1 / 17

Spelling Intervention

Spelling Intervention . Kelly Fogle & Gemma Miller EDPS 654 April 23, 2014. Background . Student grade: 3 rd Referral issue: Spelling difficulty (repeatedly failing weekly spelling tests) Attempted solutions: Reduced weekly spelling list from 20 words to 10 words

remedy
Download Presentation

Spelling Intervention

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Spelling Intervention Kelly Fogle & Gemma Miller EDPS 654 April 23, 2014

  2. Background • Student grade: 3rd • Referral issue: Spelling difficulty (repeatedly failing weekly spelling tests) • Attempted solutions: • Reduced weekly spelling list from 20 words to 10 words • Cover-Copy-Compare intervention • Not successful

  3. Problem Definition • The student earns failing grades on weekly spelling tests: • Failure on the spelling tests = earning less than 50% correct. • Students are expected to complete the tests with 90% accuracy.

  4. Goal • Teacher’s expectation: • Students are expected to be able to complete weekly spelling tests of 20 words with 90% accuracy. • Realistic goal: • increase of .65 correct letter sequences(CLS)/week • final goal =105 CLS at the end of the 8-week intervention • At the end of the intervention, the student is expected to transfer spelling skills to the classroom and be able to complete weekly spelling tests at 75% accuracy • However, based on the student’s progress during the intervention, this goal could potentially be increased to 90% accuracy.

  5. Intervention Options: • Continue Cover-Copy-Compare • currently unsuccessful • Self-correction with Verbal Cues • Repeated Review of Spelling Words with Shared Rime • Say and Spell: Phonics

  6. Chosen intervention: • Repeated Review of Spelling Words with Shared Rime • Available on Intervention Central • http://www.interventioncentral.org/academic-interventions/writing/spelling-repeated-review-spelling-words-shared-rime • Appropriate for individual students or small groups • Objective: • The student will learn to read and spell words from word ‘families’ with similar pronunciation and shared spelling patterns. • -ack • black, tack, back, sack, lack, etc.

  7. Review of Evidence Base • Key ingredients for a successful Spelling intervention • Explicit instruction • Multiple practice opportunities • Immediate corrective feedback (Wanzek et al., 2006) • Practice improves orthographic representation of words  gains in spelling and reading! (Conrad, 2008) • Rime spelling training > individual word learning training (Greaney, Tunmer, & Chapman, 1997)

  8. Implementation Logistics • Frequency of intervention: 3x/week, 20 minutes • Duration of intervention: 8 weeks • Monitor success of information with progress monitoring and modify intervention as needed • Change intervention if ineffective, increase goal if warranted • An interventionist or practicum student is best suited to implement this intervention.

  9. Materials • Spelling word flash cards (printed) • 20 words total (5 words from four word families) • http://www.wordlistgenerator.net/print.aspx • Student Sheet • Recording Sheet • pencils

  10. Intervention Process • Student reads words aloud from flash cards • Present words from same word family together • Give corrective feedback/provide response after 5 seconds • Interventionist/Practicum student reads the same words aloud one-by-one, and student spells them on the Student Sheet • Don’t show cards to the student! • If incorrect, student crosses out their attempt and copies the word into the second column of the Student Sheet • Interventionist/Practicum student records correct responses on the Recording Sheet • Current list of words is used until mastered • Interventionist/ practicum student can then create a new word list at http://www.wordlistgenerator.net/

  11. Student Sheet (Conrad, 2008)

  12. Recording Sheet (Conrad, 2008)

  13. Collecting Baseline Data • Spelling CBM (Fuchs & Fuchs) • Use Spelling CBM worksheet • Administer 3x • Median score – baseline • IF three data points are dissimilar, administer additional probes, and use mean score for baseline • Scoring • Count the number of correct letter sequences (CLS) • Similar to the WIAT-III Essay scoring • ^b^l^a^c^k^ • Baseline = 100(50% CLS)

  14. Collecting Progress Monitoring Data • Spelling CBM (Fuchs & Fuchs) • Same procedure used for collecting baseline • 1x/week • Interventionist/practicum student will spend the last five minutes of the Thursday intervention time for progress monitoring • Decision points: • 3 consecutive data points above the aim line: • Switch to ambitious goal line • 3 consecutive data points below the aim line: • Consider a different intervention!

  15. Progress Monitoring Graph Example

  16. Conclusions • Ideally, before choosing an intervention, we would want additional information regarding how the student is doing in class! • E.g., reading performance, letter-sound correspondence skills, phonemic awareness, etc. • Progress monitoring will be used to adjust the intervention should results show that the intervention is ineffective for the students, or a more ambitious goal is appropriate

  17. References Berninger, V. W., Vaughan, K., Abbott, R. D., Brookes, A., Abbott, S. P., . . . & Graham, S. (1998). Early intervention for spelling problems: Teaching functional spelling units of varying size with a multiple-connections framework. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 587-605. Conrad, N. J. (2008). From reading to spelling and spelling to reading: Transfer goes both ways. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100 869-878. Fuchs, L. S. & Fuchs, D. (n. d.). Using CBM for progress monitoring in written expression and spelling. Introduction to Curriculum-Based Measurement, Retreived from http://www.studentprogress.org/summer_institute/2007/written/writing_manual_2007.pdf Greaney, K. T., Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W. (1997). Effects of rime-based orthographic analogy training on the word recognition skills of children with reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(4), 645-651. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.89.4.645 Intervention Central. (n.d.). Spelling: Repeated review of spelling words with shared rime. Intervention Central. Retrieved from http://www.interventioncentral.org/academic-interventions/writing/spelling-repeated-review-spelling-words-shared-rime Intervention Central (n.d.). Spelling: Self-correction with verbal cues. Intervention Central. Retrieved from http://www.interventioncentral.org/ academic-interventions/writing/spelling-self-correction-verbal-cues The Florida Center for Reading Research. (2007). Phonics: Say and spell. Student Center Activities. Retrieved from http://www.fcrr.org/FAIR_Search_Tool/PDFs/2-3P_010.pdf Wanzek, J., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Swanson, E. A., Edmonds, M., & Kim, A. (2006). A synthesis of spelling and reading interventions and their effects on the spelling outcomes of students with LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 528-543.

More Related