Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Speech and Language Clinician in a school with a content area literacy focus, I was interested in
combining the knowledge I had of language development with the information available on
content area literacy so that I could assist language handicapped student develop the vocabulary
and concepts they needed to experience success in Science.
One question I had was how to separate information which needed to be held in short
term memory and information which needed to be held in long term memory. Short term
memory is relatively quick and requires only rote memorization while long term memory takes
time and requires a highly organized system of strategies. “Students will be able to comprehend
new information in a content area if you take time to demonstrate how the new information
builds upon and extends what they already know about a topic. And, students will be able to
retrieve information from long term memory if you model and encourage meaningful
organization of new information when it’s first presented to the class.” (Readence, Bean,
Baldwin, 1998)
Students who have speech and language disabilities find the vocabulary of Science very
difficult. The student often is struggling to understand the basic vocabulary words used in
teaching as well as the new vocabulary, which is being introduced. Vocabulary is really not just
words; rather words representing concepts when applied to a subject. To understand the word
you have to understand the underlying concept and see the connection to new information.
Often language disabled students struggle to understand what is being taught to them and
have difficulty using previously learned information and applying it to newly introduced
information. They don’t seem to understand how to scaffold on what they’ve learned to embrace
the current teaching. Sometime teaching information that we consider descriptive to the average
learner becomes too confusing for the language disabled student to understand. The teacher
continues to explain while the student continues to become more and more confused. When you
evaluate the text you realize that a student who has a vocabulary and experience level of a 3rd
grader would have difficulty with the content being introduced at sixth grade. There is a gap in
vocabulary knowledge that needs attention.
I knew that my students were at a great disadvantage. My question was: How will
strategies used to preteach the vocabulary of the FOSS program to language handicapped
students impact t their understanding of the classroom?
Previous Research
Research tells us that to effectively teach content are literacy you need to account for
three things. They are Prior Subject knowledge, Literacy strategies, and social context
(Readence, Bean, Baldwin, 1998)
I certainly didn’t feel I had an adequate Science knowledge base although I have taken
part in the district-wide training for the FOSS program. This presented the opportunity to
collaborate with the science teacher because she had an understanding of teaching science and I
had an understanding of strategies to teach vocabulary. While I tend to lean towards language
arts and away from the sciences and math classes I felt this would be a wonderful experience. I
would have to rely heavily on my partner, Jingyi Chen, to be my “go to” person. She was my
link to the curriculum and had already spent a great deal of time modifying curriculum to meet
student needs.
The second component is the literacy strategy component. I knew I had to find materials
and strategies which would enhance my ability to assist students in mastering vocabulary,
comprehending text, increase interest in studying, and applying what they have read accurately
in class assignments. I have a wealth of strategies but it’s always a challenge to adapt my
strategies to the curriculum.
The last component is social context. I had to try to understand the impact of my
teaching on the students self perception. These are students who are aware of their struggles in
school. I need to find ways to teach them without making them feel like they are in a remedial
program. Middle school students don’t want to feel like they are different from all other
students. They may resent my attempts to teach them science outside of the science curriculum.
To address these components I realized that I needed to keep my scope narrow. I could
not possible preteach everything that would be taught in the class. I would focus on the assumed
vocabulary (vocabulary used in the text but not introduced as new vocabulary) and new
vocabulary (vocabulary related to the topic being taught).
Assumed vocabulary is the vocabulary that you need to know to understand the meaning
of the text. An example of this type of vocabulary is given in the following passage. I have
bolded the Assumed vocabulary. New vocabulary is vocabulary that pertains to the subject
matter. I have italicized that vocabulary
The primary reason that taproots reach and probe is to increase the plant’s access to water and
minerals. In the process the plant gets anchored in the soil. Water goes deep into the root
structure entering into tiny hollow tubes called Xylem.
The student needs to know the Assumed vocabulary before he/she can address the new
vocabulary. Context will give some clue but when the text contains so many words that are not
understood then the student can not rely only on context to understand the information presented.
Process
First we had to look at the student’s language disabilities and identify whether or not
vocabulary development is a significant detriment to learning in the general curriculum. Then
we had to look at the curriculum materials to identify two types of vocabulary needs. I define
the first type as the need to understand the basic vocabulary of instruction and the other is the
new vocabulary being introduced with the concept. I then looked at ways to clarify the language
of instruction based on the level the students were operating and then introduce the new
vocabulary with this modified level of instruction.
The next concern was to have the students “buy into” the need to repeat science
information with out resenting the idea that they were doing more than their peers in the regular
education setting.
I needed to identify strategies which where going to be successful with teaching this
population and expanding on their knowledge base to accept the new vocabulary. I also need to
find ways to evaluate the student progress in both the therapy setting and the general education
setting. Did the information generalize to the academic setting?
One of my largest hurdles was the fact that I don’t actually go into the class and I have 35
students at three grade levels to provide service for. I was going to have to be creative finding
ways to access the information that was being presented on a daily basis. I had access to the
teaching materials but was never really sure where the teacher was at within the program. This
meant I would be learning along with the students.
Then, how do I access all the language impaired students to work with them on these
concepts? My scheduling was very important so that I may access the greatest number of
students in the least amount of time on a regular basis. I decided to make myself available to the
guided study classes which were offered to all special education students at the sixth grade level.
There I would work closely with the Cross Categorical teacher and the Special Education Aid
who had access to the Science programs daily. We set up a common daily planning time so that
we could develop materials to aid the curriculum and go over the classroom teacher’s daily plans
and assignments.
The students were divided into two groups of eight students. One group had a guided
study on Monday and Wednesday; the other had it on Tuesday and Thursday. They rotated on
Fridays. The composition of the classes contained students with and without language
handicaps, the majority of the students were identified with low vocabulary skills and some type
of Speech and Language needs.
I identified the low vocabulary skills through the use of previous evaluations and present
IEPs. The students had to score in the low average to disabled range to be considered to have a
vocabulary deficit. Out of the 16 students I had access to, 14 fell into this category. Two of the
sixteen had strong vocabulary skills and good background information when it came to science.
The next step is to identify the critical vocabulary for each unit that the student needs to
know to understand the concepts being taught. Ms Chen and I looked at the reading that was
required by the students and selected out both types of vocabulary and made a list for each
section. After we developed these lists, my job was to figure out ways to teach the vocabulary
drawing from the student’s previous knowledge and building on it. This way I would be helping
the students place the new information into their working memory rather than teaching them in
rote way and placing the information into short term memory. I decided to explore some of the
strategies in the book Classroom Strategies for Interactive Learning by Doug Buehl and Graphic
Organizers by Daniel Barnekow.
Data Collection
For this study I used several methods of data collection. During the period of study I kept
an ongoing Journal of my experiences and reflections. I also spent time consulting with my
coworker, Jingyi Chen, and the Special Education Aid, Brenda Tompkins. I spent some time
getting feedback from the classroom teacher, Sara Hawkins. Jingyi was my link to the
curriculum and Brenda was my link to the daily classroom activities. We met briefly on a daily
basis to go over our plans for teaching the guided study class.
While I didn’t work closely with the classroom teacher I did discuss my work with her
periodically and give her worksheets and guides to what I was doing. She in turn used some of
the materials in class and provided incentives to my students for completing this additional work
for science.
Finally I listened to the students and recorded their concerns and made adjustments based
on their needs. I worked at making the material more relevant to them. I was always listening to
student responses. I wanted to hear their complaints as well as their support for the process.
Results
Initially I used the lists of words developed by Jingyi and taught the vocabulary in
isolation from the text and content. I realized that the students weren’t embracing the
information. Rather they were just writing the definitions down to get the work done so they
could move on to other activities. They also argued with me about having to do the extra work
and I started feeling that this was not going to be a success. I started putting some thought into
past research and what I could do to engage the students in the activity. I realized that they were
not feeling any personal connection to the vocabulary being taught and didn’t connect it to what
they were learning. I understood that hey were just learning the vocabulary and this was not
going into long term memory but rather short term memory. I was concerned that the
information that I was teaching would not stay with the students. What I need was some type of
strategy to tap into the student’s experiences and previous knowledge. I had the idea that if I
made the information more relevant to them they would enjoy the experience more and retain the
information for a longer period of time.
I then developed a way to discuss the vocabulary with the students. I was still giving
them the definition as it applied to the science content; however I was drawing from what I knew
the students could comprehend. If a passage said “You may have seen water-expelling vesicles
in the paramecia.” I may talk about what water expelling means through the experience they had
with squirt guns. They are all familiar with a squirt gun so they can connect what it does with
the water-expelling vesicle. Vesicle is the new word while water expelling is the assumed word.
Every day I looked over the words that Jingyi identified as science vocabulary needed
and I read through the text articles to identify assumed words and added these to my list. I then
tried to come up with ways to incorporate the information that the students may understand into
the introduction of the vocabulary. There were times that I drew pictures on the chalkboard to
give the children a visual of what I was talking about. We used semantic webbing to give the
children an idea on how things fit together. Jingyi developed flash cards for the student to take
home and study. I had the students draw timelines on their papers and we handed out pictures so
they could identify parts of the topic being presented in pictures. There was the ever-present list
of vocabulary words to work from.
One of the drawbacks to the way we introduced the vocabulary was that we saw the
students only twice per week to work on this and sometimes the daily classroom expectations
were difficult to keep on top of. This was even more concerning when the students had release
days, field trips, assemblies, and vacation days. We found that there were just some things we
couldn’t get to with some groups of students. We also had to support academics from other
content areas. This meant that time was sometimes reallocated to other student needs. This made
my vocabulary introduction somewhat inconsistent. The students would be in a routine of
learning vocabulary during part of the period and then the routine was changed. This caused
some concern because they seemed to accept this better when it was part of their resource time
routine. Also, I was working with them only for three weeks of the month due to the other
requirements of my position, which again broke the routine. After the routine was broken for a
few sessions I would get ready for student reluctance to go back to the vocabulary work. The
students would complain that they had other work that needed to be done. They would argue that
they were doing more work than the other students were and some would shut down and refuse
to be involved. I would just plunge ahead to re-establish the routine and have them continue the
work. We reminded them that they would be getting credit for the work in their Science class as
well as our class. The majority would come around and once involved in the activity they started
connecting and adding input.
I spent time discussing the student’s progress with Brenda the SEA. She relayed to me
that on the days the students came to class with an understanding of the concepts being taught
they would be more active in the class discussion. They were better prepared to follow class
activities and completed work with less support from her. She kept me aware of what the
children were doing in class and how they were buying into the science program. She also
brought back the results of tests that were given in science. Most of the students took the regular
test that the other students took without modifications. Brenda was available to read the
questions but did not assist the students with their answers. The majority of the students who
were active learners in the Resource class did well on the tests (They passed with a C or better).
The handful of students who fought the extra Science regularly got lower grades. These also
were students who exhibited behavior problems.
As the year progressed I found that the students were putting more effort into class
discussion and less arguing about the extra work. I started to relax and enjoy the experience. I
looked forward to these vocabulary discussions and found myself getting more information about
the children’s lives because I was using their experience to explain new vocabulary. I realized
when you use this approach you are asking the students for their own experiences and most are
happy to share them with you. Also when you are allowing them input they start to feel that they
are more in control of their learning. One of the classes bought into the program more than the
other class, but with creative seating I think the students who were reluctant were separated and
seemed to accept the process better.
In the past few weeks I interviewed the classroom teacher to get her perception of how
our project was going. Sara Hawkins has been teaching FOSS science for years, but this was her
first year teaching at the sixth grade level. She was just learning the sixth grade FOSS program.
She had met with Jingyi this past summer to go over the curriculum and discuss modifications.
Sara genuinely appreciated the support that we were giving to her program. She stated that she
knew when we were going over the science vocabulary because the students were better prepared
for class and more involved in class discussion. She also noticed the improvement in test grades
when we were able to preteach the vocabulary. She was happy to provide the students with extra
incentive by using some of the work sheets with here entire class as well as accepting the extra
work for credit towards her class. She often stopped into the resource classes during her
planning time to clear up any questions the students and we had about her expectations. There
we’re times when the students needed to get materials from the science class and she was
available to make sure they had access to what they needed. Her availability helped out a great
deal when we had questions about upcoming assignments and due dates. By getting these
questions answered we were able to fit in the vocabulary teaching and have time to complete
other class expectations also.
Through this process, I realized that I could find strategies that help students learn new
vocabulary and hold it in long term memory. I address all the concerns for teaching content area
literacy. I worked to build on student’s prior knowledge; I used literacy strategies that were
developed by me, Jingyi Chen, Doug Buehl and Daniel Barnekow. I realized the strong
commitment several teachers have had for student success and the power of collaboration among
professionals and paraprofessionals. We addressed the student’s needs and concerns by having
the teacher support the program and add additional incentives to their grades. They also realized
that their input was valued and was drawing from their personal experiences. The majority of
students bought into the program. Those students benefited by getting passing grades and
becoming a more active part of their science class. In the end they felt successful in a class
where they had previously struggled.
FOSS for Middle School Project (2003) Laurence Hall Science, University or California,
Berkeley CA
Ehern, Barbara J. (2000) Maintaining a Therapeutic focus and Sharing Responsibility for student
Success: Keys to In-Classroom Speech –Language Services. Language Speech and Hearing in
Schools, 31(3), 219-229.
Readence John E., Bean Thomas W., Baldwin, R. Scott (1998) Content Area Literacy. Kendall
Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa
Barnekow, Daniel (2006) Graphic Organizers. PCI Educational Publishing, San Antonio Texas.
Appreciation
Thank you to Jingyi Chen who did all the Science work and worked closely with me. All
appendices are her work and are credited to her. Her name should be on this paper also be cause
my paper reflects her hard work.
Thank you to Brenda Tompkins for having the classroom information available to me as I
needed it.
Thank you to Sara Hawkins for allowing us to use these materials to support students in her
class and supporting us.
Appendix I: Aten, 2006
LIFE ON EARTH
A)_______________________
B)_______________________
C)_______________________
A)________________________
B)________________________
C)________________________
D)________________________
3. Fill in the missing functions which are performed by all living organisms:
________________________
C) A rock can never be dead because a rock was never alive. This rock is
________________.
LIFE ON EARTH
organisms
living
dead
nonliving
needs or requirements
function
process
exchange
essential
energy
waste
environment
responses
reproduce
characteristic
qualify
habitat
aquatic
dormant
magnification
Appendix II: Aten, 2006
A)____________________________
B)____________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
A)____________________________________
B)____________________________________
THE LOWLY PARAMECIUM
paramecia
REVIEW:
protists
ORGANISMS
specialize RESPOND
REPRODUCE
organelles
cilia
(cell) membrane
nutrients
digestive enzymes
division
original
expelling
Appendix III: Aten, 2006
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
4. What features of ancient aquatic organisms made it possible for them to leave
the sea and colonize the dry land about 400 million years ago? (circle one)
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
Cell: The Basic Unit of Life
simple
REVIEW:
primitive MEMBRANE
ORGANISM
cell
WASTE
complex REPRODUCE
ENVIRONMENT
replicate
ESSENTIAL
amino acids
bacteria
kingdom
Monera
cytoplasm Protista
aquatic colonies
diverse ancient
eukaryotic cells
organelles
Appendix IV: Aten, 2006
GERMINATION
A)______________________________________
B)______________________________________
C)______________________________________
A) _________________________________________
B)__________________________________________
SEEDS AND ROOTS
dormant
REVIEW:
seed coat ORGANISM
embryo LIVING
ENERGY
cotyledon
adaptation
germination
root
structure
anchor
xylem
fibrous root
taproot
deep
shallow
proproots
Appendix V: Aten, 2006
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
4. What is wilting? What do they do in the grocery store to keep produce from
wilting? _______________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
5. Why is coastal fog so important to the plants and animals that live there?
Coastal fog is so important to the plants and animals that live there because
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
STEMS AND LEAVES
flexible
REVIEW
rigid MEMBRANE
CELL
support
STRUCTURE
adapted CHARACTERISTIC
SPECIALIZED
stems
GROW
leaves
FUNCTION
tendrils
chloroplasts
chlorophyll
photosynthesis
phloem
stomates
transpiration
hydrate
dehydrate
wilting
Appendix VI: Aten, 2006
FLOWERS TO SEEDS
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
4. What is a fruit?_______________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
FLOWERS TO SEEDS
produce
species
reproduction
petals
stamens
anther
pollen grains
pistil
stigma
fertilized
pollination
deposited
diversity
variation
REVIEW:
attract
ADAPTED
fuse
ENERGY
fruit
COTYLEDON
composite STRUCTURE
florets
evolved
Appendix VII: Aten, 2006
colonize
territory
dispersal
mechanisms
spherical
compact
prairie
germinate
tropical
durable
digesting
ejection
propelling
Appendix VIII: Aten, 2006
1. What are three regions the insect body always divided into?
What are their functions?
A) ______________________________________________
______________________________________________
______________________________________________
B) ______________________________________________
______________________________________________
______________________________________________
C) ______________________________________________
______________________________________________
______________________________________________
diverse evolve
recycling ridges
pollination tracheae
phenomenal spiracles
exoskeleton diffusion
chitin molting
head metamorphosis
thorax nymphs
abdomen miniature
mobility larva
fundamental pupa
sponging deteriorate
siphoning
vibration
compound eyes
migration
hibernation
Appendix IX: Aten, 2006
B) when_________________________________
Benefit:_______________________________
2. Explain how the wheat weevil and the drummer wasp benefit
from the activities of humans.
Wheat weevil____________________________________
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Drummer wasp___________________________________
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
entomologists
spiracles
segment
dominant
larva
pupate
kernel
burrow
vitality
phloem
clone
voracious
predator
foraging
pheromone
Appendix X: Aten, 2006
KINGDOMS OF LIFE
Match each definition to the word by placing the letter on the line.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________