Case Study: Stage 3- Hypothesis Testing

--Download Original Flie with Charts--

HYPOTHESIS 1: Justin learns better in a one on one situation than he does in a group situation.

In order to test this hypothesis, Justin’s teacher was asked to provide examples of what had been taught before a Thursday visit to work with Justin. I then tested Justin on these academic points which he had been taught with the rest of the class earlier in the week. The academics involved S blends, Ch, and Wh. Second, I asked what academic subjects would be taught the following week, and I then taught this subject myself on Thursday. I returned to test Justin’s knowledge of these academics on Friday, before any classroom instruction had been given. The one-on-one academic subject covered contractions. The results were as follows:

For the classroom subject (S blends, Ch, and Wh) Justin was given a list of 10 words the teacher agreed he should be able to identify without trouble because of the weeks lessons and reinforcements. These words were:

1. stamp
2. check
3. whale
4. chin
5. lunch
6. chap
7. spoon
8. snow
9. stick
10. snake

On his own, Justin was unable to identify any of the words given. He needed help to identify every word on the list. It is noted that Justin was given this test first, as he tends to tire after working one-on-one for a while. This was done to assure his best work, as seen in past experiences in working with Justin.

After this testing, I introduced Justin to contractions. Justin seemed confused at first, and said he had never seen contractions before. This makes sense as the teacher said this would be completely new material for the class. After a few minutes of explanation, rehearsal, and practice, Justin seemed to understand the materials, and could produce contractions and read contractions correctly. He was taught and on Friday, tested, on ten contractions. Justin was given the original two words, and was taught to create and say the following contractions.

1. don’t
2. wasn’t
3. she’s
4. it’s
5. he’s
6. isn’t
7. I’m
8. won’t *the only irregular contraction taught
9. he’ll
10. you’ll

On Friday, Justin was given a paper with the ten two word items he had been taught to make contractions from the day before (do not, was not, she is, etc.). Justin was asked to write the correct contractions, and then Justin was asked to read the ten sets of words. Justin wrote all but #8 (won’t) correctly, and was able to verbally identify all but three (#s 1,2,and 8) of the contractions on the first try. With very little help, Justin was able to fix all of his mistakes as well.

The predictions of hypothesis #1 appear to be correct. Justin does learn and remember better when taught in a one-on-one environment.

HYPOTHESIS 2: If Justin has the word attack skills necessary for first grade reading, he will be able to read texts geared for this level.

In reference to the referral question, it is noted that Justin has not mastered the common reading rules for his grade, nor is he able to read materials designed for his grade level. In order to look more closely at hypothesis #2, several letter combinations were tested for understanding, and several words taken from these combinations were also tested for readability. The letter combinations and words used were compared to see if Justin knew words taken from letter combinations he did know. The following chart identifies which parts of words Justin knew, and which words derived from those parts he knew.

Though the correlation is imperfect, it does appear that if Justin knows a part of speech, his chances of correctly reading a word taken from those parts of speech are improved. Justin did know the parts, “ake,” “and,” and “ee” and also knew the words “cake,” “grand,” and “see.” Justin also knew three other parts (ax, eft, and ong) but needed help in identifying the words “fax,” “left,” and “long.” The help given for these words was simple instructions to look specifically at a certain letter, or letter combination. Other result examples are specified in the above chart. The second hypothesis was supported.

HYPOTHESIS 3: (Due to dyslexia concerns) If Justin does not have difficulty identifying the order of letters in a sequence, he will be able to read texts designed for his grade level.

Hypothesis three was tested because of concerns expressed by Justin’s mother and a school note found in a kindergarten file stating that his school was “watching to see if he sees things backwards.” Hypothesis three was not supported. Justin was given 12 three letter word flashcards for one second each, and after each was asked to identify the three letters (or word, if he recognized it) he saw. Justin correctly identified 11 out of the 12 combinations he saw. Conferring with his teacher and the school psychologist, it was agreed that it is not uncommon for children of Justin’s age to mis-read at least one in 12 three letter words.

Filed under: EDC 514-515 Academic Assessment for Intervention
Copyright: March, 2004 - David Profitt