ࡱ> MOJKLc jbjb(p(p BB &XXXXXXXT 8e8e8e8peedT 7Flgg"ggg1jOj [j,}Rχ܂Xcji^1jcjcj܂GvXXgg/GvGvGvcj~XgXgGvlpXXXXcjGvGvyXXz`g .8enfzz07zGv4zGvXT T Z8eT T 8e Teaching Children with Down Syndrome to Read: A Phonics Based Approach MED-ME Katherine Eggie 1/14/2011 A Capstone Presented to the Faculty of the Teachers College of Western Governors University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Education Chair: Dr. Mario Castro Abstract Children with Down syndrome have a high capacity for learning. Typically, the majority of this population is taught to read via sight word/whole language instruction instead of an explicit, systematic phonics based approach. I believe we need a program that teaches children language through their challenges. Down syndrome is a genetic disorder and is not specific to any one race, gender, socioeconomic group or geographical location. My overall goal is to show that children with Down syndrome can increase their reading skills through a phonics based program. The learner, once completing the program, will increase their reading scores by 50% from initial assessment data within a six month period. This goal will be attained by working with students utilizing a phonics based, multisensory approach to reading instruction. Keywords: Down syndrome, literacy, instruction Table of Contents Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM Introduction.5 Problem Statement..6 Description of Stakeholder Groups12 Research Question and Goal Statement.12 Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction14 Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY Learner Analysis....19 Research and Evaluation Instruments...21 Special Populations...22 Materials22 Performance Objectives.....23 Learning Theories and Instructional Strategies.........24 Procedure...26 Integrity of Data33 Permissions and Anonymity..34 Technology Used in the Curriculum......34 Data Analysis.35 Chapter 4: RESULTS Report of Results...36 Recommended Revisions38 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION Discussion40 Implications and Limitations40 Conclusion41 References42 Appendix A.44 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM Introduction What I did For this research project, I worked with six students with Downs syndrome. I worked with them over the course of six months and implemented a phonics based reading program. Prior to instruction, I performed a pre-assessment to determine the students reading ability prior to instruction. I then began instruction twice per week for one hour. After the six month period, I then performed the pre-assessment once again to determine the progress made over the course of the six months. Why I Chose This Project I am a special education teacher and have worked in many different domains over the years. I feel strongly that children with disabilities should be held to higher standards that what we currently expect and feel that with appropriate instruction, these students can exceed expectations in reading to live more independent lives as adults. Why It Is Important Individuals with disabilities such as Downs syndrome often outlive their caregivers. Its crucial that we help these individuals become as independent as possible. In addition, it is important that we provide instruction to give such individuals the best possible opportunity to enjoy an independent life. Reading is so important to our lives. We use the skill of reading every day, all day. Whether we are reading for pleasure or reading street signs, bus schedules or paying our bills, we must be able to read in order to care for ourselves and function in a literacy based society. How It Related To Appropriate Theory For Your Discipline It is important for the students and their educators that we develop appropriate tools to evaluate their needs and their abilities in reading. This research will show that students are capable of higher level reading skills, thus proving that we need to create evaluations and instruction to aide in this learning. How the Project Fits Into Teaching and Learning in Your Field Students with disabilities can learn. We, as educators, must revise our previous ways of thinking and encourage the development of literacy in children who are challenged cognitively. Special education is a field that is constantly changing. We are always reading and studying to learn new ways to challenge and educate individuals that some feel may not be successful. Its this desire to prove successful that this research project came about. I am extremely excited to share the results with teachers, parents and therapists. It is my hope that I will be able to prove this type of instruction is not only valid, but appropriate for children with Downs syndrome. Problem Statement Definition of the Problem Most previous instruction and instructional strategies have focused on teaching students with Down syndrome to read by utilizing sight word instruction and focusing on comprehension. This research will heighten our expectations of children with Down syndrome by going beyond sight words and incorporating a phonics-based approach to language instruction. This will require recognition of deficits common amongst individuals with Down syndrome and working to overcome those difficult areas. What becomes very clear during this research is that most agree that children with Down syndrome should initially be taught through a sight word, whole language approach to instruction and then gradually move toward teaching phonics and phonemic awareness. This is because this type of learning and instruction requires a lower level of thought process and skill and is taught through drill method. Possible Causes of the Problem Children with Down syndrome are not provided with the opportunity to read material due to the belief that they should be taught to read using a sight word based reading instruction program. Many children with Down syndrome have the capacity to learn at a higher level and that includes the ability to learn to read material beyond what a sight word program can teach. This research proposes that children with Down syndrome are can increase their reading ability using a phonics based approach to reading instruction. Background Information Children with Down syndrome have a high capacity for learning. Typically, however, the majority of this population is taught to read via sight word/whole language instruction instead of an explicit, systematic phonics based approach. Although, this researcher believes that we should begin sight words at a very young age, she also believes we need a program that teaches children language through their challenges. This language program must teach phonics systematically through multi-sensory avenues and must include rehearsals and strategies to assist with overcoming verbal short-term memory deficits, as well as, communication cues and strategies. Currently, most children with Down syndrome begin learning to read using sight words in a look-and-say method or through drills. This often begins at a very young age, sometimes during the first year of life and continues on through the childs educational career. Some schools will teach beginning phonics in secondary school. But, the majority of a childs reading instruction consists of rote memorization, continual drills and combining those learned words into sentences. Through experience, this researcher believes that many children with Down syndrome can be taught to read using an explicit, multi-sensory phonics approach to instruction. As there is no one way to teach all children, we should not deny a child with Down syndrome the opportunity to further their literacy skills because of their disability. The researcher is not proposing that all children will gain decoding ability with this type of program, rather that many children who are now denied the opportunity can indeed succeed in a multi-sensory, explicit phonics program. The researcher chose two methods of data collection to analyze the need for this type of instruction. The first method of collection was a survey issued to parents of children with Down syndrome to gather information on the childs current programming. The researcher created the survey questions to understand what parents were experiencing in their childs school. This survey was sent out to hundreds of people including organizations locally and nationally. With such a wide range of recipients, the researcher feels she obtained a good sample of current experiences of children with Down syndrome. The second method of data collection was completed through direct interviews. The researcher contacted ten parents across the country that were willing to speak to her about their child and the literacy programs used to teach their child. The researcher chose this method because various parts of the country do things quite differently. She wanted to get a perspective from many regions of America. An interview format was chosen because she wanted more information than a simple survey would provide. Through a computerized data search, the researcher found that 1 in every 800 children is born with Down syndrome. Approximately 340,000 individuals in the United States have Down syndrome. Illinois state testing scores in reading align all children with developmental disabilities into one category. However, most children with Down syndrome fall into the cognitive disability group. 2006-07 data shows that 286,112 children in the state of Illinois, ages 6-21, have some form of a disability. 25,562 of those children have a cognitive disability. In grades 3rd, 4th and 8th, at least 40% of children with disabilities scored in the meets range on state reading tests. In grades 5th, 6th and 7th, at least 30% of children with disabilities scored in the meets range on state reading tests. This is in contrast to their non-disabled peers, of whom at least 75% scored in the meets range in 3rd-6th grades and at least 80% in the 7th and 8th grade. Analyzing the survey results proved to the most difficult due to the quantity of responses. The researcher went through each survey and reviewed comments and tallied scores to come to a percentage. The interview portion of the data collection was similar to the survey portion as the researcher asked the same questions and included that data into the survey data results. By performing an interview, the researcher was able to reach individuals in various parts of the country. She was able to compile responses into a table and put the comments into a narrative. State data was readily available from the State of Illinois educational report card data located online and in print. Through this analysis, the researcher discovered that the hypothesis is correct. Most children with Down syndrome are still taught through a sight word curriculum with some phonics included to round out the program. She also found that parents want their children to be taught through phonics to increase their ability to read. In fact, 81.5% of the respondents felt that their child would benefit from a program that teaches phonics/decoding in addition to sight words in a multi-sensory, small group setting. An alarming 46.2% of the respondents consider their children beginning readers and the ages of the students surveyed varied between 10-24. Approximately 51.9% of children read using both phonics and sight words, with an emphasis on sight words. Sight words will not get children through adulthood; therefore we must include phonics in the reading program of children with Down syndrome. The researcher also found that children with disabilities score much more poorly on state testing than their non-disabled peers. This data further supports the need for a reading program that will allow students to read unknown words. Parent Survey/Interview Responses Response% of resp.Response% of resp.Response% of resp.Response% of resp.Response% of resp.My child in a beginning reader46.2My child in a emergent reader26.9My child in an independent reader26.9My child uses phonics to read7.4My child uses sight words to read29.6My child uses both, but mostly phonics11.1My child uses both, but mostly sight words51.9My child is taught using phonics0My child is taugh using only sight words 17.4 My child is taught through a combination of both phonics and sight words 60.9 My child is taught through guided reading/balanced literacy 17.4 My child does not have a literacy program in school17.4My child is taught reading in a small group45.8My child is taught reading in a 1:1 setting with a teacher41.7My child is taught reading in a large group0My child is taught reading in a resource room8.3My child is taught reading in a general education setting29.2I believe my child would benefit from a program that teaches phonics/decoding in addition to sight words in a multi-sensory, small group setting81.5I do not believe my child would benefit from a program that teaches phonics/decoding in addition to sight words in a multi-sensory, small group setting3.7I am not sure if my child would benefit from a program that teaches phonics/decoding in addition to sight words in a multi-sensory, small group setting14.8Considering my child's school reading program as it is currently, I feel that my child will be able to independently read things he/she needs to read to function in life, hold a job, pay bills, etc60Considering my child's school reading program as it is currently, I do not feel that my child will be able to independently read things he/she needs to read to function in life, hold a job, pay bills, etc12Considering my child's school reading program as it is currently, I feel it's doubtful that my child will be able to independently read things he/she needs to read to function in life, hold a job, pay bills, etc28I have approached my child's program to request a phonics program be used/introduced and was refused.26.1I have approached my child's program to request a phonics program be used/introduced and we now incorporate this into his/her education.21.7I have not approached my child's program to request a phonics program be used/introduced.52.2I am satisfied with the reading instruction my child has received.57.7I am not satisfied with the reading instruction my child has received.42.3 Description of Stakeholders Group The results of this research project will be provided to interested parties. Those interested parties include parents, therapists, educators, school boards and non-profit organizations. As this is a topic that lacks much exploration, the findings of this research will provide information that will drive instructional decision making. Parents can use this information when working with their childs IEP team as evidence of successful research. Therapists, educators and school boards can use this research to assist with curriculum decisions for special populations. Finally, non-profit organizations can use the research aide in determining program funding and grant decisions. This is an area of much interest to adults that work with and teach children with Down syndrome. Research Question and Goal Statement Given that students receive consistent, 2 times weekly instruction with a phonics-based reading program, such as SLANT, a multi-sensory language program, will students improve their reading level significantly (50% increase in assessment scores) by the end of the 6 month research period? My overall goal is to show that children with Down syndrome can increase their reading skills. The learner, once completing the program, will increase their reading scores of real and nonsense words by 50% from initial assessment data within a six month period. Since many children utilize sight word reading as their main form of reading. We must include nonsense words to ensure they are decoding and not simply reading words they know by memory. This goal will be attained by working with students utilizing a phonics based, multisensory approach to reading instruction. Through this increase in skills, students will be able to transfer this reading ability into their everyday life. CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction As a source of reference, I am a special education teacher at Antioch Elementary School in Antioch, IL. I work with students in grades 2-5. In addition, I own a small corporation that focus on working with teachers and parents of children with disabilities. Specifically, I focus on working with children who have Down syndrome. I currently teach 6 students with varying severity of Down syndrome to read in a private setting. I work with each student in their home for 1 hour per week. Instruction is provided with a 1:1 ratio. Most previous instruction and instructional strategies focused on teaching students with Down syndrome to read by utilizing sight word instruction and focusing on comprehension. In my capstone project, I want to heighten our expectations of children with Down syndrome by going beyond sight words and incorporating a phonics based approach to language instruction. What becomes very clear during this research is that most agree that children with Down syndrome should initially be taught through a sight word, whole language approach to instruction and then gradually move toward teaching phonics and phonemic awareness. The purpose of this review is to ascertain the most reported method and chronology to teach reading instruction to children with Down syndrome and how to incorporate a phonics based approach to broaden the reading skills and abilities. Many children with Down syndrome exhibit short term memory and communication deficits. We must examine how these issues affect literacy and what we can do to overcome them. We must also delve into the importance phonemic awareness plays in reading and how to assist children with Down syndrome in solidifying those skills to improve their ability to break words into phonemes. Finally, we must examine how communication difficulties affect reading ability. Reading is a fundamental life skill. (Up for Reading, 2007) Although, this may be obvious to most, we must remember and not limit children simply because of their disability. We must always remember that reading is a very critical and basic life skill. Down Syndrome Education International states, Reading will help children with Down syndrome to develop vocabulary and grammar knowledge. (Up for Reading, 2007) Children with Down syndrome, like neurotypical children, gain great practical knowledge from reading. The importance of reading cannot be diminished and must be encouraged as the literacy ability of all individuals, including those with Down syndrome, directly affects the quality of life and independence of an individual. It is crucial for the literacy success of a child that the educators move beyond sight words and toward a phonics based approach to reading. (Buckley, Bird, 1993) Since we, as educators, cannot possibly teach a child all of the words they may encounter via sight words, drills and repetition, we must empower them with decoding skills. The majority of our children can learn to read single words by three to four years of age, some even earlier. (Buckley, Bird, 1993) Sue Buckley and Gillian Bird recognized that very young children are able to read and learn words and even put words into sentences. They also learned that these children, when reading sentences, made both visual and semantic errors. This is critical as it shows that these children were not just reciting words, but they understood the meaning of these words. (Buckley, Bird, 1993) This was a remarkable break through and taught us that the childrens brains were working beyond what was originally thought. In addition, Buckley and Bird recognized that the early success of the sight word vocabulary should not be the ceiling for these children, but instead the starting point. Once success has been reached, a phonics program can gradually be introduced utilizing what the child already knows and building on their vocabulary. One characteristic of children with Down syndrome is they often, but not always, exhibit poor verbal short-term memory. (Jarrold, Baddeley, Phillips, 1999) Christopher Jarrold, Alan D. Baddeley and Caroline Phillips describe a phonological loop where short term storage of information forms part of a broader working memory system in which information is both held and manipulated. The actual storage of verbal information relies on a sub-system of the model termed the phonological loop. (Jarrold, Baddeley, Phillips, 1999) In addition, word span tasks are seen as measures of phonological loop functioning, and a number of authors have suggested that the relatively poor performance on these tasks shown by individuals with Down syndrome reflects some form of impairment to the phonological loop component of this model. Certainly the impairment of the phonological loop described here greatly affects a childs ability to master phonemic awareness and decoding skills. Its clear that with this possible impairment of the phonological loop, some interventions must be provided to improve on this deficit. Many children with dyslexia also exhibit difficulties with phonological awareness. We know that these children benefit from explicit, multi-sensory instruction. (Shaywitz, 2003) Research on teaching cognitive skills to children with Down syndrome has shown that greater improvements are made when small teaching steps are taken. (Broadley & MacDonald, 1993) Research also shows that adults and children with Downs syndrome are poor at sequential processing. Therefore, it would seem that explicit, multi-sensory instruction in small teaching steps would be an appropriate way to teach phonics to children with Down syndrome to begin to repair that impairment in the phonological loop. (Broadley & MacDonald, 1993). In addition to the phonological impairments, students with Down syndrome often exhibit communication impairments, which also impede the ability to learn to read using phonics. Typically, children with Down syndrome are visual learners, which explain the difficulty in learning the relationship between letter, sounds and the formation of sounds into words. (Powell, 2009). Sign language is often used with children with Down syndrome and helps to bridge the gap between a childs receptive and expressive language abilities. (Powell, 2009) This visual facilitation of expressive language enables the child to increase their vocabulary and overall cognitive skills. Decoding skills may develop mechanically for some, but an impoverished vocabulary and limited understanding of language make it difficult for children to make sense of what they read. (Hartshorne, 2006) The increase in vocabulary assists children in improving decoding skills, utilizing and manipulating language. Providing a student with a means of communication is a crucial component in reading instruction and success. Therefore the increased vocabulary combined with a multi-sensory program should result in successful literacy skills. (Hartshorne, 2006) In addition, improved phonological awareness directly related to superior phoneme segmentation skills and thus improved oral reading. (Cupples & Iacono, 2000) Ryka Evans fails to provide solutions, and focuses solely on the weaknesses of children with Down syndrome on the area of alliteration, phonological awareness and the ability to blend and segment words. However, he discusses children whose alphabetic and phonological skills were absent, yet they showed some reading ability. This forces one to further question the skills that should be focused on when teaching phonics to children with Down syndrome. Through these reviews of literature examining teaching children with Down syndrome to read, we learn that these children face many obstacles including poor verbal memory and processing, lack of or poor expressive communication skills and difficulty with phonological awareness. These three components are important to reading development, although Ryka Evans disputes the necessity of phonological awareness for reading mastery. Its apparent that a strong program focusing on sight words and whole language from a very young age and moving to an explicit, multi-sensory phonics program after some expressive communication has been gained increases the likelihood of success in language and reading. CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY Learner Analysis Demographic Information This demographic group varies in all aspects of socioeconomic profiles, abilities, age, family dynamics. Down syndrome is a genetic disorder and is not specific to any one race, gender, socioeconomic group or geographical location. Down syndrome is caused by an extra chromosome and there is no cure for this disability. Children vary in delays and abilities and struggles. Entry Level Skills The program used to teach children in this research begins at the beginning, very basic phonics level. Children need to be able to remain focused for a short period of time to perform a task. A break can be given and then come back to the exercise, but the basic ability to sit for a short time is necessary. Also, although strong verbal skills are not necessary, it is helpful if the child has some verbal ability to form sounds, read words aloud, etc. The child must be able to read and make verbal sounds in order for the instructor to assess mastery of a sound to move on to the next. Relevant Group Characteristics All of the students I will be working with are from the ages of 10-16. They have all been diagnosed with Down syndrome. All of the children are verbal. However, 3 of them are minimally verbal and three of them are verbal to a conversational degree. All of these students are from a wealthy area of suburban Chicago. All but one of these students are enrolled in a self contained program. The other student is mainstreamed as often as possible and centers her day around a life skills program. The students in this research are very visual and often need visual cues to correspond with verbal requests. They learn best using multisensory strategies. Language is sometimes a difficult obstacle, therefore, including sign language, written (visual) cues and accepting receptive answers as opposed to requiring verbal answers provides a less frustrating environment while still ensuring the student is learning. All of the students have cognitive delays. The most severely affected is a boy, age 10, who has cognitive skills determined to be approximately 5 years old. Obviously, my expectations change based on the child and their abilities. However, expectations are always a part of the program and the students are consistently challenged. Prior Knowledge of the Topic Prior knowledge is not important in this instruction since we are beginning at the very beginning of phonics instruction. However, it is beneficial in this study that the students know their alphabet and the names of the letters. If they do not, this does not automatically prohibit them from utilizing this program, however for this research project, participants must know the names of the letters of the alphabet. Attitudes and Motivation Toward Topic It is very challenging to keep a group of students motivated to learn something that they neither see a purpose in nor have any desire to learn. Setting up motivational strategies is important to the success of the program. Each student has a prize box. In this box are several toys and/or candy treats. At the end of each session, if the child worked well, he/she can choose a prize. In addition, students are often given choices throughout the sessions to increase their participation in the work we do together and allow the student to feel as though they have more control over the session. However, most children with Down syndrome, as with other children want to please their teacher and strive on praise and positive reinforcement. Its important that the instructor continue to provide this positive feedback to reinforce good work and to continue the students progress. Learning Styles and Orientation The students in this research project require instruction to include multiple senses. This includes visual, tactile and kinesthetic. The visual presentation of material combines with the tactile sense and movement enables students to retrieve the information through various senses thus enhancing and speeding the learning process. Also, many children with Down syndrome have sensory needs. Working with these children requires some knowledge of strategies to work with children whose sensory needs interfere with their learning. Providing sensory breaks, weighted objects and stimulating tools, like vibrating pillows, all help to relieve the child of the obstacles that get in the way of learning to read. In summary, the children in this study group are hard workers and want to please their instructors. They have strong abilities and once their needs are met, have the desire to work and ability to learn. Data Collections Instruments The researcher chose to use a pre-assessment/post-assessment test of the 6 students. Each student will be assessed using the CORE Phonics Survey prior to instruction. The CORE Phonics Survey has 3 sub-tests. Specifically, it tests consonant sounds, long vowel sounds and short vowel sounds. Results of the sub-tests are reported in a raw score. This instrument will provide solid data on the skills being taught and assessed. (Appendix A) Special Populations Currently students with Down syndrome receive instruction that focuses on sight words. It is common for children to be in classrooms where everything in the room is labeled to increase independence. While this is an appropriate practice, this is often where reading instruction ends, with sight word instruction. Our curriculum must include a phonics program if we expect to increase the reading skills of children with Down syndrome to a level where they are independent readers and can function in society. Currently, most children with Down syndrome begin learning to read using sight words in a look-and-say method or through drills. This often begins at a very young age, sometimes during the first year of life and continues on through the childs educational career. Some schools will teach beginning phonics in secondary school. But, the majority of a childs reading instruction consists of rote memorization, continual drills and combining those learned words into sentences. Through experience, I believe that many children with Down syndrome can be taught to read using an explicit, multi-sensory phonics approach to instruction. As there is no one way to teach all children, we should not deny a child with Down syndrome the opportunity to further their literacy skills because of their disability. I am not proposing that all children will gain decoding ability with this type of program, rather that many children who are now denied the opportunity can indeed succeed in a multi-sensory, explicit phonics program. Materials SLANT Instruction Manual, Stage 1, Lesson 1 Dry erase board Dry erase marker Rice box Alphabet banner Worksheet copy of lower case letters Flashcards with lower case letters Shaving cream Packets of each unit with words from that unit for reading Pointers Sight word cards Sand box Paper and Pen Manipulatives (small toys, bingo markers, toy erasers, etc.) Two copies of story from current lesson Performance Objectives Performance Objectives 1. Students will recognize letters when shown the letter in 95% of the trials. 2. Students will relate sound to letter when shown the letter in three out of four trials. 3. When provided with words lists, students will accurately read words containing new and previous taught sounds with 80 % accuracy. 4. When provided with words verbally, students will accurately spell words from current and previous lesson with 80% accuracy. 5. When provided with a list of previously taught sight words, students will read the words with 85% accuracy. 6. When a sentence is dictated to the student using current or previous taught sounds, student will write sentence with correct spelling 85% of the time. 7. When provided with a story containing current or previously taught sounds, students will read the story with 85% accuracy Learning Theories and Instructional Strategies The performance objectives are based on Gagnes nine events of instruction. Gain attention-Gaining the attention of the students in the population I work with is not only important, it is essential. Typically, to gain the attention of students, the researcher will begin with a multi-sensory activity or a computer based presentation. Gaining their attention sets precedence for the rest of the lesson. Inform learners of objectives-Its important for students to realize there is a purpose for the lesson and for what they are learning. The researcher typically will show a paragraph to students that they will be able to read once the lesson is complete. Stimulate recall of prior learning-To stimulate recall of sounds and words the student already learned, the researcher reviews the sounds learned in past units at the beginning of every new lesson. This reminds students of what they already learned and generalizes the information into the new lesson. Present the content-In this event, students are presented with the new sound, told what the sound is and asked to repeat it using a sound phone so that while they are saying it, they are also hearing it and seeing it on the card that is initially presented. Provide learning guidance-During this event, students are provided with practice activities to practice their new sound and to ensure that they are encoding the material for long term storage. Elicit performance-To elicit performance, students are provided with sounds and words verbally and they must practice providing the sounds and/or spelling the words appropriately. Provide feedback-Students perform well when provided with constant, consistent feedback on their performance. Throughout the lesson, students are consistently provided with positive feedback when they provide appropriate responses. If a student provides incorrect responses, feedback is provided immediately in order to correct the error before the incorrect response has time to be encoded. Assess performance-At the end of each unit, students are provided with reading material containing only the sounds that they have learned. Errors are counted to calculate a percentage correctly read. A percentage over 80% indicates mastery of the material. Enhance retention and transfer to the job-Each lesson builds on prior lessons. This ensures that students are maintaining material and able to generalize it outside of the lesson where the skill was taught. Also, there is a portion of the lesson that includes guided reading of grade level material. This activity further enables the teacher to increase the opportunity for generalization. Based on the learning theory of Cognitivism, I expect the learners to absorb the instruction presented in various modalities, process the information and be able to generalize the skill to show overall reading improvement. The fact that the information is presented in various modalities allows the students to understand and internalize the material to increase reading ability. In the lessons that follow, many activities are included based on the Cognitivism theory. Students are required to practice skills using a tactile-kinesthetic approach. The information is taught to the students and then the student has the opportunity to process the information, practice and implement the new skill. This scaffolding approach allows the students to learn, process and output the information being taught.(Learning Theories, 2010) Direct instruction is a strategy used to instruct students on step by step skills. This strategy is used with the population of students in this research. The students respond best to direct, explicit instruction which will break the large skill of reading down into smaller, logical increments. The task of reading requires many skills from memory, recall, processing and production of sounds, blending sounds into words and comprehending the meaning of words. Direct, explicit instruction enables the instructor to break the large task of reading into small steps and teach each individual step and then bring them together in each lesson to generalize the individual skills of phonics, phonemic awareness, vocabulary, comprehension and fluency to the broader skill of reading. Procedure To implement this research project, the researcher will need students who have had minimal phonics instruction. The students must be committed to the research project and commit to 6 months of instruction. The researcher must implement the pre-test prior to beginning the direct phonics based instruction. Once pre-test has been implemented and recorded, the researcher can begin direct instruction sessions. The researcher will meet with each student two times per week for one hour. The following lesson plan illustrates the lessons that will be completed at each session for each new phoneme that is introduced. At the end of the six month period, the post test should be implemented to determine progress. Lesson One Objective (desired result). Students will recognize letters when shown the letter in 95% of the trials. Acceptable evidence. When students are shown a worksheet listing the letters of the alphabet, the student will verbally identify each letter. Teacher will note any errors. Student will be shown only lower case letters and will miss no more than two letters in order for the desired result to be met. Learning experiences and instruction. Materials. White Board and dry erase markers Rice boxes (shirt boxes filled with plain white rice) Banner with the alphabet written in letters to be colored in. Worksheet with lower case letters listed for assessment Time. This lesson should be repeated daily following the sequence attached until all letter names have been mastered. Lesson one should take ten minutes. Procedure. During this lesson, we want students to learn the names of the letters. 1. Each day, the teacher will first review the letters the student already knows by pointing to them on the poster. 2. Next, the teacher will write the new letters on the board and verbally name the letters. For this lesson, the letters are a, b, f, m, p, s, and t. 3. The child will write the letters on their white board while saying their names. 4. Next students will take out their rice boxes and write the letters in the rice boxes while saying the letter names. 5. Finally students will color in the letter on a letter banner to be hung in the classroom. Lesson Two Objective(Desired Result). Students will relate sound to letter when shown the letter in three out of four trials. Acceptable evidence. When shown a letter on a worksheet, student will be able to identify the sound related to the letter including short vowels in three out of four trials. Teacher will note any errors and re-assess those after additional instruction. Learning Experiences and Instruction. Materials. Flashcards with lower case letters Dry erase board and marker Shaving cream Worksheet with lower case letters Time. This lesson should be repeated daily following the sequence attached until all short vowels and consonant sounds have been mastered. Lesson two should take 15 minutes. Procedure. 1. The teacher will first review previous sounds learned by pointing to them on the poster and asking the students to recite the sound. 2. Next teacher will introduce new sound by writing the letter on the board and saying the sound. The sounds for this lesson are a, b, f, m, p, s, and t. 3. Student will mimic teacher and write the letter on their white board five times while saying the sound the letter makes. While working on a short vowel, teacher will instruct the student to say the following phrase each time they recite the sound of the vowel: A says /a/ like apple E says /e/ like echo I says /i/ like igloo O says /o/ like octopus U says /u/ like umbrella 4. Next, teacher will spread some shaving cream on the white board. Students will draw the letter in the shaving cream and recite the sound of the letter at least five times. 5. Teacher will wrap up lesson by pointing to new and old letters on the letter poster and having students state the sound of the letter pointed to. Lesson Three Objective(Desired Result). When provided with words lists, students will accurately read words containing new and previous taught sounds with 80 % accuracy. Acceptable evidence. Students will be shown word lists from the current sound. Students will be asked to read the words. Teacher will note errors. Learning Experiences and Instruction. Materials. Packets of each unit with words from that unit for reading Pointers Time. Depending on student ability, this lesson could take 20-30 minutes each day. Procedure. Once students have learned the sound for a particular unit, they should be presented with the opportunity to blend those sounds together into words. 1. Teacher will present students with a pointer and real word list. 2. She will have the student read the words and make corrections when necessary. 3. Next, teacher should provide students with a nonsense word lists to practice reading words with new and previously learned sounds. Students should practice reading 15-20 words of each type (real and nonsense), tapping each word with their pointer. It is important that the student use pound and sound strategy to blend sounds together. Pound and sound is when students pound on the table or tap on their arm for each sound in the word. 4. After they have pounded the last sound, they slide with their fingertips to blend the sounds together. 5. To wrap up the lesson, review the sound from that days lesson. Lesson Four Objective (Desired Result). When provided with words verbally, students will accurately spell words from current and previous lesson with 80% accuracy. Acceptable evidence. Students will spell words provided by teacher. Teacher will note spelling errors and % correct. Learning Experiences and Instruction Materials. Dry erase board and markers Time. This lesson should take 10-15 minutes Procedure. 1. Teacher will take the words that the student read in the last lesson and read them aloud to the student. 2. The student will then pound and sound to determine the letters in the word. 3. The student will then spell the word on the dry erase board. The teacher should make any corrections at that time to assist student in pounding out, hearing each sound and including it in the spelling. 4. Teacher should read 15-20 real and nonsense words to the student for the spelling section. Lesson Five Objective (Desired Result). When provided with a list of previously taught sight words, students will read the words with 85% accuracy. Acceptable evidence. Teacher will present student with flashcards of previously taught words and note any errors to calculate accuracy rate. Learning Experiences and Instruction. Materials. Sight word cards Dry erase board and markers Sand box Time. This lesson should take less than 10 minutes. Procedure. Each lesson has a pre-set sight word that students will learn. 1. For each lesson, teacher will write the sight word to be learned on the board and ask the student if they know the word. 2. If they do know the word, teacher can move on and review all known sight words by using flash cards and showing the student the previously learned word and asking the student to read the word. 3. If the student does not know the word, teacher should tell the student the word and have the student write the word on the dry erase board five times. 4. While they are writing, they should say each letter as they write it. 5. Once they have written it, have them write the word in their sandbox. 6. To conclude the lesson, flip through the flashcards of words the student has already learned including the current word. Lesson Six Objective(Desired Result). When a sentence is dictated to the student using current or previous taught sounds, student will write sentence with correct spelling 85% of the time. Acceptable evidence. Student will write sentences that are dictated by the teacher. Teacher will grade for spelling to calculate %. Learning Experiences and Instruction. Materials. Paper and Pen Manipulatives Time. This lesson should take 15-20 minutes. Procedure. 1. Teacher will read a sentence from the current unit. 2. Student will repeat the sentence. 3. Teacher will say the sentence again. 4. Students will repeat the sentence and use one manipulative to represent each word, placing each manipulative in a line in front of them. 5. Student will then write the sentence without assistance from the teacher on a piece of paper. 6. Teachers must not repeat the sentence unless absolutely necessary and if repetition is needed, teacher should repeat the entire sentence, not just the missing word. The student must write in pen so teachers can note errors. Lesson Seven Objective(Desired Result). When provided with a story containing current or previously taught sounds, students will read the story with 85% accuracy. Acceptable evidence. Student and teacher will each have a copy of the story. Teacher will note errors during reading. Teacher will then count number of words and number of errors and calculate a percentage correct. Learning Experiences and Instruction. Materials. Two copies of story from current lesson Time. This part of the lesson could take from 10-20 minutes depending on the length of the story. Procedure. 1. Teacher will direct student to begin reading. 2. Teacher will note any and all errors on teacher copy of story. 3. If the student makes an error that affects the story, teacher will stop student and ask them to pound out the word. 4. If error does not affect the meaning of the story, teacher will note error and allow student to continue reading. 5. Teacher will review story with student. 6. Teacher will count words in the story and divide words read correctly by total words read to calculate the percentage correct. Integrity of the Data The integrity of the data is very important to the researcher and the stakeholders of this research. Each student involved in the research has their own file where weekly performance is stored after it has been scored and recorded into the data table. This data table has been checked by the researcher on different dates to ensure the accuracy and minimize the chance for human error. Copies of student work have been provided to the respective parent for their records, as well. This data has been reviewed by parent and researcher to ensure there have been no errors in the recording of the data. Permissions and Anonymity Anonymity is crucial in this study. The parents do not wish to acknowledge their childs weaknesses for many reasons and this researcher respects their concerns and appreciates their willingness to allow their child to participate in this research. Thus all student names have been either removed or denoted with a letter (Student A, etc.). Throughout the research, names were not used, only initials and letter denotations on all student work, records and data recordings. In addition, instructional sessions were completed in the students homes to again ensure anonymity within society. Technology Used in the Curriculum There are many options for technology in this instruction. Technology will allow for variety and interest for the students involved and, in addition, adds an additional modality for instruction delivery. This researcher includes videos created in Microsoft PowerPoint to assist in the retention of skills. In addition, this researcher allows students to record stories on a voice data recorder to allow students to hear their reading and allow researcher to further analyze the reading ability and fluency of the student. Technology is an important aspect of instruction. Not only to enhance students reading skills, but also to motivate the learner. Students are so immersed in technology in their daily lives that including any form of technology during instruction is motivational for students. A Microsoft PowerPoint presentation was created to show short vowels and provided motion and images to illustrate that short vowel. The presentation was shown as a short film for the students to watch. Short vowels are difficult for our student to learn and retain. Thus this presentation was created to be shown occasionally to refresh short vowel skills throughout the student learning. A voice data recorder was used to record student readings. Students were then allowed to listen to themselves read. When students realized they were going to hear themselves read, some students worked harder to improve their reading while some became shy. The researcher must analyze their student to determine if this is a beneficial strategy for them. The researcher also used the recordings to later identify errors made by students that can be corrected. Data Analysis Students will be assessed prior to instruction and post instruction with the CORE Phonics Survey. Pre-test data will be compared with the post-test data using an Excel Data Analysis software in a one sample dependent t test analysis. The CORE Phonics Survey has 3 sub-tests. Specifically, it tests consonant sounds, long vowel sounds and short vowel sounds. Results of the sub-tests are reported in a raw score. The one sample t-test will be used to compare pre-test and post-test data to see if there is a significant difference in pre-test and post-test scores. CHAPTER FOUR: Results Report of Results Assessment data of six students was used to determine the results of this research. Each student was assessed using the CORE Phonics Survey initially and upon completion of the instructional research period. (Scholastic) This survey assessed the consonant, short vowel and long vowel knowledge of each student. The null hypothesis is that the t score is equal to the test scores. The alternate hypothesis is that the t score showed an increase from the pre-test scores. A one-tailed test produced a result consistent with the alternate hypothesis if the t score shows a significant difference (p>.05). The researcher assumed a 95% confidence interval. There were six students analyzed; therefore, the degree of freedom in this analysis is five (n-1 or 6-1). A significant difference at p > 0.05 means that if the null hypothesis is correct (i.e. the samples scores do not differ after instruction) then I would expect to get a t value as great as the results on less than 5% of occasions. A significant result at the 95% probability level tells me that the data is good enough to support a conclusion with 95% confidence. After calculating the t score, the P-value is .00291939. I have determined the rate of improvement is significant to determine the success of instruction and accept the alternate hypothesis. Students were assessed prior to instruction and post instruction with the CORE Phonics Survey. Pre-test data has been compared with the post-test data using an Excel Data Analysis software in a one sample dependent t test analysis. The CORE Phonics Survey has 3 sub-tests. Specifically, it tests consonant sounds, long vowel sounds and short vowel sounds. Results of the sub-tests are reported in a raw score. The one sample t-test will be used to compare pre-test and post-test data to see if there is a significant difference in pre-test and post-test scores. The data chart below shows the percentages of sounds correct prior to instruction and the percentage of sounds correct post instruction. The P-value is .00291939 which demonstrates a significant difference between two scores. This P-value shows us that the alternate hypothesis is correct. Thus, children with Down syndrome can successfully learn to read using a phonics based approach to literacy instruction. DatePre-TestDatePost-TestStudent A5/33511/350Student B5/83011/965Student C5/34011/1662Student D5/26311/578Student E5/81511/525Student F5/42511/335P-value=0.00291939 The data chart below shows the percentage of growth during the six months of phonics instruction. DatePre-TestDatePost-Test% of ChangeTarget %Met goal?Student A5/335%11/350%+15%17.50%NoStudent B5/830%11/965%+35%15%YesStudent C5/340%11/1662%+22%20%YesStudent D5/263%11/578%+25%21.50%YesStudent E5/815%11/525%+10%7.50%YesStudent F5/425%11/335%+10%12.50%NoP-value=0.00291939From this chart, we can conclude that although the P-value showed us that the alternate hypothesis is correct, there were two students that did not meet their target growth. However, although they did not meet their target growth for this study, it should be noted that all students in the study made reasonable growth and thus this data should continue to support the use of a phonics-based literacy instruction program for children with Down syndrome. Recommended Revisions To further validate this type of instruction, several aspects of data should be compiled to further compare and ensure that the growth made by students is from the phonics instruction and not other instruction. One piece of data that would be beneficial would be to track progress for 6 months prior to this study. This would provide the researcher with a level of progress baseline to, again, measure the type of growth the student typically made without phonics instruction. This would add more validity to the percentage of growth, which, in turn, would add more validity to the use of a phonics based instruction for reading. A second revision to this study would be to include a larger sample. Students with disabilities are often affected by environments and social situations that will affect their learning, as well. At least two of the students in this study experienced illness and emotional stress during the six month period. Future studies including a larger sample would provide for an analysis of more stability and consistency. The final revision to this study would be to increase the duration of the study. Although six month is a respectable length of instruction, a more viable duration would be one full school year. Typically, growth would be measured from a fall assessment to a spring assessment. This would align with the school year and provide a more accurate assessment of student ability with consistent instruction. CHAPTER FIVE: Discussion Discussion These current findings add substantially to our understanding of the abilities of students with Down syndrome in the area of literacy. The methods of this study may be applied to a classroom or individual instruction sessions. It is of this researchers opinion that this study is valid and that the results are indicative of the results that should be expected in a similar setting with similar instruction. Considerably, more work will need to be done to ensure transfer of skills to other areas of instruction and is generalized into other reading material outside of those used during instruction. In addition, future studies will need to ensure that the same level of intensity and instruction are maintained when studying further. It would be interesting to perform this type of instruction as a whole class intervention and determine the progress made over the course of a year with whole class versus a one to one situation. A study of this kind would greatly further the instruction of students with Down syndrome in the area of literacy if the researcher saw growth with a phonics-based literacy program through whole group instruction. Implications and Limitations Several limitations to this pilot study need to be acknowledged. First, the sample size was small and selective. If this research were performed randomly, the results may show a very different result especially if the students do not have the required skills discussed in this research paper. Another limitation was that the instruction was often done within the students home. This could be beneficial, however, often this proved to be distracting to most of the students. Many students were often distracted by snacks, pets, siblings, telephones ringing and parents. These distractions caused us to lose focus and took time away from the direct instruction. The final limitation could not be avoided by this researcher and that is the general health of the students. Several students became ill during the six month period and required some missed sessions or working while ill which is not a prime condition for instruction. Conclusion This research provides the education field with much needed information regarding the practice of instructing children with Down syndrome in the skill of reading. It is the desire of this researcher to provide this information to those who work with these students to encourage successful instruction that will promote independence in school and further into life. References Arndt, Elissa. (2006). Orton-Gillingham Approach. Retrieved from http://www.fcrr.org/FCRRReports/PDF/Orton_Gillingham_Approach.pdf on September 7, 2009. Azen, Debbie and Geller, Marsha. (2002). SLANT system for structured language training: Stage 1. Buffalo Grove, IL: Geller Educational Resources. Broadley I, MacDonald J. Teaching short term memory skills to children with Down syndrome. Down Syndrome Research and Practice. 1993;1(2);56-62. Buckley, S. and Bird, G. (1993). Teaching children with Downs syndrome to read. The Down Syndrome Educational Trust Down Syndrome Research and Practice. 1(1) 34-39. Cupples, L and Iacono, T. (2000). Phonological awareness and oral reading skill in children with down syndrome. The Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research. 43: 595-608 CureResearch (2003). Statistics for Down Syndrome. Retrieved from http://www.cureresearch.com/d/down_syndrome/stats.htm on 10/7/2009. Dickinson, L. The use of a reading program and signing to develop language and communication skills in a toddler with Down syndrome. Tidewater Down Syndrome Association Newsletter. February 1999. Evans R. Phonological awareness in children with Down syndrome. Down Syndrome Research and Practice. 1994;2(3);102-105. Gaiser, Barbara. (2006). Meeting the Challenge of the Oral Language Gap, Skill in Verbal Reasoning is a Major Factor in Performance on the FCAT. Retrieved from http://www.fcrr.org/assessment/SLP/Barbara_Meeting.pdf on September 18, 2009 Hartshorne, M. Speech, language and communication needs and literacy difficulties. I CAN Talk Series. 2006: 1(1). Jarrold C, Baddeley AD, Phillips C. Down Syndrome and the Phonological Loop: The Evidence for, and Importance of, a Specific Verbal Short-Term Memory Deficit. Down Syndrome Research and Practice. 1999;6(2);61-75. Jestice, Haley. (2008). Preventing Failure of At-Risk Students. A therapists role in the response to intervention process. Retrieved from http://www.therapytimes.com/content=0302J84C4896BE84408040441 on September 20, 2009. Kruse, Kevin. (2007). Gagnes nine events of instruction: an introduction. Retrieved from http://www.e-learningguru.com/articles/art3_3.htm Laws G, Buckley SJ, MacDonald J, Broadley I. The influence of reading instruction on language and memory development in children with Down syndrome. Down Syndrome Research and Practice. 1995;3(2);59-64. Learning Theories Knowledgebase (2010, June). Cognitivism at Learning-Theories.com. Retrieved June 10, 2010 from  HYPERLINK "http://www.learning-theories.com/cognitivism.html"http://www.learning-theories.com/cognitivism.html. National Research Center on Learning Disabilities (2006). RTI Manual. Fidelity of implementation. 2006;4;2-4. Powell, K. (2009). Reading skills in children with down syndrome. Retrieved from http://physical- disabilities.suite101.com/article.cfm/reading_skills_in_children_with_down_syndrome on August 26, 2009. Scholastic. CORE Phonics Survey. (2002). http://www.scholastic.com/dodea/Module_2/resources/dodea_m2_tr_core.pdf Retrieved on April 13, 2010 Shaywitz, S. (2003). Overcoming Dyslexia. New York: Random House. State of Illinois (2007). 2006-2007 Annual State Report on Special Education. Retrieved from http://www.isbe.state.il.us/spec-ed/pdf_reports/annual_performance_report06-07.pdf on 10/7/2009. Up for Reading (2007). Teaching reading skills to children with Down syndrome. Retrieved from http://www.up-for-reading.org/down-syndrome/reading/ on August 26, 2009. Utah Department of Health. (2003). ABLE Program. Occupational therapists. Retrieved from http://health.utah.gov/able/forparents/occupationalTherapist.html on September 15, 2009. Article available online at: http://www.therapytimes.com/0722Intervention Vanderbilt University (2003). Understanding by Design. Retrieved June 9, 2010 from http://www.vanderbilt.edu/cft/resources/teaching_resources/theory/design.htm Appendix A Teacher Resource _ Assessment Tool Scholastic Red 2002 WHAT The CORE Phonics Survey assesses the phonics and phonics related skills that have a high rate of application in beginning reading. Each survey presents a number of lists of letters and words for the student to identify or decode. Pseudowords, or made-up words, are included since the student must use decoding skills to correctly pronounce these words and cannot have memorized them. These assessments are best used to plan instruction for students in the primary grades and to develop instructional groups. They may be administered every four to six weeks. WHY A students ability to use knowledge of sound/letter correspondences (phonics) to decode words determines, in large measure, his or her ability to read individual words. A detailed assessment of a students phonics skills points to areas in which the student is likely to benefit most from systematic, explicit phonics instruction. Also, knowing the skills that the student does possess will help in selecting reading tasks that offer the most effective reinforcement of those skills. HOW Instructions for administering each part of the survey are included on the Record Form. Students read from the Student Material on the pages that follow the Record Form. To focus the students attention on the part of the test being given, cover the other parts with a piece of paper. The RecordForm shows the same material that appears on the Student Material, in a reduced size, so that you may easily record the students responses. Following administration, score each of the test parts, and transfer the results to the first page of theRecord Form under Skills Summary. Retest every 46 weeks but only on parts not yet mastered. Be aware of the students behavior during testing. If the student is tiring or making many consecutive errors, discontinue testing at that time. WHAT IT MEANS This test is a mastery test. It is expected that students will ultimately get all items correct. In five-item subtest, a student who misses two or more items would benefit from more direct instruction in the indicated element. In ten-item subtests, three or more errors warrant attention. WHATS NEXT? Use the information to monitor phonics instruction and to design skill groups in direct instruction in the particular element measured. Older students who score poorly on the CVC portion of the survey may need further assessment, such as the CORE Phoneme Segmentation Test. CORE Phonics Survey Skills Assessed: Phonics Grade Level: K8 Language: English Grouping: Individual Approximate Testing Time: 1015 Minutes Materials: Pencil, Lined Paper Adapted from CORE Teaching Reading Sourcebook: For Kindergarten through Eighth Grade. Copyright c 2000 Consortium on Reading Excellence, Inc. All rights reserved. Name_________________________________________________________________Grade___________________________________________________ Date___________________________________________ SKILLS SUMMARY Alphabet Skills ___/ 26 Letter names - uppercase ___/ 26 Letter names - lowercase ___/ 23 Consonant sounds ___/ 5 Long vowel sounds ___/ 5 Short vowel sounds Reading and Decoding Skills ___/ 10 Short vowels in CVC words ___/ 10 Short vowels, digraphs, and -tch trigraph ___/ 20 Consonant blends with short vowels ___/ 10 Long vowel spellings ___/ 10 Variant vowels and diphthongs ___/ 10 r- and l-controlled vowels ___/ 24 Multisyllabic words Spelling Skills ___/ 5 Initial consonants ___/ 5 Final consonants ___/ 5 CVC words ___/ 5 Long vowel spellings Skills to review: Skills to teach: CORE Phonics Survey Record Form 1. Letter Names Uppercase Say to the student: Can you tell me the names of these letters? If the student cannot name three or more consecutive letters, say: Look at all of the letters and tell me which ones you do know. D A N S X Z J L HT Y E C O M R P W K U G B F Q V I ___/ 26 2. Letter Names Lowercase Say to the student: Can you tell me the names of these letters? If the student cannot name three or more consecutive letters, say: Look at all of the letters and tell me which ones you do know. d a n s x z j l ht y e c o m r p w k u g b f q v i ___/ 26 3. Consonant Sounds Say to the student: Look at these letters. Can you tell me the sound each letter makes? If the sound given is correct, do not mark the Record Form. If it is incorrect, write the sound the student gives above each letter. If no sound is given, circle the letter. If the student cannot say the sound for three or more consecutive letters, say: Look at all of the letters and tell me which sounds you do know. d l n s x z j t y p c h m r w g b f q v ___/ 23 CORE Phonics Survey Record Form CORE Phonics Survey Record Form 4. Vowel Sounds Ask the student: Can you tell me the sounds of each letter? If the student names the letter, count it as the long vowel sound. Then ask: Can you tell me the other sound for the letter? The student should name the short vowel sound. e _ _ i _ _ a _ _ o _ _ u _ _ l = long sound s = short sound Record l on the first line for the long sound (letter name) and s for the short sound on the second line. If the student makes an error, record the error over the letter. ____/5 Long vowel sounds (count the number of ls above) ____/5 Short vowel sounds (count the number of ss above) 5. Reading and Decoding For items A through G, students must read both real and pseudowords (made-up words). For the first line of real words, tell the student: I want you to read these words. If the student cannot read two or more of thereal words, do not administer the line of pseudowords. Go to the next set of items. Before asking the student to read the line of pseudowords, say: Now, I want you to read some made-up words. Do not try tomake them sound like real words. A. Short vowels in CVC words ___/ 5 sip cat let but hog (real) ___/ 5 vop fut dit kem laz (pseudo) B. Short vowels, digraphs, and -tch trigraph ___/ 5 when chop ring shut match (real) ___/ 5 wheck shom thax phitch chud (pseudo) C. Consonant blends with short vowels ___/ 5 stop trap quit spell plan (real) ___/ 5 stig brab qued snop dran (pseudo) ___/ 5 clip fast sank limp held (real) ___/ 5 frep nast wunk kimp jelt (pseudo) D. Long vowel spellings ___/ 5 tape keylute paid feet (real) ___/ 5 loe bine joad vaysoat (pseudo) E. r- and l-controlled vowels ___/ 5 bark horn chirp term cold (real) ___/ 5 ferm dall gorf murd chal (pseudo) F. Variant vowels and diphthongs ___/ 5 few down toyha wk coin (real) ___/ 5 voot rew fout zoyba wk (pseudo) CORE Phonics Survey Record Form     PAGE  PAGE 48 cl9:BC @ B n o r s / 2 ^ d   6 ; C ` DE}"#MeNghFh/Q5CJOJQJaJhF:4h/Q>*CJOJQJaJhF:4h/Q6CJOJQJaJh/Q>*CJOJQJaJh/QCJOJQJaJhF:4h/QCJOJQJaJBScm3456789:C $d@&a$gd/Qdgd/Q $da$gd/Q$ #da$gd/Q G^gd/Qdgd/Q d@&gd/Q $@&a$gd/Q$a$gd/Q $da$gd/Q !"#MZeNgXu!@H d`gd/Q d@&gd/Q $da$gd/Q $d@&a$gd/Qdgd/QX;u!@Ha q(t(,,,,,, -"-%-'---/-----..".$.W5_5555T6]677S7T7U7Z7\7777ժ(jhFh/QCJUaJmHnHuhFh/QCJaJhFh/Q5CJ\aJh/Q5CJOJQJaJhF:4h/QCJH*OJQJaJhFh/Q5CJOJQJaJhF:4h/QCJOJQJaJh/QCJOJQJaJ6Ha!"&p*.g00T5U5V5W5Y5Z55555555555 $$Ifa$gd/Q$d`a$gd/Q d`gd/Q d@&gd/Q55 $$Ifa$gd/Q55kd$$Ifl c b E"$6((((4 l4a56 6(6-6O6T6V6X6Z6\6]6{66666667777(7*7S7U7Ff[ Ff $Ifgd/Q $$Ifa$gd/QU7Z7[7\77777>Nkd $IfK$L$ ' ` 634ap $$Ifa$gd/Q $Ifgd/QNkd $IfK$L$' ` 634ap $$Ifa$gd/QK$77777777,8-8=9>9;;==>>????BBFFFF(L*L{R|Rgg9iLikkppcrrv"vDxgxyxzxxxyy{{{{óóçóççóóóóóóçççÚçóóhFh/QOJQJ^Jh/QCJOJQJaJhFh/Q5CJOJQJaJhF:4h/QCJOJQJaJ(jhFh/QCJUaJmHnHuhFh/QCJaJhFh/Q5CJ\aJ97777777'8,8-8Y8^88888FfNkdR $IfK$L$ ' ` 634ap $$Ifa$gd/QK$ $$Ifa$gd/Q $Ifgd/Q88889=9>999m:q: ;;;;;;;;;<<======Ff $Ifgd/QFfb $$Ifa$gd/Q====>>>>>>>>>4?9??????????? d`gd/QFf+Ff@& $Ifgd/Q $$Ifa$gd/QFf ??BB DFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFIJ;N|RHV $da$gd/Qdgd/Q d`gd/Q $d@&a$gd/QHVx]dygggg9iLikkppcrrv"vxydgd/Q d@&gd/Qdd\$`gd/Q dd@&\$gd/Q$dd\$a$gd/Q$dd@&\$a$gd/Q d`gd/Qyy{{}~ dsȂт߂D[d1$5$7$8$H$gd/Qd1$5$7$8$@&H$gd/Q $d@&a$gd/Q d`gd/Q$a$gd/QCD[rՆ!0ji[mn ƏǏwNY[efmntuÚŚ˹˪˪˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˪ttttt h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ)hFh/Q5CJKHOJQJ\]aJhF:4h/Q6CJOJQJaJhF:4h/QCJOJQJaJ#hFh/Q5CJKHOJQJaJhFh/Q5CJOJQJaJ&hF:4h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ hF:4h/QCJKHOJQJaJ-[r )Ն!ji[dgd/Q d`gd/Q $d@&a$gd/Qd^`gd/Q d1$5$7$8$H$^`gd/Qd1$5$7$8$@&H$gd/Q&gwNYÚ&H~\Jd1$5$7$8$H$gd/Qd1$5$7$8$@&H$gd/Q $d@&a$gd/Q d`gd/Qdgd/QŚךؚ $%&"-.GHɡʡˡ̡۶۶۶۶ۡۡۡzff&hwh/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ)hwh/Q5CJKHOJQJ\]aJ#h/Q56CJKHOJQJ\aJ)hwh/Q56CJKHOJQJ\aJ&hFh/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ hF:4h/QCJKHOJQJaJ h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ&hF:4h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ(Jğ"-ˡס$FM+5K`vZd1$5$7$8$@&H$gd/Qd1$5$7$8$H$gd/Q̡ա֡סFGKLM7\]^_hij Ӭ֬RǶǡǶyyǶǡ&hwh/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ&hF:4h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ)hwh/Q5CJKHOJQJ\]aJ h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ hF:4h/QCJKHOJQJaJ#h/Q56CJKHOJQJ\aJ)hwh/Q56CJKHOJQJ\aJ/7^j>hR̭!GS®d1$5$7$8$@&H$gd/Qd1$5$7$8$H$gd/QRgi̭ !GHQRSCOPYZjmٰڰhiʶʏzff&h#h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ)h#h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\]aJ#h/Q56CJKHOJQJ\aJ)hwh/Q56CJKHOJQJ\aJ&hwh/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ hF:4h/QCJKHOJQJaJ&hF:4h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ$®COٰhȱѱرTҲ7ϴLW Ŷd1$5$7$8$@&H$gd/Qd1$5$7$8$H$gd/QѱұֱױرLWXqt  öĶŶǶǡǶxddǶ&h#h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ)hF:4h/Q5>*CJKHOJQJ\aJ&hF:4h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ)h#h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\]aJ h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ hF:4h/QCJKHOJQJaJ#h/Q56CJKHOJQJ\aJ)h#h/Q56CJKHOJQJ\aJ'ŶӶU}7*,8`gûϻG8fd1$5$7$8$H$gd/Qd1$5$7$8$@&H$gd/Q*?A*+,-678_`aefgûĻͻλϻ[uDzǡyyǍǡءgg#h#h/Q5CJKHOJQJaJ&h#h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ&hF:4h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\aJ)h#h/Q5CJKHOJQJ\]aJ hF:4h/QCJKHOJQJaJ)h#h/Q56CJKHOJQJ\aJ#h/Q56CJKHOJQJ\aJ"f[ugu@ $$Ifa$gd/Q $da$gd/Q d`gd/Q $d@&a$gd/Qdgd/Qgu '*/3ADJN\_dhvy~ "^_mqvttt"hF:4h/Q5CJOJQJ\aJh/QB*CJOJQJaJph+hF:4h/Q5B*CJOJQJ\aJph(h#h/Q5B*CJOJQJaJph%hF:4h/QB*CJOJQJaJphh/QCJOJQJaJhF:4h/QCJOJQJaJh#h/Q5CJOJQJaJ- $$Ifa$gd/Q 8,,, $$Ifa$gd/QkdS.$$Iflr w ''''' 264 l4a]p2#'*/Dkd/$$Iflr w '''''  64 l4a]p2 $$Ifa$gd/Q/23=ADJMDkd0$$Iflr w '''''  64 l4a]p2 $$Ifa$gd/QMNX\_dgPDDDDD $$Ifa$gd/Qkd1$$Iflr w '''''  64 l4a]p2ghrvy~PDDDDD $$Ifa$gd/Qkd2$$Iflr w '''''  64 l4a]p2PDDDDD $$Ifa$gd/Qkd3$$Iflr w '''''  64 l4a]p2PDDDDD $$Ifa$gd/Qkd4$$Iflr w '''''  64 l4a]p2YMAAAA $$Ifa$gd/Q $$Ifa$gd/Qkd6$$Iflr w '''''64 l4a]p2 "'YQQQQEE $$Ifa$gd/Qdgd/Qkd6$$Iflr w '''''64 l4a]p2'05?KT^_imqvzFfMBFfe>Ff): $$Ifa$gd/Qv  /34BFK[^h|J`5@f񷢷h/Q5CJOJQJaJh/QB*CJOJQJaJph(h#h/Q5B*CJOJQJaJph%hF:4h/QB*CJOJQJaJph"hF:4h/Q5CJOJQJ\aJ(hF:4h/Q56CJOJQJ\]aJhF:4h/QCJOJQJaJ2  $)/34FfNFfJFf5F $$Ifa$gd/Q4>BFKOT[^_`abcdefgFfQ $$Ifa$gd/QghkdS$$Iflִ A!''''''P''!6    4 l4a]pPhq|}~ $$Ifa$gd/Q $$Ifa$gd/QkdT$$Iflִ A!''''''P''!6    4 l4a]pPJ`}5@*  $da$gd/Q $d@&a$gd/Qdgd/Q$XJ}U<` $d@&a$gd/Q $da$gd/Qgd/Qdgd/QfgX;DE:AB#$Zrsmn忯yy忚g#h/Q0JB*CJOJQJaJphh/Q6CJOJQJ]aJ"hF:4h/Q6CJOJQJ]aJ)hF:4h/Q0JB*CJOJQJaJphh/QB*CJOJQJaJph%hF:4h/QB*CJOJQJaJph$hF:4h/QCJOJQJaJmHsHhF:4h/QCJOJQJaJh/QCJOJQJaJ(bc|+,AS+,cz{QRSҭҭrbhF:4h/Q6CJOJQJaJ+j2VhF:4h/QCJOJQJUaJ%jhF:4h/QCJOJQJUaJ#h/Q0JB*CJOJQJaJph)hF:4h/Q0JB*CJOJQJaJphh/QB*CJOJQJaJph%hF:4h/QB*CJOJQJaJphh/QCJOJQJaJhF:4h/QCJOJQJaJ#TUefMN `akltuopӤӤӒӒӤӤӤӤӤӤӂӤsb hF:4h/QCJOJPJQJaJh^h/QCJOJQJaJhF:4h/Q<CJOJQJaJ"hF:4h/Q6CJOJQJ]aJh/QCJOJQJaJh/QB*CJOJQJaJph%hF:4h/QB*CJOJQJaJphhF:4h/QCJOJQJaJhF:4h/Q6CJOJQJaJh/Q6CJOJQJaJ$`l L:>#'3 d@&gd/Qdgd/Q@&gd/Q $@&a$gd/Qgd/Q\$gd/Q #:>#'3A:Oboa-:+GHX,XGs1 Y       r   μݫݫݫݼݫݼݫݫݫݫݫݫݫݫݖݫ(hF:4h/QCJOJPJQJaJmH sH  hF:4h/QCJOJPJQJaJ"hF:4h/Q5CJOJQJ\aJhF:4h/QCJOJQJaJ"hF:4h/Q6CJOJQJ]aJ hF:4h/QCJOJPJQJaJ;3Abo!-~+Gigd/Q@&gd/Qdgd/Q d@&gd/Q ,HXr 3( 1 E  "    @&gd/Qgd/Q  / Q a I g  1 j   8d+Ch@&gd/Qgd/Q       _ `     Ec&d+Cjˡ|jh/Q0JUh/Qjh/QUhF:4h/QCJOJQJaJ(hF:4h/QCJOJPJQJaJmHsH(hF:4h/Q56CJOJQJ\]aJ hF:4h/QCJOJPJQJaJ"hF:4h/Q6CJOJQJ]aJ"hF:4h/Q5CJOJQJ\aJ/Cjh]hgd/Q &`#$gd/Q@&gd/Qgd/QhF:4h/QCJOJQJaJh/Q0JmHnHuh/Qjh/Q0JU h/Q0J &1h:p/Q/ =!"#$%n *0.PNG  IHDR%VsBIT|.wPLTEU~tRNS@fbKGDHgIFgV0 cmPPJCmp0712Om IDATc`clIENDB`$$If!v h55%5555555 5 %#v %#v #v#v#v#v#v#v#v%#v:V l6, 5 /  /  /  / /  / /  /  / /  / /  / a$$If!v h55%5555555 5 %#v %#v #v#v#v#v#v#v#v%#v:V l d6, 5 9 99/  / /  / / /  /  / /  /  / / / / apdkd$$Ifl c b E"$####### d6((((4 l4apd$$If!v h55%5555555 5 %#v %#v #v#v#v#v#v#v#v%#v:V l d6, 5 9 999/  / /  / / /  /  / /  /  / / / / apdkd$$Ifl c b E"$###### d6((((4 l4apd$IfK$L$!vh5#v:V  ` 6,59/ / 34 p $IfK$L$ !vh5#v:V  ` 6,59/  / 34 p $IfK$L$ !vh5#v:V  ` 6,59/  / 34 p $$If!v h55%5555555 5 %#v %#v #v#v#v#v#v#v#v%#v:V ly ```````d6, , ,,,,,,,,5 9 9999/  / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /  / / /  apdkd $$Ifly c b E"$##### ```````d6((((4 l4apd$$If!v h55%5555555 5 %#v %#v #v#v#v#v#v#v#v%#v:V l d6, 5 9 9999/  / /  / / /  /  / /  /  / / / / apdkd$$Ifl c b E"$##### d6((((4 l4apd$$If!v h55%5555555 5 %#v %#v #v#v#v#v#v#v#v%#v:V l ``````d6, 5 9 99/  / /  / / /  /  / /  /  / / / / apdkd$$Ifl c b E"$####### ``````d6((((4 l4apd$$If!v h55%5555555 5 %#v %#v #v#v#v#v#v#v#v%#v:V l d6, ,,,5 9 99/  / /  / / /  /  / /  /  / / / / apdkd_$$Ifl  c b E"$####### d6((((4 l4apd$$If!v h55%5555555 5 %#v %#v #v#v#v#v#v#v#v%#v:V l d̙̙̙̙̙̙6, 5 9 99/  / /  / / /  /  / /  /  / / / / apd̙̙̙̙̙̙kd#$$Ifl c b E"$####### d̙̙̙̙̙̙6((((4 l4apd̙̙̙̙̙̙$$If!v h55%5555555 5 %#v %#v #v#v#v#v#v#v#v%#v:V l d̙̙̙̙6, 5 9 9/ /  /  / / / / /  / / / /  / / / /  apd̙̙̙̙kd($$Ifl c b E"$######## d̙̙̙̙6((((4 l4apd̙̙̙̙7$$If]!vh55L555#v#v#v#vL#v:V l 26,559/ /  / a]p2$$If]!vh55L555#v#v#v#vL#v:V l  6,559/ / / /  a]p2$$If]!vh55L555#v#v#v#vL#v:V l  6,559/ / / /  a]p2$$If]!vh55L555#v#v#v#vL#v:V l  6,559/ / / /  a]p2$$If]!vh55L555#v#v#v#vL#v:V l  6,559/ / / /  a]p2$$If]!vh55L555#v#v#v#vL#v:V l  6,559/ / / /  a]p2$$If]!vh55L555#v#v#v#vL#v:V l  6,559/ / / /  a]p2$$If]!vh55L555#v#v#v#vL#v:V l6,559/ a]p2$$If]!vh55L555#v#v#v#vL#v:V l6,559/ a]p2[$$If]!vh55L5555/55#v#v#v/#v#v#v#vL#v:V l P!6,55P559/ / /  / /  /  / /  / / / / /  / / a]pP?kd7$$Iflִ A!''''''P'' P!6    4 l4a]pP$$If]!vh55L5555/55#v#v#v/#v#v#v#vL#v:V l  !6,55P559/  / /  / / /  / / / / /  / / /  a]pPkdj<$$Iflִ A!''''''P''  !6    4 l4a]pP$$If]!vh55L5555/55#v#v#v/#v#v#v#vL#v:V l  !6,55P559/  / /  / / /  / / /  / / / /  / a]pPkdR@$$Iflִ A!''''''P''  !6    4 l4a]pP$$If]!vh55L5555/55#v#v#v/#v#v#v#vL#v:V l  !6,55P559/  / /  / / /  / / /  / / / /  / a]pPkd:D$$Iflִ A!''''''P''  !6    4 l4a]pP$$If]!vh55L5555/55#v#v#v/#v#v#v#vL#v:V l  !6,55P559/  / /  / / /  / / /  / / / /  / a]pPkd"H$$Iflִ A!''''''P''  !6    4 l4a]pP$$If]!vh55L5555/55#v#v#v/#v#v#v#vL#v:V l  !6,55P559/  / /  / / /  / / /  / / / /  / a]pPkd L$$Iflִ A!''''''P''  !6    4 l4a]pP$$If]!vh55L5555/55#v#v#v/#v#v#v#vL#v:V l  !6,55P559/  / / /  / /  / /  / / / / / a]pPkdO$$Iflִ A!''''''P''  !6    4 l4a]pP1$$If]!vh55L5555/55#v#v#v/#v#v#v#vL#v:V l!6,55P559/ a]pP1$$If]!vh55L5555/55#v#v#v/#v#v#v#vL#v:V l!6,55P559/ a]pPDyK yK |http://www.learning-theories.com/cognitivism.htmlyX;H,]ą'cJ@J x6Normal dCJ_HaJmH sH tH ^@^  Heading 1$<@&"5CJ KH OJPJQJ\^JaJ p@p 0B0 Heading 2!$d1$5$7$8$@&H$"5CJKHOJPJQJ\^JaJDA@D Default Paragraph FontRi@R 0 Table Normal4 l4a (k( 0No List V^V m0 Normal (Web) dZCJOJPJQJ^JaJVOV 0B0Heading 2 Char"5CJKHOJPJQJ\^JaJVOV Heading 1 Char"5CJ KH OJPJQJ\^JaJ fO"f 2U0Default 7$8$H$1B*CJOJPJQJ^J_HaJmH phsH tH .X@1. WC40Emphasis6]6U@A6 WC40 Hyperlink >*B*phdP@Rd M0 Body Text 20d^`0CJOJPJQJ^JaJPOaP M0Body Text 2 CharCJOJPJQJ^JaJ4@r4 3Y3Header  !.)@. 3Y3 Page NumberVY@V /Q Document Map-DM CJOJQJaJ 0!z!z!z!z!z!z!z!z! z! z! z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z !z "z #z $z %z &z 'z (z )z *z +z ,z -z .z /z 0z: # #+^/7 >@;HHPXya2gnu|)[g]Wݹ@ @ <!Q+   *  # 0o9 s0~ !"#$%&u' () *+ ,-./Scm3456789:C G^        ! " # M Z e N g Xu!@Ha p$(g**T/U/V/W/Y/Z/////////////0 0(0-0O0T0V0X0Z0\0]0{00000001111(1*1S1U1Z1[1\11111111111'2,2-2Y2^222222283=3>333m4q4 55555555566777777777888888888499999999999999<< >@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@CD;H|LHPxW^yaaaa9cLceejjcllp"prssuuwx{{{{ ||d|s||||||}D}[}r}}~~ )Հ!ji[&gwNYÔ&H~\Ję"-˛כ$FM+5K`vZ7^j>hŖ!GS¨CO٪hȫѫثTҬ7ϮLW ŰӰU}7*,8`gõϵG8f[uɼgu@ #'*/23=ADJMNX\_dghrvy~ "'05?KT^_imqvz  $)/34>BFKOT[^_`abcdefghq|}~J`}5@* $XJ}U<`l L:>#'3Abo!-~+Gi ,HXr 3(1E" /QaIg1j     8 d     + C h      C j         0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0:@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0`0@0@0`0`0`0`0@0@0@0`0@0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0@0# `0@0Z `0@0N `0@0 `0@0`0@0`0@0@0`0`0@0!`0@0H`0H`0H`0H`0H`0H`0H`0H`0H`0H`0H`0H`0H`0H`0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0Hd 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0Hd 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0Hd 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H`0H` 0Hd 0H` 0H` 0H`0H` 0Hd 0H` 0H` 0H`0H` 0Hd 0H` 0H` 0H` 0Hd 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0Hd 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0Hd 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0Hd 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0Hd 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0H` 0Hd 0H`0@09`0@0<`0<`0<`0<`0<`0<`0<`0<`0<`0<`0<`0<`0<`0<`0@0@`0@`0@`0@`0@`0@`0@`0@`0@`0@0ya`0@0a`0@09c`0@0e`0@0j`0@0cl`0@0p`0p`0p@0s`0@0u`0u`0u`0@0@0{`0{`0{`0{`0{`0@0s|`0s|`0s|`0s|`0s|`0s|`0@0@0[}`0[}`0[}`0[}`0[}`0[}`0[}`0@0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0@0w`0@0N`0N`0@0@0@0&`0&`0&`0@0`0@0`0`0`0`0`0`0@0"`0"`0@0@0@0כ`P0כ`P0כ`P0@0F`P0@0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0@0`P0`P0@0@0@0j`P0@0`P0@0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0@0`P0`P0@0@0@0@0@0@0G`P0G`P0G`P0@0C`P0C`P0@0@0@0`P0`P0@0ѫ`P0@0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0@0L`P0L`P0@0@0@0Ű`P0@0`P0@0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0@0`P0`P0@0@0@0@0``P0@0õ`P0õ`P0õ`P0õ`P0õ`P0õ`P0@0`P0@0[`P0@0ɼ`P0ɼ`P0ɼ`P0@0g`P0g`P0g`P0g`P0g`P0g`P0g`P0@0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0`P 0dP 0`P0@0J`P0J`P0J`P0J`P0J`P0J`P0J`P0J`P0J`P0J`P0J`P0@0`P0`P0`P0`P0@0`P0`P0`P0@0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0@0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0@0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0@0@0`P0@0@0 `P0 `P0@0:`P0:`P0@0#`P0#`P0@03`P0@0b`P0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0!`P0!`P0!`P0@0@0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0@0+`P0+`P0+`P0+`P0+`P0+`P0+`P0@0H`P0H`P0H`P0H`P0@0@0@0`P0`P0`P0@0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0`P0@0@0/`P0/`P0/`P0/`P0/`P0/`P0/`P0@0`P0`P0@0 `P0 `P0@0 `P0 `P0@0d `P0d `P0d `P0d `P0@0+ `P0+ `P0@0 `P0 `P0@0 `P0 `P0@0j @00` %%%%%(7Ś̡Rvf  H555U778=?HVy[J®Ŷf/Mg'4gh`3 R X !(!!l,b$ *0.(@P(  X  3 A?#" ?X  3 A?#" ?X  3 A?#" ?B S  ?S111 ttt RANGE_A1_J9/ / 61;1JJPPPPPPPQ Q7R8R?RARIRKULUTUUUUZW[WcW\\\\\\\``||FQghiӰ+1;AKX`JV}U\`hHRBK&'OP  ] c                ? D E I J N O U V Z            ! O V o r s w x | }            . 3 J N O R S W X ]                   (S}X""#d#&&&',l-777888CNDWDDEoFZWwWxWXXXabb(bfgggggclllm9rr|}&LNgÔڔ&~-.8LכFM`v7jԦ֦Rw!GSOPkm٪hѫثWXbt "Ű*A8`gõϵͻ'.Sai39UXz?M;=J^t|YZ}GIU<Jb 59E`tl08HSLR:48X3OSs(EopIJgR        +                  :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: |pՔ|}z~P*EvUSQ ,=f ^`.^`.88^8`.^`. ^`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo( 88^8`OJQJo( ^`OJQJo(hh^h`. hh^h`OJQJo( ~}| Z/////////////0 0(0-0O0T0V0X0Z0\0]0{00000001111(1*1S1U1Z1[1\11111111111'2,2-2Y2^222222283=3>333m4q4 555555555667777777778888888884999999999999@ #'*/23=ADJMNX\_dghrvy~ "'05?KT^_imqvz  $)/34>BFKOT[^_`abcdefghq|}~  """@ # p @Unknown GTimes New Roman5Symbol3 ArialCArialMTArialaMonotypeSortsMonotype Sorts7Calibri7Cambria5 TahomaCzrPLucida Grande"0hk&k&r&o0q"b\/0!4d~3QHX $PmITeaching Children with Down s Syndrome to Read: A Phonics Based Approach Windows User Charles Fox4          Oh+'0, @L l x  'LTeaching Children with Downs Syndrome to Read: A Phonics Based ApproachWindows UserNormal Charles Fox2Microsoft Word 11.6.0@F#@|@ 4@ 40&o ՜.+,D՜.+,x4 hp  'ASAPq JTeaching Children with Downs Syndrome to Read: A Phonics Based Approach Title 8@ _PID_HLINKS'Ag2http://www.learning-theories.com/cognitivism.html  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789;<=>?@ACDEFGHINRoot Entry F:+4PData W1TableWordDocumentSummaryInformation(:DocumentSummaryInformation8BCompObjXObjectPool:+4:+4 FMicrosoft Word DocumentNB6WWord.Document.8