14.3 Recommending Reading, Writing, Mathematics & Content-Vocabulary Interventions from Case-Study Data

0007e, 0007f, and 0007g on the constructed response

When the CR asks for an academic need, Field 060 is asking you to apply research- or evidence-based methods in reading (0007e), written language (0007f), and/or mathematics (0007g) to this case. Completeness still means you answer the academic bullet the prompt actually wrote. Accuracy is whether you named a real instructional method that matches the error pattern. Depth of Support is whether you cited Exhibit 2 scores and Exhibit 3 work samples—not a generic lecture on "struggling readers."

The most common Score Point 2 pattern is an accommodation masquerading as instruction. Extended time, a calculator, a scribe, audio text, or preferential seating can be appropriate IEP accommodations. They do not teach the missing skill. If you only add time, the student still cannot decode silent-e, plan a paragraph, or select a word-problem schema. Say the accommodation exists if the exhibits mention it; still recommend instruction.

Reading: decode the file before you "teach comprehension"

Read Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3 together.

Decoding / word-recognition need. Letter-sound and pattern errors (bote for boat, sed for seed), low Word Reading and Pseudoword/Decoding scores, and much stronger listening comprehension or correct answers when an adult reads the passage. Recommend structured literacy: explicit, systematic phoneme-grapheme mapping, blending, and decoding of the failing patterns (silent-e, vowel teams), then reading connected decodable text that uses those patterns. "Read more independently" and a main-idea graphic organizer skip the bottleneck.

Fluency need. Accurate but slow oral reading that starves comprehension. After accuracy is in place, use repeated reading, phrased text, and words-correct-per-minute goals. Do not start fluency drills on text the student cannot decode.

Comprehension need with intact decoding. The student reads the words, then cannot infer, monitor, or hold the gist. Recommend self-questioning, RAP paraphrasing, chunking long sentences, and reciprocal teaching. Do not open with intensive decoding if Exhibit 3 is an accurate grade-level running record and the comprehension subtest is the trough.

Writing: SRSD is a taught routine

Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) (Harris and Graham) teaches a strategy such as POW+TREE (persuasive) or POW+WWW (stories) plus self-instruction, goal-setting, and self-assessment. Exhibit 3 often shows a topic sentence with no reasons, no planning marks, or a list of fragments. That is a written-expression need (0007f), not "give a laptop."

SRSD steps you can actually write: develop background knowledge, discuss the strategy, model it with think-aloud, memorize the mnemonics, support practice with feedback, then independent performance. A blank graphic organizer dropped on the desk without those steps is a worksheet. Extended time without a planning strategy is an accommodation.

Mathematics: CRA versus schema-based instruction

Concrete-Representational-Abstract (CRA) fits when Exhibit 3 shows an algorithm with no meaning: lining digits so 14+5 becomes 17, or "borrowing" as a trick. Start with base-ten blocks (concrete), then drawings (representational), then numerals (abstract). A calculator is not CRA.

Schema-based instruction (SBI) fits when facts are relatively intact but the student adds every number in a word problem regardless of the question. Teach the schema (change, compare, group/total), a diagram, and a think-aloud such as FOPS (Find the problem type, Organize with a diagram, Plan, Solve). Flashcard fact drill does not fix operation choice.

Original vignette (not a Pearson sample): Aisha Rahman, Grade 3, Albany

Aisha Rahman, age 8, Albany City School District; classification: specific learning disability. Resource room 5×40 minutes for reading. Loves science videos and soccer (Exhibit 1).

Exhibit 2: WIAT-4 Word Reading standard score 76, Pseudoword Decoding 72, Listening Comprehension 98 when passages are read to her.

Exhibit 3: Running record: CVC words accurate; boat read as "bote," seed as "sed," coat as "cot." After the teacher reads the same page aloud, Aisha answers both literal questions correctly.

Academic need: word recognition of long-vowel patterns—not "reading comprehension."

Intervention: daily explicit decoding: map silent-e and common vowel teams, blend, write the same patterns from dictation, then read a short decodable that uses them. Use soccer/science topics in the decodable to tap Exhibit 1.

Why it matches: Exhibit 2 shows decoding as the trough and listening comprehension as a relative strength. Exhibit 3 shows the exact orthographic patterns. A main-idea organizer would skip the bottleneck. Extended time on unread text would not teach silent-e. Cite Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3 in the CR; mention Exhibit 1 only as a motivational hook, not as the diagnosis.

If the academic bullet had been writing: a sample with no reasons would get SRSD POW+TREE, not "more time to write." If math: a worksheet that adds all three distances in a compare problem would get SBI, not fact flashcards.

CR stems: "Exhibit 3 running-record errors of bote/sed/cot show a long-vowel decoding pattern, which matches Exhibit 2 Word Reading SS 76 and Pseudoword SS 72. I will use structured literacy by mapping silent-e and vowel teams, then reading a decodable. This is appropriate because Listening Comprehension SS 98 (Exhibit 2) shows Aisha understands text she can access."

Keep the whole CR near 400–600 words. Academic depth does not require naming four methods. One well-matched method with steps and citations beats a list.

Content concepts and vocabulary (0007h)

Performance Indicator 0007h is the one academic recommendation candidates forget, because it does not look like a reading, writing, or math program. It asks you to recommend research- or evidence-based strategies for identifying and teaching essential concepts, vocabulary, and content across the general curriculum for a given student. Section 13.2 teaches the underlying instruction (0005h); here you are being scored on whether you can recommend it from exhibits.

Recognize the 0007h file. The exhibits point here, rather than to 0007e/f/g, when:

• Exhibit 2 shows decoding and calculation within range but depressed performance on content-area measures, vocabulary subtests, or listening/reading comprehension of dense expository text.
• Exhibit 3 is a science, social studies, or technical-subject artifact — a lab sheet, a document-based question, a unit quiz — where the errors are conceptual and lexical (photosynthesis confused with respiration; "erosion," "amendment," "ratio" used loosely) rather than phonological or computational.
• Teacher notes say the student "participates until the chapter vocabulary starts" or "can explain it orally but cannot use the terms."

Recommend the routine, not a substitute curriculum. A scoreable 0007h recommendation names a taught routine and its steps:

Why this earns Depth of Support. Tie the rationale to the exhibit and to the standard: pre-teaching a small set of Tier 2 and Tier 3 words before a dense chapter reduces the working-memory load the exhibit documents, while keeping the New York P-12 Learning Standards concept intact. The single most common failure on this indicator is recommending a watered-down substitute — a coloring sheet, a lower-grade text about a different topic, or a decoding program used in place of the science block. Access changes; the concept does not.

Exam watchouts

• A comprehension strategy when the running record is a decoding file.
• Extended time, calculator, or scribe as the only "intervention."
• Naming a commercial program without steps.
• Inventing scores the exhibits did not give.
• Treating a content-vocabulary file (0007h) as a decoding file, or replacing the science or social studies concept with an easier topic.