After completing the reading on Dr. German’s website, read the following Screening pages in preparation for your Word Finding Project assignment: Word Finding Referral Checklis

1

Word Finding Project

Student Sample A

SPE 502

Linda Kryzak

Fall 2017

2

Word Finding Project

Explanation of Findings

James (pseudonym used) is an energetic 6 year 4 month old student chosen for this word finding

screening. James has an IEP for a developmental delay. James’ oral language was observed in a

school setting across multiple subject areas and instructional activity structures.

After observing James, ‘Yes’ was checked for 10 word finding behaviors and

‘No’ for 5 word finding behaviors. According to the Word Finding Assessment Checklist, the

number of ‘Yes’ responses indicates that James may benefit from additional assessment in word-

finding. This checklist is purposed to observe and identify students who may exhibit word

finding difficulties, it does not test or assess this skill. This checklist does suggest three profiles

of word-finding difficulties which represent unique patterns of oral language behavior.

Items 1,2,3,4a, and 4b were marked ‘Yes’ after observing James, as well as items

5,6,10, and 11. According to the Word Finding Assessment Checklist, these items suggest that

James may potentially have word-finding difficulties with specific words in single word

contexts. This means, James may have difficulty retrieving specific words, such as nouns, verbs,

adjectives, etc. He may have difficulty remembering names, dates, or other fact specific words

related to instruction or content. For example, as he was observed in a whole group reading

lesson, James volunteered to answer a question about a story. He said “In the…um…um” in

attempts to appropriately respond ‘In the beginning [of the story]”. James was observed to have

slow single word retrieval with both accurate and inaccurate retrievals. Most often, James was

not able to retrieve the single word and said “never mind” or “I forgot”. At times, James

substituted nonsense words for real words or struggle to retrieve the function of words when

3

describing what characters were doing. For example, James said “He was….” as an attempt to

say “He was jumping” when describing a character.

Items 1,2, 8, 4a, and 4b were marked ‘Yes’ after observing James. Items 7,9,4c,

and 4d were marked ‘no’. According to the Word Finding Assessment Checklist, this indicates

that James may potentially have word-finding difficulties with words in discourse. The

assessment interpretation guidelines suggest that word finding in discourse contexts is an area of

difficulty. James did, however, present the ability to remember words within a conversation with

both adults and peers. James was observed to show proficient word finding abilities when

speaking with both adults and peers, as well as in a small group and one on one settings. James

was observed to repeat words and phrases within oral discourse, as well as slow retrieval times.

He did demonstrate the ability to recall words within a conversation and speak fluently without

false starts.

Items 1,2,3,8,4a,4b,5,6,10, and 11 were marked ‘yes’, which indicates that James

may have difficulties with word finding in both single word and discourse retrieval contexts.

Many of the word finding behaviors and errors observed of James were related to single word

retrieval. The results from this checklist suggests that this single word finding difficulty may

impact his oral language across both contexts. James often has long delays when he cannot think

of a word. He uses self-help strategies like nonverbal gesturing to support his intended message

in discourse contexts. He further was observed to use self-correction strategies to help him

clarify his message when speaking with others. James also was observed to use fillers to occupy

the delay time when thinking of a word.

The findings from the Word Finding Assessment Checklist suggest that James

may benefit from additional assessment in word-finding behaviors. James’ oral language

4

indicates evidence of difficultly retrieving single words across different contexts. The results of

this checklist suggest that James may have word-finding difficulty in both single and discourse

contexts, as items were marked ‘Yes’ across all three profiles.

Conclusions and Recommendations

The results of the Word Finding Assessment Checklist, based on observations of

James’ oral language, identify James as having displayed word finding difficulties in both single

and discourse retrieval contexts. Therefore, it can be recommended that James be referred for

further assessment of word finding using a thorough, standardized assessment tool, such as The

Test of Word Finding, Third Edition (TWF) and The Test of Word Finding in Discourse (TWFD)

.

It can be concluded that James may display the following behaviors illustrative of

word-finding difficulties:

• difficulty remembering the names of familiar people, places, or objects

• substitution of nonsense words that sound similar to the retrieval word

• substitution of the function of the word for the retrieval word

• self-corrections of oral language word finding errors

• long delays or pauses in oral language when speaking

• Repetition of words or phrases

• use of nonverbal gestures to indicate frustration or to demonstrate a word

• use of time fillers when trying to retrieve a word “um”

With these conclusions in mind, the following recommendations can be made to support

James in the classroom as he develops his word-finding abilities. When assessing James on oral

reading, it should be remembered that his silent reading may be superior to his oral reading

5

fluency. His word-finding difficulties may impact his ability to apply reading strategies to

produce fluent oral reading, and this may ultimately impact his comprehension. Therefore, James

should be able to read silently when completing comprehension assessments.

Further, James should be allowed adequate wait time to produce words in conversation or

oral questioning activities. As James as the tendency to avoid speaking when he experiences

retrieval difficulties by saying “never mind” or “I don’t know”, James should be encouraged to

take his time and understand that his contribution is valued. A strategy in this situation could be

to allow James time to time and then coming back to him to answer the question when he feels

ready so that he does not feel “on the spot”.

James may also benefit from using cloze sentences, sentence starters, or sentence frames

when participating in word retrieval contexts. This can help James reduce the number of oral

repetitions and time fillers to help him develop more fluent oral speaking. James can also be

supported with phonetic cues when he is struggling to retrieve a known word. For example, if he

is attempting to ask “May I go to the bathroom?” but is struggling to retrieve the word, he can

be used with the beginning sound of ‘bathroom’, /b/, to help him retrieve the word.

When the retrieval word is not known, it is recommended that James be supported by

reducing the frustration he may feel. Avoiding interruptions and using slower rates of speaking

may be successful strategies in these contexts. As James demonstrates both iconic and frustration

gestures, it is recommended that James be supported by asking questions to elicit the unknown

word he is trying to retrieve. For example, one can ask “is it something you use to write?” or “is

it something you use to color?” if James is gesturing writing. James may benefit from using a dry

erase board or notebook to draw the word he is describing as well.

6

James may also benefit from repeated exposures to texts, vocabulary, and instructional

concepts. Allowing him multiple opportunities to experience and use specific words may help

James retrieve them when he attempts to use them in single or discourse contexts. As James is

still developing his reading skills, he may benefit from illustrated word choices when

participating in class discussions to help him retrieve words specific to instructional activities or

concepts.

7

Word Finding Assessment Checklist

8

Sources

Overton Speech & Language Center – Word-Retrieval. (2010). Retrieved from

http://www.overtonspeech.net/WordFinding.html

Word Finding Difficulties. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.wordfinding.com/index.html

1

Word Finding Project

National Louis University, SPE 502

Sample B

2

Explanation of Findings

The observation and checklist were completed on an 11-year-old girl we will call “Susan” who

has a primary diagnosis of autism and a secondary diagnosis of Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD).

She is slightly below grade-level and is receiving instructional support as needed per her IEP.

After observing and filling out checklist, the results determined that this student demonstrates s

single word and discourse profile. Susan has a good understanding of spoken language and the social

context in which to use specific words (German). Due to her solid understanding, a check in the “yes”

column was given for question 2. However, she does struggle to remember names of people, places, and

objects (German). When she misremembers, she tends to substitute by vaguely saying “you know” or “the

thing”. This results in a check “yes” on numbers 3, 4d. 5, and 6 on the checklist. The student often confuses

her teachers and/or substitutes their names for mom or dad. A “yes” checkmark was also given form 7.

While observing she said, “wait mom can you hand me the marker?” when addressing the lead teacher.

After the student spoke, she knew that was incorrect, but couldn’t remember the teachers name quick

enough to fix her mistake. When trying to fix her mistake she stumbled over her words and said “umm,

no mom, no dad, no, whatever your name is”. While trying to fix her mistakes, she uses fillers which

resulted in a check mark “yes” for question 11 and 9. Although the student makes mistakes or has a lengthy

delay when addressing others, she can self-correct (question 6). Due to the student’s secondary diagnosis

of ODD, she tends to get extremely angry and argumentative. When she is in these moods, she uses hand

gestures to show her frustration, such as balling her fist or erecting her middle finger towards anyone in

her general direction. This resulted in a check “yes” for number 10. The checklist and observations have

shown that further assessments and interventions need to be pursued.

Conclusion and Recommendation

3

Individuals who struggle with single word retrieval context have difficulties retrieving specific

words and responding to questions that require retrieval of specific facts (German, n.d.). Specific facts

include nouns, verbs, adjectives, dates, and numbers. Although the individual may struggle with specific

words and fact retrieval, they know the information. This student falls into the language pattern of unique

response substitution. The student frequently partakes in semantically related substitution. This means the

student substitutes words that are related to the target word in meaning or words that co-occur with each

other (German, n.d.). The student also has a difficult time using specific words when requesting materials.

Since the student had yes checkmarks for 1, 2, 3, 4d, 5. 6. 8, 9, 10, and 11. According to Dr. German’s

Word Finding Referral Checklist Interpretations, Susan is exhibiting a single word and discourse profile.

Since this was a Word Finding screening, further assessments need to be performed. The Test of

Adolescent/Adult Word Finding (TAWF) is recommended for completion. This test is best suited for the

student based on her age and certain “yes” check marks. The Test of Word Finding in Discourse (TWFD)

is also recommended since she demonstrated both profiles. In addition to the further evaluation, there are

some things that can be done during peer interactions to help the student during instructional time. When

the student is speaking and struggling to find the word she is looking for, certain classroom ques can be

beneficial. The instructor can ask the student to describe the object she is thinking about. Another easy

way to promote the student’s language is to present the first syllable. For example, if the student says,

“can I have that thing?”, the teacher can say “do you mean the Mar” for marker. This will give the student

the beginning of the word in hope that it activates the word in their memory. Another easy tool for teachers

to use when talking with a student who struggles with single word retrieval is gesturing. Gesturing to the

object the student is trying to think of will allow them to take responsibility of coming up with the word

on their own. In Special Education we tend to move very fast and want automatic responses. When

working with a student who has single word retrieval difficulties, we tend to say, “do you mean ___” and

give them the answer instead of waiting for the student to come up with it on their own. Assessing the

4 student further using the TAWF will help provide a deeper understanding of the student’s single word

profile. In the meantime, the student and teachers should use the intervention strategies provided in this

report. Teachers working with the student will be taking data on which intervention strategies work and

which do not. Once more data and results are gathered, we will have a clearer understanding of the

student’s single word and discourse profile.

5

Appendix

6

Resources

German, D. (n.d.). Differential Diagnosis and Word Finding Intervention. Word Finding Difficulties. Retrieved from: http://www.wordfinding.com/index.html

Goldschmid, L., Singerman-Berman, B., Telzak, C. (2011). Word Retrieval and Its Impact on Learning. [PDF]. Retrieved from: https://www.mamkschools.org/uploaded/teaching_and_learning/Word_Retrieval_Document.pdf