inability to recognize the written letter with its name. He is linguistically

gifted demonstrated by his ability to respond accurately to oral prompting.

Green 9
 Green 10

5. List of instructional recommendations that I would make to the teacher to address the needs

and strengths of the student.

‣ In content-oriented lessons, limit the teacher-talk. Brian benefits from a conversational

approach to learning. He is much more likely to process the new knowledge if he

verbalizes his thoughts to the teacher and his peers.

‣ Brian would benefit from increased practice with sentence patterning (i.e., the song-based

activity summarized here). This sentence patterning chart is used similar to MadLibs in

that the students fill in the appropriate words. The sentence is sung to the tune of “The

Farmer in the Dell.” For example,

“The creepy, crawly spider—

The creepy, crawly spider—

The creepy, crawly spider lays in the web.”

Prepositional
Adjective Noun Verb
Phrase

Creepy
Spider Lays In the web
Crawly

‣ Brian needs encouragement to be independent in his writing. The teacher-directed format

of the writing journals is of no benefit to him. Far more important is his ability to

generate and record his own thoughts. Simply, he needs to be released from his concern

with “correctness.”
Green 11