Download Final Paper - gozips.uakron.edu

Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
Introduction
Since American society is primarily a reading-based society, reading is a necessary
survival skill for independence. Why some students are able to learn to read easily, while others
struggle, has always been a mystery. Reading is complex. On some level, reading involves
decoding, pronunciation, spelling, comprehension, prediction, memory, and application skills
(Yule, 1994). Each of these skills incorporates a multitude of subskills, i.e. phoneme, morpheme,
grapheme awareness. Hence, when the components do not amalgamate correctly into a unified
process, people experience a reading problem, a reading difficulty, or a reading disability
depending on the severity and longevity of these processing issues. For successful reading, visual
cues, verbalizations, auditory skills, and kinetic movements must be correlated. Often the
codependence of these subskills is so complex that even educators are baffled when endeavoring
to explain inadequacies in the acquisition process of reading skills. Hence, research continually
investigates what can enhance development of the deficient skill, or skills. Unfortunately even
with the best of training and remediation, the target skills do not always interact to produce the
researchers’/educators’ expected results, or the improvement may not be as drastic as hoped, or
retention as long as desired.
Reading difficulties emerge in assorted forms e.g. learning disabilities, dyslexia, reading
syncopation, low comprehension. Research has been guided by hypotheses pertaining to possible
explanations for one or more dysfunctions. Some are medically based. For example, Lueck,
Bailey, Greer, Tuan, Bailey, and Dornbusch, (2003) manipulated print-size, working distance,
and magnification devices in order to investigate the optimal reading acuity and reading speed of
words in isolation and a passage. Half of their subjects had visual acuity problems. Lueck, et al
(2003) suggested using a font that is three times the student’s visual acuity in order to increase
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
reading speed. Reasonably, poor vision could cause, or have a negative effect upon a child’s
ability to read. Unfortunately, the research by Kiely, Crewther, and Crewther (2001) concluded
that their results failed to prove any correlation. Poor vision does not hinder a student’s ability to
learn to read or reading to learn, though he or she may tire more easily with extended reading.
Naturally, wearing corrective lenses is recommended to reduce the strain. For children with
dyslexia, the Kiely et al (2001) study suggests that binocular anomalies should be assessed to
determine if the problems are physical defects of the eye. But, Kiely et al (2001) acknowledge
that other factors, not related to optometry, must explain most reading difficulties.
If reading difficulties cannot be explained by biological deficits, then the next logical
conclusion is poor reading instruction (Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998). Consequently, a
multitude of teaching techniques and computer software programs have been devised in hopes of
solving the mysteries educed from poor readers. Yet in review, has any one type of instruction
solved all the mysteries? What has been tried? What has not been tried? What has had some
success? What has had no success at all? For decades, students have experienced basal readers
which are part of directed reading instruction programs, like Reading Master Series (Miao,
2002), that provide systematic rule-based instruction. Multisensory reading programs such as
Orton-Gillingham also use this approach (Hook, Macaruso, & Jones (2001). Another popular
reading program is Hooked on Phonics. Some programs focus on creating graphic organizers in
order to connect new vocabulary to preexisting schema (Taraban, Johnson, & Shufeldt (1995).
Other teaching techniques offer valuable assistance to struggling readers through modern
technologies such as computers, word processors, spell checkers (MacArthur, 2002), overhead
projectors, PowerPoint presentations, and Smart Boards. Though the afore mentioned programs
probably have been successful for many students, the fact remains that no one type of reading
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
instruction has proven to be 100% successful for 100% of the recipients, no matter how well
implemented. Some students still have reading difficulties even with years of great instruction.
Hence, poor readers produce a multitude of mysteries for educators to continue to explore and
tackle.
The emergence of technology has spawned many software programs that directly target
reading skills. For example, Hook et al (2001) researched the Fast ForWord Language to
Reading program. According to John Schacter (2000), other successful reading software
programs for elementary children include DaisyQuest, Little Planet, Wiggle Works, IBM
Writing to Read, Breakthrough to Literacy, Waterford Early Reading Program, Accelerated
Reader, Academy of Reading, SuccessMaker and Tomorrow’s Promise Reading. Another
software program that promotes reading is Picture It Software which incorporates pictures into
text for beginning readers (Slater, 2002). These programs target different areas of reading such as
speed, fluency, vocabulary acquisition, comprehension, accuracy in reading, retention, on-task
behavior (Miao, 2002), and word prediction (MacArthur, 2000). With all this complexity all
educators and researchers are left to ponder which skill is most important? Which method is the
most successful with the largest number of students? What aspect of reading must be mastered
first, second? What format assists a student with a learning disability in reading or dyslexia the
most? What area of reading has yet to be researched?
When investigating the impact of vocabulary acquisition in relation to reading
acquisition, few studies surface. Thus, the combination of the above research studies and these
issues have caused this question to emerge, “Will students exposed to intense multisensory
teaching methods improve their spelling retention?” Vocabulary acquisition is just one of the
basic subskills of reading that warrants further investigation. So, “Why can’t Susie spell?”
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
Which is more important? 1. Being able to spell a word from memory? Or 2. Recognizing a
word in print and remembering the definition? Which has the greater impact on future reading,
memorized words, or recognition with comprehension?
Method
Participant and Setting
This research utilized AB single-subject research design. This method was selected
because the information being collected was only one small skill, spelling, in a very complex
process, reading. This study examined the effects of multisensory instruction delivered in a
classroom setting.
The subject chosen is a female student who has dyslexia and a life time of vocabulary
struggles. This student is a middle-class, Hispanic-American, native English speaker without any
behavior problems. This 11th grader participates in Special Education English classes and has an
I.E.P. with a reading/vocabulary acquisition goal. Her instructional reading level is at the 7.0
grade according to the 2004-05 end-of-the-year informal reading inventory administered by her
previous English teacher. The current English class has seven fellow students and meets in the
afternoon.
Target behaviors and definition
After receiving multisensory instruction, this student will spell from memory new
vocabulary words accurately. This study will investigate what effect the multisensory instruction
has on her vocabulary acquisition skills.
During this study, the student will learn to spell a list of ten words introduced in the
classroom setting. The student will demonstrate acquisition of this skill: first, by listening to the
teacher pronounce the word two times; then, by accurately spelling at least eight of these ten
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
words either by personally dictating, writing, or typing them. Naturally, the “desired” outcome
would be to have the student spell new vocabulary words with 100% accuracy. The student will
demonstrate the 80% level of preciseness at least three times during this study before considering
a word as mastered. For completing the tests, the student will be given as much time as needed to
complete the task due to I.E.P. specifications. Even though data collection will only occur for
approximately four weeks, the unstated goal would be to have permanent acquisition.
Measurement Procedures
The baseline data for the specific vocabulary lists were collected with the teacher
administering a traditional oral spelling “Pretest”. The teacher only pronounced each word twice.
The student wrote the letters of the words. The lists were graded for accuracy. Each list of words
was tested twice a week until the end of the study. Progress on each list of words was graphed.
Intervention Procedures and Experimental Design
For five days each week, the student received multisensory instruction for a list of ten
words that accompanied a five-day short story unit. These words were chosen one of three ways:
Option 1: The student previewed the story and determined what words she did not know
how to spell. Working together, the teacher and student narrowed the list to the 10 words most
likely to be used in the student’s future writings.
Option 2: The teacher chose ten words from the story.
Option 3: The student chose ten words from a pre-made list of words.
List options include the words in alphabetical order or sequentially based upon the short story.
The teacher then has lessons pertaining to the story and teaching the spellings of the words and
definitions.
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
Week 1- Unit 1 Short Story= “Checkouts” by Cynthia Rylant
Day 1 : Activity 1- Option 1 was used for word selection. Activity 2: Pretest
administered. Activity 3- After the pretest, the student got online and looked up a definition and
part of speech for each word. The class went over the different definitions together. The word
was found in the story and the appropriate definition was chosen. By the end of this first day, the
student had a list of ten words with the definitions and part of speech.
Day 2 : Activity 1- The student practiced the words tactilely by running the index finger
of the writing hand over a large grid while simultaneously saying the letters of each word aloud.
Each word was followed by the definition which was practiced verbally only. Each word on the
list was spelled in this manner three times. Non-writing index fingers were used if the finger
became numb or sensitive. Activity 2- As a review, the student was given a word search that
provided the definition for the words. The student then located the actual words with a
highlighter.
Day 3 : The student had at least ten sheets of paper and markers. Then, she was
instructed to make a picture that would help her remember the definition and spelling of the
word. The student could draw just a picture, or, include the word and/or definition. The student
also printed a picture or two from the internet and cut/pasted it onto a sheet. At the end of class,
everyone shared the pictures that had been created. Each student explained what the picture
represented. All posters were hung on the wall.
Day 4 : Activity 1- The student practiced spelling the list of words with sign language.
Each word and definition was spelled three times. The student sometimes verbalized the letters
concurrently with the sign language, when struggling with the sign language and spelling
combination. Activity 2- When the sign language activity was completed, the first half of the
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
short story was read aloud. Each student read one sentence at a time. If one of the spelling words
was found in the sentence, the person reading the story had the first option of defining the word.
If not, the first student to raise his/her hand was given the opportunity. When a student correctly
identified one of the vocabulary words and defined it correctly, he/she received a piece of candy.
The students were encouraged to find the words and definitions on the wall as aides. The
elements of the story were discussed and taught throughout this activity.
Day 5 : Activity 1- Students finish reading the short story in the same manner as Day 4,
Activity 2. Activity 2- A “Checkouts” Post test 1 was given for the list of ten words in the same
manner as the pretest. The students were not facing the wall with the posters hanging on it. Tests
were scored, and recorded.
Week 2-Unit 2 : “The Inspector-General” by Anton Chekhov
Day 1 : Activity 1: Option 2 was used to determine word list. Pretest “The InspectorGeneral” and Post test 2 “Checkouts” was administered. Week 1 words were included on the preand post tests (Trials 2 & 3 this week). The two lists were kept separate for simple grading and
recording. Activity 2- After the pretest, the student was given a list of ten words and their part of
speech. Blanks were left where the definitions belonged. The student listened to the teacher who
verbally filled in the blank definitions. The student wrote down the definitions. Activity 3- The
student sat at a computer and made a PowerPoint “poster” for each word. The student was
encouraged to try large and varied fonts. The background and font colors were manipulated as
well.
Day 2 : Activity 1- The student completed Activity 3 from Day 1. When the student had
created a slide with the word, its part of speech, and the definition, it was printed out on bright
pieces of paper. The student then hung them on a wall. (In this classroom setting, the students
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
joined in Activity 2 as they finished.) Activity 2- (The following are the “Class” Directions, but
this could have been done one-on-one) The class was divided into teams of two. Each team was
given a set of 3-D letters. The announcer pronounced a word and the two students raced to spell
the words with the 3-D letters. With the first round, the student was permitted to use her list with
the definitions. Then for round 2, the announcer gave the definitions and the student raced to
spell the words. Again, the lists were permitted. As the games progressed, the difficulty
increased. The next round the student was not permitted to use the list when the words were
pronounced. In the final round, the announcer gave the definition and the student spelled the
word from memory. Points per pair were tallied on the chalkboard which bolstered enthusiasm.
Day 3 : Activity 1- The students were given a lump of clay. The teacher then
pronounced a vocabulary word from “The Inspector-General” list. Each table of two students
worked cooperatively to spell the chosen word. The students molded the clay one letter at a time
into the words on the vocabulary list. The team which completed the task first stood up. The
teacher checked the spelling. Meanwhile, the other teams continued to finish their words. The
first few rounds the pairs were permitted to look at the lists. Score was kept on the chalkboard
for the number of wins. Each word was spelled out two or three times. All teams tied.
Afterwards, the students needed to wash their hands.
Due to time constraints, the second activity planned for this day was omitted.
Day 4 : Activity 1- The teacher orchestrated a dramatization of “The InspectorGeneral.” Following the performance, the student participated in a class discussion of the
elements of the story. No vocabulary practice occurred at this time.
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
Activity 2- The vocabulary words were reviewed with the PowerPoint slides that the
student created earlier in the week as a poster. Some slides were altered in order to have the
definitions shown first. This allowed better spelling practice.
Day 5 : Activity 1- The student utilized the pictures on the wall to review Week 1
“Checkouts” words and the posters on the wall to review Week 2 “The Inspector-General”
words. Then the student turned and faced the opposite wall. Activity 2- The Posttest “The
Inspector-General” Trial 1 and Posttest “Checkouts” Trial 3 was administered. Papers were
checked, scored, and recorded.
Week 3-Unit 3 : “Go Deep to the Sewer” by Bill Cosby
Day 1 : Activity 1- Option 3 was used to select the list. Words were written on the
board. Each student received two pieces of paper to vote for the two words that s/he would be
most likely to incorporate into future writing. Activity 2: Teacher administered assessments:
“Go Deep to the Sewer” Pretest, “Checkouts” Post test 4, and “The Inspector-General” Post test
2 . The three lists were kept separate for simple grading and recording. Activity 3 : After the
pretest, the student first located the word on the list from “Go Deep to the Sewer” in the text
provided online in the “public box”. On the structured worksheet provided online as well, the
student copied/pasted the sentence before, after, and including the sentence in which the word
was located. Then the student used a thesaurus (online or book) to locate a synonym for the
word. The student used the context clues to determine a guess for the definition based upon the
usage in this story. Afterwards, the student looked up the real definition and an appropriate
synonym. This activity proved to be too time consuming with only half the class having access to
a computer at one time.
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
Day 2 : Activity 1- The student finished Activity 2 from Day 1 with a worksheet
generated from the students’ previous day’s work. All of the vocabulary words and the three
sentences from the text were provided. To complete the exercise, the student retrieved any
answers from yesterday’s class time off of the online worksheet. Activity 2- The student bent
pipe cleaners to form the letters of the words. Some letters required two pipe cleaners. The pipe
cleaner word was then glued on to a poster board (or hung as a mobile, student choice). This
student made creative posters by gluing multiple sheets of colored paper together in different
patterns before placing the pipe cleaner letters on them. These posters were hung up around the
room.
Day 3 : Activity 1- The student practiced spelling the words in shaving cream smeared
thinly upon the tabletop. The (classroom) procedures were similar to Week 2, Day 2, Activity 2.
The teacher announced a word and the student must spell the word in the shaving cream. With
the first round, the student was permitted to use the list with the definitions. Then for round 2,
the teacher announced the definitions and the student spelled the words. Again, the lists were
permitted. As the games progressed, difficulty increased. The next round the student was not
permitted to use the list when the words were pronounced. In the final round, the announcer gave
the definition and the student composed the word from memory. Rounds were repeated until the
student was able to spell without much assistance. [Recommendations: have students only use
one hand, keep dry hand towels near each student, make rules about misbehavior prior to lesson,
do not wait too long between words, have students check each others’ words, take pictures!]
Activity 2 – Clean up. Student went to bathroom to wash. Tabletops were wiped down with a dry
hand towel first, then a wet towel, and dried with another towel. Activity 3- the student was
given an activity sheet that asks, “Which is the correct spelling of the word?” The student then
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
chose from four similarly spelled words. On the back of the worksheet was a crossword puzzle.
The definitions were given as clues and the student had to spell the word in the blanks.
Day 4 : Activity 1- The student read “Go Deep to the Sewer” silently. On the context
activity page from Week 3, Day 1, Activity 1, the student highlighted each word as it was
encountered. At this same time, the student verbalized in a whisper the spelling. The elements of
the story were discussed and taught before and after this activity. Activity 2- The student utilized
the pictures on the wall to review the spellings for “Checkouts”, the posters to review the words
from “The Inspector-General”, and Context-Synonym charts or pipe cleaner posters and mobiles
to practice “Go Deep to the Sewer” spellings.
Day 5 : Activity 1- “Hand Spelling” bee: The teacher pronounced a word from “Go
Deep to the Sewer” list. The student spelled the word in the palm of her hand with the pointer
finger as the pencil. The student verbalized the letters at the same time so the teacher could check
for accuracy. The student continued spelling the same word until it was correct. Since time
permitted, the other lists were reviewed one time each. Activity 2- Posttest 1 over “Go Deep to
the Sewer”, “The Inspector-General” (Trial 3) and “Checkouts” (Trial 5) was administered with
out the students being able to view the posters on the wall. Her papers were checked, scored, and
recorded.
Week 4-Unit 4 : The Scarlet Ibis”
Day 1 : Activity 1- Words were chosen by Option 2. Pretest “The Scarlet Ibis” and
Posttest Lists 1, 2, & 3 were assessed. The four lists were kept separate for simple grading and
recording. Activity 2 : After the pretest, the student was given a piece of paper divided
lengthwise into five equally sized columns from the left side margin of the paper. Across the top,
the headings read Word, Prefix, Root, Suffix, and Suffix. (To save time, this group of students
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
skipped the following step: the student guessed or used a dictionary to assist her in dividing the
words accordingly. Additionally, only words that fit the pattern were chosen to conserve time.
The part of speech was also provided by the teacher.) After discussing as a class the different
meanings for each prefix, root word and suffix, the student guessed a meaning for the word. The
page would have been better formatted with a sixth column for this guess. After reviewing the
meanings of the prefixes, root words, suffixes, and guesses, the student used a dictionary to
determine the appropriate definition. Definitions were written in the first column under the
original word.
Day 2 : Activity 1- Using the syllable chart, the student created rhythms by clapping out
the syllables, one clap for each syllable. The student demonstrated the chosen rhythm for each
word with the class. Some words were better spelled out with individual letters for more creative
rhythms. Activity 2- The student practiced spelling each word from “The Scarlet Ibis” with “air
writing.” This incorporated large muscle movements in the space in front of her body by using
the pointer finger as the pencil with her arm extended. Modifications were made with the second
and third round of words such as writing the letters as large, small, or swiftly as possible. Sitting
and standing were also alterations during the air writing practice.
Day 3 : Activity 1- The student was given masking tape. The student tore off pieces of
tape and placed them on a rug in the form of letters to spell out each word. The rug had rows of
blocks to aide the student in forming legible letters. The student then asked the class for the
definition of the word. The student who answered was the next to spell the word. Each word
from “The Scarlet Ibis” list was reviewed once. All the words were left on the rug. Both sides of
the rug were needed for all ten words. Activity 2- The student and teacher began reading “The
Scarlet Ibis” together. Each read a paragraph, alternating. After reading the entire paragraph, the
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
listener clapped out the rhythm created on Day 2 for the word, followed by giving the definition.
The elements of the story were discussed and taught throughout this activity.
Day 4 : Activity 1- The student practiced spelling the words from “The Scarlet Ibis” list
in a tray of colored sand using the index finger as the pencil. The teacher pronounced the word.
The student reiterated each letter as she was concurrently tracing it in the sand. Activity 2- The
student and teacher continued reading “The Scarlet Ibis” together. Each alternately read a
paragraph. When done, the listener clapped out the rhythm from Day 2 for the incorporated
words. Definitions and applications were also discussed. The elements of the story were
discussed and taught throughout this activity as well.
Day 5 : Activity 1 - Posttest over “The Scarlet Ibis”, “Go Deep to the Sewer” (Trial 3),
“The Inspector-General” (Trial 5) and “Checkouts” (Trial 7) were administered. Students faced
the wall opposite the posters. Her test papers were checked, scored, and recorded. Activity 2Since time permitted, the student got out her English textbook and perused it for any of the 40
vocabulary words. Then, the student copied down the sentence and page number. For quick
reference, the student should underline the word. Following this, the student decided if the word
had the same meaning in the new sentence or another one. At the end of class, the studentwas
rewarded with candy for each word found.
During instruction, multiple methods of gathering information were utilized. These
included, but are not limited to observation, written work, and other created products. These
formats, though collected, do not determine success of acquisition. The student also provided
feedback on the multisensory activities.
Interobserver agreement- A second grader agreed with 169/170 words or 99.4% agreement.
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
Statistical Results
* SO=Spelling Only, DO= Definitions Only, Both= Both Spelling and Definitions
Checkouts
Baseline= SO= 2/10, DO= 0/10, Both= 2/20
Mean
Trends
Spelling only 28 / 7= 4/10
Gain 2 words
Definitions only
57 7= 8/10
Gain 8 definitions
Both
84/ 7=12/20
Spelling Mode = 5
Definition Mode= 9
Trends:
Improvement SO=2/10—4/10, DO= 0/10—8/10, B=2/20—12/20
Percentages
20%--40%,
0%-- 80%,
10%--60%
20%
80%
50% Gain in percentages
The Inspector-General
Baseline SO= 3/10, DO= 3/10, B= 6/20
Mean
Spelling only 18/5 = 3.6/10
Gain 1 word
Definitions only
33/5 = 6.6/10
Gain 4 definitions
Both
51/ 5= 10/20
Spelling Mode 4
Definition Mode 8
Improvement SO= 3/10—3.6/10, DO=3/10—6.6/10, B= 6/20—10/20
30%--36%
30%--66%,
30%--50%
6%
36%
20% Gain in percentages
Go Deep to the Sewer
Baseline SO= 2/10, DO= 0/10, B= 2/20
Mean
Spelling only 13/3 = 4/10
Gain 2 words
Definitionss only 14/3 = 4.6/10
Gain 5 definitions
Both 27/3 = 9/20
Spelling Mode =none
Def Mode = 6
Improvement SO= 2/10—4/10, DO= 0/10—4.6/10, B= 2/20—9/20
20%--40%
0%--46%,
10%--45%
20%
46%
35% Gain in percentages
Scarlet Ibis
Baseline SO= 0/10, DO= 0/10, B=0/10
Mean
Spelling only 0
No gain in words
Defs only 6/1= 6
Gain 6 definitions
Both 6/2 =3
Improvement SO= 0/10—0/10, DO= 0/10—6/10, B= 0/10—6/20
0%--0%,
0%--60%,
0%--30%
0%
60%
30%
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
Overview of Results
For the Week 1 word list with ten words from “Checkouts” by Cynthia Rylant, this
student averaged a gain of two correctly spelled words and eight definitions over the course of
four weeks. One pretest and seven post tests were administered. The mode for the eight scores of
words spelled accurately was five. Values were steady except for a fluctuation on April 24. The
progress in definition acquisition appears stronger than the spelling retention.
For the Week 2 word list from “The Inspector-General” by Anton Chekhov, the student
averaged a gain of one correctly spelled word and four new definitions over three weeks. One
pretest and five post tests were administered for these ten words.
Ten words were selected from “Go Deep to the Sewer” by Bill Cosby for Week 3. At the
end of the research, the student was able to spell two more words correctly during a traditional
spelling test when compared to previous results. The student gained an average of five new
definitions in two weeks.
The list of ten words from James Hurst’s “Scarlet Ibis” was only tested twice. Before
spending a week practicing how to spell the words and learning the definitions, this student knew
none of either. The second test results show that the student had not acquired any of the
spellings, yet knew six of the definitions.
When considering the improvement on the entire list of forty words and definitions, the
student’s final test scores demonstrated an average of 34 % improvement. All scores, though,
when analyzed separately, show that the improvement of the quantity of words spelled correctly
was not significant. Contrarily, definition acquisition increased more than 55% on average for
the four lists, even though most of the activities highlighted repetitious spelling as much as they
focused on the definitions. Surprisingly, on Excel all the trend lines for spelling appear negative.
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
Single Subject Design
Spelling Accuracy
16
14
Number Correct
12
Checkouts
10
Inspector-General
8
Go Deep to the
Sewer
6
Scarlet Ibis
4
2
5/1/2006
4/24/2006
4/17/2006
4/10/2006
4/3/2006
3/27/2006
3/20/2006
0
Date of Test
Definition Accuracy
Checkouts
Inspector-General
Go Deep to the
Sewer
Date of Test
/2
00
6
5/
1
4/
2
4/
20
06
References
7/
20
06
4/
1
0/
20
06
4/
1
/2
00
6
4/
3
7/
20
06
Scarlet Ibis
3/
2
3/
2
0/
20
06
Number Correct
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
Single Subject Design
Both Spelling and Definition Accuracy
Checkouts
Inspector-General
Go Deep to the
Sewer
Scarlet Ibis
3/
20
/2
00
6
3/
27
/2
00
6
4/
3/
20
06
4/
10
/2
00
6
4/
17
/2
00
6
4/
24
/2
00
6
5/
1/
20
06
Number Correct
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Date of Test
Spelling Accuracy
Baseline
Checkouts
ck
o
C
h e u ts
2
ck
ou
C
h e ts
4
ck
ou
t
In
sp s 6
-G
e
In
sp n 1
-G
e
In
sp n 3
-G
en
G
o
5
Sc Dee
p
ar
2
le
tI
bi
s
1
C
he
es
t
Pr
et
es
t
et
Pr
3
InspectorGeneral
Go Deep to
the Sewer
Scarlet Ibis
1
Number Correct
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Tests
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
Single Subject Design
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
5/1/2006
4/24/2006
4/17/2006
4/10/2006
4/3/2006
3/27/2006
Words Spelled
Correctly
Remembered
Definitions
Both Spelling
and Definitions
3/20/2006
Number Correct
Checkouts
Dates of Tests
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Words Spelled
Correctly
Definitions
Remembered
Dates of Tests
5/1/2006
4/24/2006
4/17/2006
4/10/2006
4/3/2006
Both Spelling and
Definition
3/27/2006
Number Correct
Inspector- General
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Words
Spelled
Correctly
Definitions
Remembered
5/1/2006
4/24/2006
4/17/2006
Both Spelling
and
Definitions
4/10/2006
Number Correct
Go Deep to the Sewer
Da te s of Te sts
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Words Spelled
Correctly
Definitions
Remembered
06
/2
0
06
4/
30
/2
0
06
4/
28
/2
0
06
Both Spelling and
Definitions
4/
26
/2
0
4/
24
Number Correct
Scarlet Ibis
Dates of Tests
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
Linkage
Some of the hands-on activities used in this study were borrowed from aspects of the
Orton-Gillingham training. The goal was to find a technique that helped this student with
dyslexia learn sight words, not only for recognition, but for later recall. The Hook et al (2001)
research incorporated the Orton-Gillingham program for a few members of their study. Their
study focused on phonemic awareness and reading. Therefore, this study investigated spelling
acquisition with definition retention noted as well. Ultimately, both sets of researchers were
interested in identifying how improving these subskills would render more proficient readers.
More analysis could be performed on the tests similar to the analyses done by Moats
(1996). The phonological errors could be more closely examined. Spelling patterns could be
more useful information than quantity of words retained.
Limitations
Since research was conducted on one student for a very short period of time, few valid
generalizations can be made about the results. Larger samples of students with learning
disabilities should be involved in further research for a more extensive period of time in order to
obtain any generalizable information. Timing difficulties occurred with the school schedule that
may have had an impact upon the results. The research was designed to occur on five day school
weeks. Instead, three of the weeks were four day school weeks with three day weekends. This
necessitated administering the post tests on different days of the week, sometimes following a
weekend, sometimes not. Another delay also occurred when the student was absent.
Consequently, the student admitted not being as interested in some of the activities as well as
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
feeling ill several days. Both of these factors, according to the subject, attribute to her ability, or
lack of ability, to process and recall the information later on the posttests.
Future Directions
This study incorporated an average of two kinetic activities a day for five days. Further
investigation of one specific kinetic activity might result in more concrete gains. For example,
using the grids once a day for five days in a row instead of varying the activities everyday could
be explored (or whatever activity the student prefers.) Group studies would also add different
dynamics that may warrant investigation. If this study were duplicated by this researcher, each
list of words would receive a minimum of four weeks practice and data collection. Additionally,
a more in-depth error analysis procedure would be applied.
Conclusions
The deficits caused by dyslexia were not significantly affected by these multisensory activities.
Single Subject Design
Tamela Green
May 4, 2006
References
Hook, P., Macaruso, P., Jones, S. (2001). Efficacy of Fast ForWord training on facilitating
acquisition of reading skills by children with reading difficulties-- a longitudinal study.
Annals of Dyslexia. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company retrieved
January 30, 2006 from www.findarticles.com.
Kiely, P., Crewther, S., & Crewther, D. (2001, Nov. 20). Is there an association between
functional vision and learning to read? Clinical & Experimental Optometry, 84(6), 346353.
Lueck, A., Bailey, I., Greer, R., Tuan, K., Bailey, V., Dornbusch, H. (2003). Exploring print-size
requirements and reading for students with low vision. Journal of Visual Impairment &
Blindness, 6, 335-354.
MacArthur, C. (1999). Word prediction for students with severe spelling problems. Learning
Disability Quarterly, 22(3), 158-172.
Miao, Y., Darch, C., Rabren, K. (2002). Use of precorrection strategies to enhance reading
performance of students with learning and behavior problems. Journal of Instructional
Psychology. 29 (3), p162.
Moats, L. (1996). Phonological spelling errors in the writing of dyslexic adolescents.
Reading and Writing, 8, 105-119.
Schacter, J. (2000) Reading programs that work: A review of programs for pre-kindregarten
through 4th grade.
Slater, J. (2002). A pictorial approach for improving literacy skills in students with disabilities:
an exploratory research study. JSET E Journal. 17: 3.
Taraban, R., Johnson, M., & Shufeldt, M. (1995). Reading comprehension development:
Increasing processing capacity versus increasing knowledge. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech
University, Department of Psychology. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED
384 024).
Yule, V. (1994) Spelling and society: Orthografy and reading. Summary of a research
thesis[1]. Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society. 2: 17.