Transcript Language, literacy and the - California Speech Language

Language, literacy and the
APPlication
CSHA District 2
Saturday, April 25, 2015
Robert A. Pieretti, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
California State University, Sacramento
Sacramento City Unified School District
Jackie Bryla, BA, SLPA
Roseville City School District
Goals for This Morning……….
1. Review and refine definitions of language based reading
problems
2.
Outline Practical strategies for clinical assessment of literacy
3. Discuss the Language, Speech, and Hearing Specialist’s role in
literacy in the public schools and how to build bridges among
special educators in the assessment process:
LSHS/RSP/School Psychologist
Role of the SLP: Language and Literacy
• Mastery of the sounds of our language, the words of our
language, and the way we put sentences together in our language,
combined with our background and experiences, correspond
directly to our ability to decode and comprehend text.
How many people have reading disorders???
• 15 percent of the population has specific reading disorders. Of
these 15 percent as many as 1/3 may show change in the brain
structure.
• Reference
Reading Statistics Reference Information
Albert M. Galaburda, M.D., Beth Israel Hospital, Harvard Medical
School.
One World Literacy Foundation. Illiteracy/Reading statistics.
Retrieved April 6, 2015 at:
http://www.1worldliteracy.org/index.php/why-supportowl/iliteracy-statisctics.html
How many people have reading disorders???
• Dyslexia affects one out of every five children - ten million in
America alone.
• Reference
Literacy Statistics Reference Information
Sally Shaywitz, M.D.,2004
One World Literacy Foundation. Illiteracy/Literacy statistics.
Retrieved April 6, 2015 at
http://www.1worldliteracy.org/index.php/why-supportowl/iliteracy-statisctics.html
READ OR GO TO JAIL???
According to the One World Literacy Foundation, The Department
of justice reports:
• The link between academic failure and delinquency, violence, and
crime is related to reading failure
• Over 70% of inmates in America’s prisons cannot read above a
4th grade level
One World Literacy Foundation. Illiteracy Statistics/US Literacy
Statistics. Retrieved April 6, 2015 at
http://www.1worldliteracy.org/index.php/why-supportowl/iliteracy-statisctics.html
The hard facts……
• The One World Literacy Foundation has found that 2/3 of
students who cannot read proficiently by the end of 4th grade will
end up in jail or on welfare. The 4th grade is the watershed year.
We can predict that if a child is not reading proficiently in the 4th
grade, he or she will have approximately a 78% chance of not
catching up.
One World Literacy Foundation. Illiteracy/U.S. literacy Statistics.
Retrieved April 6 2015 at:
http://www.1worldliteracy.org/index.php/why-supportowl/iliteracy-statisctics.html
And yet………….
• Learning disabilities (LD) are fairly common! As many as 1 out of
every 5 people in the United States has a learning disability.
Almost 1 million children (ages 6 through 21) have some form of a
learning disability and receive special education in school. In fact,
one-third of all children who receive special education have a
learning disability (Twenty-Ninth Annual Report to Congress, U.S.
Department of Education, 2010).
• LD varies from person to person. One person with LD may not
have the same kind of learning problems as another person with
LD. Some may have trouble with reading and writing. Another
person with LD may have problems with understanding math. Still
another person may have trouble in both of these areas, as well
as with understanding what people are saying
• Center for Parent Information and Resources (funded through
Office of Special Education Programs/U.S. Dept of Ed. Learning
disabilities. Retrieved April 6, 2015 at:
http://www.parentcenterhub.org/repository/ld/#def
How does this affect “Our” Kids?? What
does it have to do with Speech-Language
Pathology?
Language problems and LD
• Approximately 85% of children with Learning Disabilities have
difficulty learning and using symbols—Some professionals
consider this group to have a language learning disability (Owens,
2014).
• Even children with a Specific Language Impairment who are not
diagnosed with LD can have literacy problems. Early language
skills that affect later reading (decoding and comprehension) and
writing are affected and oral errors appear in their writing (Owens,
2014).
Special Education Students Accessing the
“Common Core” Curriculum
• Some of “our” kids will receive only Speech and Language
Services
• Some of “our” kids will be enrolled in the general education
classroom receiving support: RSP, Speech and Language, etc.
• Some are enrolled in special day classrooms
• All are faced with curriculum that is being aligned to the common
core state standards
Special Education Students Accessing the
“Common Core” Curriculum
• Whether “our” kids are college-bound or not, the Standards focus
on college and career readiness (College and Career Anchor
Standards)
• We need to help them negotiate these standards without failing
• Recommendations include presenting information in multiple ways
and allowing for multiple ways of expression; accommodations
that do no alter the standards or lower the expectations; assistive
technology devised and services that enable access (Frank
Donovan, Ed.D. Common core and the special educator: making
the transition. Presentation to yolo county office of education
May 9, 2013)
In the words of Pieretti & Stage:
The Power of Narrative in the age of Expository Text
Pieretti, R. and Stage, T.
CSHA Magazine Winter 2014
• “The Common Core Standards, adopted by California in 2010, are
expected to be fully implemented in our schools during the 201314 academic year. The standards emphasize the critical
relationship between oral language development, specifically
listening and speaking, and the successful acquisition of reading
and writing. They also stress the importance of developing
students’ ability to work with informational text at all grade levels
and with increasing levels of complexity as they progress through
school. Because of this, there has been renewed focus on
teaching expository text structures to promote successful reading
comprehension.”
The SLP and the Academic Climate……
• I choose “C” video
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=you+tube+I+choose+C&F
ORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=9BAA9774F85A18D3CA169BAA977
4F85A18D3CA16
• Laura Justice Article from the Asha Leader
October 2013:
From My Perspective: A+ Language Goals.
Role of the SLP: Language and Literacy
• So, in terms of language and literacy, the “heat” is on…………..and
more eyes are on us than ever before……..particularly in public
school settings….
Early success in school is closely linked to
success in the language arts—specifically
reading and reading comprehension
• If you don’t, you’re pressured
• Don’t fit in
• Traditionally, there have been 2 words for a student who falls
behind in the Language Arts: SPECIAL ED!
Who are “our” kids?
• Where do they come from?
• Where do they go?
What happens to children with early speech
and language problems?
• 40-100% of these children have persistent
language problems
• 50-75% of these children have academic
problems
(Lewis et al., 2000)
What does the research say?
• Longitudinal studies have consistently shown that
children with language impairment often have reading
disabilities
• In fact, comprehensive research indicates that 50
percent or more of children with language impairment in
preschool or kindergarten go on to have a reading
disability in primary or secondary grades (Catts, Fey,
Tomblin, & Zhang, 2002)
EARLY LANGUAGE PROBLEMS TO WATCH
FOR: Red Flags!
 3 YEARS:
*receptive vocab. problems
*naming problems
*may have phonological
processing problems
(Scarborough, 1998; Stackhouse, 1997)
EARLY LANGUAGE PROBLEMS
 4 YEARS:
*word junction problems (Wells, 1994)
*problems differentiating similar-sounding words
*problems distinguishing/producing words with complex
sound clusters & more complex words (Stackhouse,
1997)
EARLY LANGUAGE PROBLEMS
5 YEARS:
*poor naming
*poor rhyming
*poor letter-sound knowledge
*poor phonemic awareness
5 KINDERGARTEN VARIABLES THAT PREDICT
2ND GR. READING (Catts, Fey, Zhang, &
Tomblin, 2001)
• LETTER IDENTIFICATION
• SENTENCE IMITATION
• PHONOLOGICAL AWARENESS
• RAPID NAMING
• MOTHER’S EDUCATION
• THIS IS JUST ONE LIST
MORE READING PROBLEM PREDICTORS
• Phonological PROCESSING PROBLEMS PAST 5 1/2 yrs
• Phonemic AWARENESS problems in kindergarten
• Will usually have phonics & spelling problems
• Naming problems
MORE READING PROBLEM PREDICTORS
•
Significant language problems at 4-5 yrs. likely to
have learning problems
•
Verbal expressive problems past 6 yrs.
•
“Somewhere between a small vocabulary at 2 and
serious expressive language difficulties at 6 we may
find an early, reliable predictor of school-age
language performance” (Paul, 1997)
SO!!! Many of these children will be
diagnosed with language-based reading
disabilities:
The oral-written language continuum
• Think about preschoolers who graduate from speech
and language services and later diagnosed with a
reading disability in 2-4th grades…
• Different names by virtue of time and learning context.
Demonstrates the virtues of time and the learning
context. Demonstrates the continuum deficits in
language learning. (Bashir & Scavuzzo, 1992)
A critical question!
What are the links to early
literacy?????
Early Oral Language Problems
& Later Reading Problems:
Missing Links to Literacy
 Phonology: Phonological
Processing/
Phonological Awareness
 Word Finding
 Memory
 Syntax
 Semantics
 Morphology
Phonology: A Critical Link To
Decoding……
• Phonological Processing:
“using phonological information to process oral
& written language”
• Phonological Processing Difficulties:
“problems with phonological input (auditory
processing), lexical representation, &/or
phonological output-speech”
(Hodson/Edwards, 1997)
**Phonology:
Phonological Awareness
• Phonological Awareness: breaking
speech into smaller units: words,
syllables, sounds
– Phonemic Awareness: sounds
• Not to be confused with phonics:
Sound-symbol connections;
phonology-orthography connections.
“Fuzzy” Phonemes Impact Phonics
Development and Decoding
“Did he say pin or pen?”
“Did she say dot or got?”
More “Fuzzy Phonemes…..”
Word Finding and Memory: Critical
Links to RAN and Reading
Comprehension
• Efficient Word Finding and Memory promotes
Rapid Automatic Naming (RAN)
• Efficient Word Finding and Memory is an
integral part of effective language processing,
ultimately promoting reading comprehension
The Umbrella of Phonological
Awareness
P word umbrella
• many ribs of
umbrella
• Weakness in the
system of phonology
can have a domino
effect
• Can impact any of
the “p” ribs of the
umbrella!!!
• Weak “ribs” impact
the ability to decode
Syntax, Semantics, Morpology and
Adequate decoding: Critical Links To
Reading Comprehension……
• PA + RAN = Efficient decoding. Being able to
read rapidly enough to “hold onto” the
meaning.
• Well developed systems of language (syntax,
semantics, morphology) leads to good
language processing and, ultimately, the ability
to understand what has been read.
**Summary**Key Components Of
Reading Instruction
Successful
Reading Fluency
AND
Text Comprehension
are dependent upon:
 Phonemic Awareness
 Phonics
 Vocabulary and
Language
Development
Language Delay, SLI, LLD, Dyslexia: A
Continuum
• All three will benefit from language-literacy
activities…….
Video Clips: You know these kids!!
• Language Delay: Talking Twins
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocjWFGIQr3s
• SLI (More subtle: Syntax and morphology stand out….)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAsf_Wqjz4g
• LLD (More widespread language deficits in the presence of
other deficits) (JZ and the Bird)
• Dyslexia (Phonology Deficits) (Mato)
As you swim through your daily routine…….
The idea of taking on more, like reading, can
make you want to “come up for air!!!”
But I’m here to tell you…………You’re already
supporting literacy!!!!!
We just have to make sure we have our
language and literacy “lens” on…….
• Writing Goals to the common core standards
English Language Arts Standards » Reading: Literature »
Grade 2: CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.2.1
Ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when,
why, and how to demonstrate understanding of key details in
a text.
• Actively talking about how our goals will impact literacy
-Any work on the sound system supports the ability to
decode words
-Any work on language supports the ability to comprehend
what is read
• Choosing targets strategically (classroom vocabulary)
• Collaborating with parents and teachers
Reading Problems and the LSHS: A Tale of
Two Profiles……….
• Profile A: Dyslexia (Decoding and its effect on
comprehension. Phonologic core deficits.)
• Profile B: Generalized Reading Problem (Language
Comprehension and-often-decoding problems
secondary to multiple systems of language in deficit.)
Also called mixed decoding/comprehension Deficit or
specific comprehension deficit, depending on the areas
of deficit.
The Simple View of Reading…….
• The Simple View of Reading (Hoover & Gough, 1990;
Catts & Kamhi, 2005; Kamhi & Catts, 2012) provides
a good model for differentiating typical readers from
those with deficits leading to dyslexia or a more
generalized reading problem. It suggests that
reading comprehension is dependent upon both
intact decoding and listening comprehension
abilities. The following table highlights readers by
subtype according to the Simple View:
The Simple View of Reading….
Word Recognition
Poor
Language Comprehension
Good
Good
Dyslexia
Typical Reading or
Nonspecified
Poor
Mixed Decoding/Comprehension Deficit
Specific
Comprehension Deficit
Profile A: Dyslexia
Owens (2014) mentions two types that we frequently
discuss:
1.
Language Based that may affect reading
comprehension and/or speech sound
discrimination (SLP involved—today’s focus)
2.
Visuospatial disorder that may affect letter-form
discrimination with relatively unaffected language
overall (not SLP focus)
Profile A: Dyslexia
•
A specific Language Learning Disability (LLD).
Definitely related to the “symbol” category. Specific
to the phonologic core.
•
Characterized by difficulties in accurate, fluent word
recognition when decoding words and spelling
difficulties
•
Often associated with phonological awareness,
phonological memory, and Rapid Automatic Naming
(RAN) deficits.
•
Single or Double Deficit Hypothesis (Wolf & Bowers,
1999) PA/RAN/PA + RAN
Profile A: Dyslexia
• Phonological awareness deficits lead to
trouble with phonics(sound-symbol
correspondence)
• This leads to decreased word attack, which
leads to decreased reading fluency, which
impacts reading comprehension…….
Profile A: Dyslexia
• Phonological memory deficits lead to trouble
with phonics (sound-symbol correspondence)
• This leads to decreased word attack, which
leads to decreased reading fluency, which
impacts reading comprehension…….
Profile A: Dyslexia
• RAN deficits lead to trouble with retrieving oral
labels for visual forms
• This leads to decreased word identification of
orthographic patterns, which impacts reading
fluency, which impacts reading
comprehension…….
Dyslexia vs. Generalized
Reading Problem
•
ASHA (2010) reminds us that language-based learning
disability (LLD) is an even better title than dyslexia
because of the relationship between spoken and written
language.
•
Dyslexia is a specific LLD
•
The child with dyslexia has trouble almost exclusively
with the written (or printed) word.
•
The child with a decoding problem/reading fluency
problem as part of a larger language learning disability
has trouble with both the spoken and written word.
Many in the field would consider this a more generalized
or “garden variety” reading problem…..not as specific as
dyslexia.
Two Paths to reading comprehension……
Comparing children with dyslexia to their Typically Developing peers,
the following are often noted:

Listening Comprehension: At or above grade level
(If someone else reads the passage to them, they understand it)

Reading Comprehension: Below grade level

Oral language skills: Average to above average scores

Word Attack (decoding) & Spelling to Dictation: Below grade level

Nonsense or non-real word reading: Often below real word reading

Phonological Processing: PA and/or RAN: Decreased scores

Intelligence: Average to above average
(word attack skills)
Comparing children with generalized reading problems to their
Typically Developing peers, the following are often noted:

Listening Comprehension: At or below grade level

Reading Comprehension: Below grade level

Oral language skills:

Word Attack (decoding) and Spelling to Dictation: Deficits may

Phonological Awareness and/or RAN: Deficits may be noted.

Intelligence: Average to below average

In Sum: Diffuse language deficits across the systems of
language (phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics)
semantics deficits
Phonology, Morphology, Syntax, and/or
be noted
Comparing individuals with dyslexia to typical developing peers
Dyslexia
Specific Comprehension Deficit
Mixed Decoding/
Comprehension Deficit
Listening Comprehension
Average to above average
Below average
Below average
Reading Comprehension
Below grade level
Below grade level
Below grade level
Oral Language Skills
Average to above average
Deficits in one or more systems of
language
Deficits in one or more
systems of language
Decoding/Spelling
Below grade level
At or above grade level
Below grade level
Reading nonsense words
Below grade level
At or above grade level
Below grade level
Phonological Processing
Below average
Average to above average
Below average
Cognitive Ability
Average to above average
Average to below average
Average to below average
THE “D” WORD!!!!!!!!!
• Use of the term in school
settings………
The LSHS has a lot to say about both
profiles, whatever we decide to call them!!
• PHONOLOGICAL
AWARENESS PROBLEMS
• RAPID NAMING
PROBLEMS
• LANGUAGE PROBLEMS
• Hello LSHS!!
ASSESSMENT WITH LITERACY IN MIND
• Many SLPs typically assess with:
Clinical Evaluation of Language
Fundamentals (CELF-5) (Wiig, Semel, &
Secord, 2013)
This test “is an individually administered
clinical tool for the identification,
diagnosis, and follow-up evaluation of
language and communication disorders in
students 5-21 years.”
CELF-5
Subtests commonly given for Receptive and Expressive
Language Composites:
• Sentence Comprehension
• Linguistic Concepts
• Word Structure
• Word Classes
• Following Directions
• Formulated Sentences
• Recalling Sentences
• Understanding Spoken Paragraphs
CELF-5
Subtests commonly given as part of the Receptive and Expressive
Language Composites:
•
Sentence Comprehension
•
Linguistic Concepts
•
Word Structure
•
Word Classes
•
Following Directions
•
Formulated Sentences
•
Recalling Sentences
•
Understanding Spoken Paragraphs
•
Word Definitions
•
Sentence Assembly
•
Semantic Relationships
Pause……………………and think!
• What have we actually tested here?
• Which elements can help us define a student referred to the IEP
team for reading problems?
CELF-5
• This information is helpful, particularly if we anticipate a more
generalized reading problem. It can also rule out oral language
problems (which fits with a Dyslexic profile).
• But, it is not enough. WE NEED TO GET AT THE ROOT: IS THERE
ALSO AN UNDERLYING PHONOLOGICAL PROCESSING
PROBLEM???
CELF-5
• Phonology is the traditionally the MOST under-assessed
system of language….it is often the “root” of the
problem!
• How do we do “get to the root?”
ASSESSMENT WITH PHONOLOGY IN MIND!!!!
• If short on time, add in the Phonological Awareness and Rapid
Automatized Naming Composites from the CELF-4.
ASSESSMENT WITH PHONOLOGY IN MIND!!!!
If short on time, add in the Phonological Awareness and
Rapid Automatized Naming Composites from the CELF-4.
PA Composite: 85 items in 17 sections, word, syllable
and sound level, including:
• Sentence Segmentation (The rabbit is jumping around)
(5)
• Syllable Blending (sail boat)
• Initial Phoneme Id (sit)
• Phoneme Segmentation (s-t-r-a-p)
• Final Phoneme Substitution lo(g), (t), lo(t)
Administration time: Less than 10 minutes
ASSESSMENT WITH PHONOLOGY IN MIND!!!!
• RAN Composite: Criterion Referenced.
• Rapid Alternating Sequences of color and shape, six rows by six
columns: Green Circle, Blue Triangle, Yellow Square, Red
Circle……..
ASSESSMENT WITH PHONOLOGY IN MIND!!!!
• Best Alternative: Give the Comprehensive Test of Phonological
Processing-2 (CTOPP-2) (Wagner, Torgesen, Rashotte, & Pearson
2013)…Ages 4-24…..…or strike a deal with the psychologist on the
team! Take turns and share in interpretation!
CTOPP-2
Four Composite Scores:
• Phonological Awareness
• Phonological Memory
• Rapid Symbolic Naming
• Alternate Phonological Awareness
Or
• Rapid Non-Symbolic Naming
CTOPP-2
Some subtests and sample items:
1.
Elision: “Say toothbrush without
saying tooth.”
2.
Blending Words: “What words do
these sounds make?” ham-er n-o
3. Phoneme Isolation: “What is the first sound
in
the word fan?
4.
Memory for Digits: 2-9 #s
CTOPP-2
5.
Nonword Repetition: sart; lis-e-
shrul
6.
Rapid Digit Naming
7. Rapid Letter Naming
Sample supplemental Subtests:
1. Blending Nonwords: lan-der: z-I-g-o-p-l
2. Segmenting Nonwords: ip: /I/ /p/
ASSESSMENT WITH READING PROBLEM PROFILES
IN MIND!!!!
I like to see results from selected subtests from the WoodcockJohnson (WJIV) (Schrank, McGrew, & Mather, 2014).
Ages 2-90+, Time varies—5-10 minutes per subtest.
Woodcock-Johnson (WJIV) Tests of Achievement:
• Letter-Word Identification
• Passage Comprehension
• Word Attack
Woodcock-Johnson (WJIV) Tests of Oral Language:
• Oral Comprehension
Clinic Based: SLP can give them
School Based: Consult with RSP
****In some school districts, these measures would be obtained
with the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (WIAT)
WJIV
• The WJIV Tests of Achievement is a norm-referenced measure of
academic achievement in the areas of reading fluency, reading
comprehension, written language, and mathematics.
• The WJIV Tests of Oral Language is a norm-referenced measure
of oral language in the areas of listening comprehension, oral
expression, phonetic coding, speed of lexical access, vocabulary,
and auditory memory.
• While many of the subtests are relevant, the subtests selected for
this presentation were chosen because they measure skills that
relate to a student’s ability to understand spoken and printed
language and to decode words.
WJIV

Subtests in detail:
1.
Letter-Word Identification: Measures the ability to identify
letters and words, a reading and writing ability. (Decoding)
(Often below average for both profiles)
2.
Word Attack: Measures the ability to apply phonic and
structural analysis skills in order to read unfamiliar printed
words, a reading/writing ability. (Decoding) (Often below
average for both profiles)
3.
Passage Comprehension: Reading comprehension (Often below
average for both profiles)
4.
Oral Comprehension: Listening Comprehension (Often below
average for generalized BUT average to above average for
Dyslexic)
Some school districts use the WIAT-III
• Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (WIAT-III) (Wechsler, 2009):
“An individually administered clinical instrument designed to
measure the achievement of students who are in Grades Pre-K
through 12 or ages 4 years 0 months through 19 years 11
months. It is used to evaluate listening, speaking, reading,
writing, and mathematics skills.”
WJIV: Letter Word Identification
The student is asked to identify written letters and words:
• Point to the “A”
• What is the name of these letters: R, F, P, J
• Point to the word “car”
• What is this word: “the”
• Lists of words in sets to read:
from simple to more complex: at, cup, have, become, imagine,
ferocious, aggrandizement
Similar WIAT-III Subtest
• Word Reading (Grades 1-12+)
“I want you to read these words out loud. Start here and read
across this way. If you finish the page, turn to the next page:”
posed
vicissitude
in
to
my
they
cow
when
budge
ruin
vitiate
quincuncial
WJIV: Word Attack
The student is required to decode phonically regular nonsense
words:
• I want you to read some words that are not real words and tell me
how they would sound:
wab
ib
zoop
wugs
mip
bine
artible
saist
intestationing
sylibemeter armophodelictedness
Similar WIAT-III Subtest
• Pseudoword Decoding: (Grades 1-12+)
“I want you to read some words that are not real words, but read
them as if they were. Start hear and read across this way. If you
finish this page, turn to the next page:”
clurt
purellian
ik
ab
fip
rix
seb
zad
plid
psibertarian
caft
apturarial
WJIV: Passage Comprehension
• The student is required to apply a variety of vocabulary and
comprehension skills in order to supply a missing word in a
passage through the use of syntactic and semantic cues:
• “Point to the picture (3 shown) these words tell about.” yellow
bird
• Read this to yourself and tell me one word that goes in the blank
space: She loves to play the ______ (drum based on picture
prompt)
• I went to the dentist. He pulled out my ____. (tooth—no picture
prompt)
Similar WIAT-III Subtest
• Reading Comprehension: (Grade 1 and up)
“I have some stories and passages for you to read. You can
choose to read out loud or silently. After each one, I will ask you
questions about what you read.”
What color was the frog?
Which animal can student bring to school on pet day?
When does the tree get leaves?
WJIV: Oral Comprehension
The student is asked to complete an oral cloze procedure
(Simple analogies to complex passages) requiring
listening, reasoning, and vocabulary abilities.
• “Finish what I say. Use only one word:”
Candy tastes _____ (good, sweet)
A bird flies, a fish _____ (swims)
Cereal is for breakfast; a sandwich is for (lunch, dinner,
a snack, supper)
Observation of behavior when errors are made can lead
to hypotheses regarding learning characteristics. Some
people become so frustrated that their emotions cause
them to quit. The rigid persist with a strategy that has
_____. (failed)
Similar WIAT-III Subtest
• Listening Comprehension: (Grades PK-12+)
Three sections
1. Receptive Vocabulary
“Empty.
Point to the picture that shows empty.”
2. Oral Discourse Comprehension
“Listen….I will ask you questions about what you have
heard.”
The Bird sings in the tree.
Where does the bird sing?
This section begins with simple sentence prompts, as
above, and moves up to paragraph prompts.
Some RSPs may not give Oral
Comprehension/Listening Comprehension
subtests. What are other good measure of
oral comprehension????
• CELF-5 Understanding Spoken Paragraphs
Language: The Keys to the Kingdom of
Reading……
• Adding a few elements to your battery and/or helping
interpret the findings of other team members with your
unique “language lens” is invaluable when defining the
existence of and type of reading problem
• This benefits students, families, teachers, and special
educators
• Appropriate assessment
is just as important as
direct intervention!!!!!
IN SUM: WHAT’S THE CONNECTION?
Language!!!!!
• PHONOLOGICAL AWARENESS: DECODING
• RAPID AUTOMATIZED NAMING: DECODING
AND READING COMPREHENSION
• LANGUAGE PROBLEMS: ORAL AND
READING COMPREHENSION
So who does what in the schools???
• Dyslexia: Assessment (Entire team.
SLP findings are KEY!!!)
• Dyslexia: Intervention (Often RSP, sometimes SLP involvement)
• Generalized reading problem: Assessment (Entire team.
KEY!!)
SLP is
• Generalized reading problem: Intervention (Often both RSP and
SLP…..and sometimes SDC Teacher)
Intervention: It still all comes down to
collaboration………
Phonological
Awareness
Teacher
X
Resource Specialist
(RSP)
SLP
X
Phonics
Vocab
Reading
Fluency
Text
Comprehension
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Shaywitz (2004): Essential,
scientifically-proven elements of
reading programs for children at-risk
for reading difficulties
• Systematic and direct instruction in Phonemic
Awareness
• Systematic and direct instruction in phonics
• Practice applying phonics in reading and writing
• Reading fluency training
• Enriched language experiences (such as oral narratives
or expository scaffolding)
Ritter and Saxon (2011)
• Ritter and Saxon (2011) demonstrated that the use
of Sourcebook of Phonological Awareness Activities
Volume II: Children’s Core Literature (Goldsworthy,
2001; ) was shown to be a key element in increasing
phonological sensitivity with a moderate effect size
for the treatment group over the control group. The
study was published in Communication Disorders
Quarterly in November 2011……
GOLDSWORTHY and
GOLDSWORTHY/PIERETTI
SOURCEBOOKS for PHONOLOGICAL
AWARENESS I (2012), II (2012), III (2012),
AND IV (2013)
• Delmar/Cengage Pub.
Group
• Activities at word, syllable,
sound levels
• 36 activities/story
• 10 stimulus items/activity
• 6 Phonological Awareness
into print activities/story
• 5 stimulus items/activity
A Hierarchical Phonological Awareness Training
Program
• Program Levels:
1. Word Awareness
2. Syllable Awareness
3. Sound Awareness
Sample Word Level Activities:
• “How many words do you hear?” three plums
(2)
• “Tell me which word is missing?” salami, nice
salami (nice)
• “Supply missing word.” He nibbled a _____
(hole)
• “Rearrange these words.” through ate he (he ate
through)
Sample Syllable Level ActivitIes:
• Delete syllables: “Say strawberries without
straw” (berries)
• Adding syllables: “Add pop to the end of lolli”
(lollipop)
• Substituting syllables: “Say strawberries. Instead
of straw say blue” (blueberries)
Sample Sound/Phoneme Level Activities:
• Guess which word doesn’t rhyme with the other
3: leaf, thief, warm, chief
• Blending sounds: sl + ice; gr + een
• Substituting initial sound: “Say pickle. Instead of
/p/ say /t/” (tickle)
• Say the word backwards: ice (sigh)
• Switch 1st phonemes: big fat = fig bat
Sample Phonological Awareness Into Print
Activities:
1. Substituting initial sound/letter in words.
NOTE: Use lined paper or copy the sheet of lined
paper at end of this chapter.
Stimulus items:
1.1. do/to
• Task a. Say “‘do.’ Instead of /d/ say /t/.
What’s your new word?”(to). “Write/copy ‘do’
and ‘to.’”
• Task b. Say “Circle the letters that make the
words different.” ([d], [t])
• Task c. Ask “What sounds do these letters
make?” (/d/, /t/)
Sample Phonological Awareness Into Print
Activities:
5. Switching first sound and letter in words ADVANCED)
NOTE: Use lined paper or copy the sheet of lined paper at end of
this chapter.
• Stimulus items:
billy goat
• Task a. Say “‘billy,’ say ‘goat.’ What sound do you hear in the
beginning of ‘billy?’” (/b/). “What sound do you hear in the
beginning of ‘goat?’” (/g/) “Switch the first sounds in those
words.” (gilly boat) “Now we’ll change the letters. Write/copy
‘billy goat’ and ‘gilly boat.’”
• Task b. Say “Circle the beginning letters that change the words.
([b] [g])
• Task c. Ask “What sounds do those letters make?” (/b/ /g/)
So who does what in the schools???
• Dyslexia: Assessment (Entire team.
SLP findings are KEY!!!)
• Dyslexia: Intervention (Often RSP, sometimes SLP involvement)
• Generalized reading problem: Assessment (Entire team.
KEY!!)
SLP is
• Generalized reading problem: Intervention (Often both RSP and
SLP…..and sometimes SDC Teacher)
Early Oral Language Problems &
Later Reading Problems:
Missing Links to Literacy
• It is harder for disabled readers than for normal readers
to acquire phonological awareness skills, but even they
can improve their phonemic awareness with training
[National Reading Panel (NRP), 2000]
• Children with phonological disorders have better
outcomes than children with phonological disorders AND
an additional language problem (Lewis et al., 2000)
All of this information allows a team to design
intervention with the language/literacy philosophy
at Sacramento State in mind:
• Don’t keep putting out all
small fires!
• Strengthen key
concepts/core literacy
foundation
• Early intervention is
vital…
IEP Activity……………..
• Let’s form IEP teams at
your tables…..
• Your Goal: Given some
data, design a team plan
for student success
In Sum…..
• We hold the keys to language and
literacy……the keys are the systems of
language!!!!
Role of the SLP: Language and Literacy
• SLP training leads to heightened
awareness of social and cultural
issues and linguistic differences
• SLPs are the professionals among the
inter-disciplinary special education
teams whose expertise is in the area
of language development and literacy
• SLPs are well-placed for intervention
and/or consultation, collaboration,
and follow-up with students
diagnosed with language-based
reading disorders
Role of the SLP: Language and Literacy
• But we are also well-placed for prevention via education and
information-sharing…..
-Early intervention programs
-Community outreach
-Clinics & Hospitals
-Local Public Agencies
We can make a difference!!!
Talking to and reading with children
promotes kindergarten readiness!!!
94,000 books have been donated to the local and
international communities courtesy of Dr. Celeste
Roseberry-McKibbin’s Book Drive: Love,Talk, Read:
lovetalkread.com
Handouts and parent training courtesy of Dr. Robert Pieretti
and the
The Sac State Literacy Connection
• Student Coordinators: Gianna
James Libby Ferris
The Sacramento State Story Time
Connection provides weekly
literacy enhancement for lowincome children and their families
who participate in Sacramento
Food Bank & Family Services
(SFBFS) programs…………………..
The group also teaches a series of
four parent literacy enhancement
training courses in Enlish and
Spanish each semester at SFBFS:
Reading to Engage Children,
Reading for sounds, Reading for
Words, and Reading to Understand
The Sac State Literacy Connection
A website dedicated to parent-friendly literacy enhancement:
Sacramento State Literacy Connection:
www.csus.edu/hhs/spa
Link: Clinical Research: Sacramento State Literacy
Connection
A Website Dedicated to Literacy Enhancement
• Reading to Children questions in 11 languages
• Techniques to elicit language growth at home in several
languages
• Community links and resources regarding language and literacy
• Red flags indicating language/literacy assessment
Onward…………
• Jackie Bryla and the APPlication!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
References
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. Language Based Learning Disabilities.
1/28/2010 from www.asha.org/public/speech/disorders/LBLD.htm.
Retrieved
Bashir, A., & Scavuzzo, A. (1992). Children with language disorders: Natural history and academic success.
Journal of learning disabilities, 25, 53-65.
Catts, H.. W., Fey, M.E., Tomblin, J.B., & Zhang, X. (2002). A longitudinal investigation of reading outcomes in
children with language impairments. Journal of speech, Languge, and Hearing Research, 45, 1142-1157.
Catts, H.W., Fey, M.E., Zhang, X., & Tomblin, J.B. (2001). Estimating the risk of future reading difficulties in
kindergarten children. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 32, 38-50.
Catts, H. & Kamhi, A. (2005). The connections between language and reading disabilities. Mahwah, New
Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Goldsworthy, C. (2003). Developmental reading disabilities: A language-based treatment approach (2nd ed.).
Clifton Park, New York: Thomson Delmar Learning.
Goldsworthy, C. (2001; 2012). Sourcebook of Phonological Awareness Activities Volume II: Children’s Core
Literature. Clifton Park: Delmar/Cengage Learning.
Hoover, W.A. & Gough, P.B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and writing: An interdisciplinary
journal, 2, 127-160.
Hodson, B.W., & Edwards, M.L. (1997).
Publishers, Inc.
Perspectives in applied phonology. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen
Justice, L. (2013). From My Perspective: A+ Speech-Language Goals. The ASHA Leader,18, 10-11.
Kamhi, A. G. & Catts, H.W. (2012). Language and Reading Disabilities. Third Edition. Boston: Pearson.
References (cont’d.)
Kamhi, A., Catts, H., & Mauer, D.
(1990). Explaining speech production deficits in poor readers . Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 632-636.
Lewis, B., Freebairn, L., & Taylor, H. (2000). Follow–up of children with early expressive phonology disorders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 433-444.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for
reading instruction. Retrieved March 10, 2009, from: http://nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/report.cfm.
Owens, R. E.
(2014). Language Disorders: A Functional Approach to Assessment and Intervention.
5th edition. Boston: Pearson.
Pieretti, R.A., & Stage, T. (Winter 2014). The power of narrative in the age of expository text. CSHA Magazine, 43(3), 16-19.
Ritter, M.J., & Saxon, T.F. (2011). Classroom-based phonological sensitivity intervention (PSI) using a narrative platform: An experiemental study of first graders at
risk for reading disability. Communication Disorders Quarterly 33(1), 3-12.
Scarborough, H. (1998). Predicting the future achievement of second graders with reading disabilities: Contributions of phonemic awareness, verbal memory, rapid
naming, and IQ. Annals of Dyslexia, 48, 115-136.
Schrank, F.A., Mather, N. & McGrew, K. S. (2014a). Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Achievement. Rolling Meadows: The Riverside Publishing Company.
Schrank, F.A., Mather, N. & McGrew, K. S. (2014b). Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Oral Language. Rolling Meadows: The Riverside Publishing Company.
Schrank, F.A., McGrew, K.S., & Mather, N. (2014). Woodcock-Johnson IV. Rolling Meadows: The Riverside Publishing Company.
Shaywitz, S. (2004). Overcoming dyslexia: A new and complete science-based program for reading problems at any level. New York: Alfred K. Knopf.
Stackhouse, J. (1997). Phonological awareness: Connecting speech and literacy problems. In B. Hodson & M.L. Edwards (Eds.), Perspectives in Applied
Phonology (pp. 157-196). Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers.
Wagner, R.K., Torgesen, J.K.,Rashotte, C.A., & Pearson, N.A. (2013). The Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing. Austin: ProEd.
Wechsler, D. (2002). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (Second Edition). San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation.
Wiig, E.H., Semel, E., & Secord W.A. (2013). Clincial Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-5. Bloomington, MN: Pearson
Wolf, M., and Bowers, P. (1999). The double deficit hypothesis for the developmental dyslexias. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 1-24.