A student with mild language delays struggles to sequence events in stories. After instruction using first, next, and last and reteaching with the words placed in separate paragraphs, the student responds correctly. The initial challenge could have been because the student:

A student with mild language delays struggles to sequence events in stories. After instruction using first, next, and last and reteaching with the words placed in separate paragraphs, the student responds correctly. The initial challenge could have been because the student:

• A. Did not comprehend the story the first time it was read
• B. Needed additional support to understand the concept
• C. Preferred that the story have different elements and an alternate ending
• D. Could not understand

Answer: (B)

The skill being tested is how students organize and sequence information from text, and how targeted supports can help if a sequencing challenge is the barrier. When the student was taught to use explicit sequencing words—first, next, and last—and then had the content reinforced by placing those words in separate paragraphs, their ability to reproduce the sequence improved. That pattern shows the difficulty was with the sequencing concept itself and with holding and arranging events in order, not with understanding the story’s meaning overall. The instruction provided the scaffolds needed to map the events step by step, reducing linguistic and working-memory load so the sequence could be clearer and more manageably practiced. Once those supports were in place, the student could demonstrate correct sequencing, which indicates the underlying issue was the need for additional support to understand the sequencing concept. Why the other possibilities don’t fit as well: a difficulty in comprehending the story the first time would likely persist even after explicit sequencing practice, because it would reflect a broader comprehension struggle rather than a targeted sequencing skill. A preference for alternate endings or different elements doesn’t address the ability to order events, which is the core skill being measured here. Finally, “could not understand” is too vague and doesn’t capture the specific difficulty with sequencing that improved with structured, explicit instruction.

The skill being tested is how students organize and sequence information from text, and how targeted supports can help if a sequencing challenge is the barrier. When the student was taught to use explicit sequencing words—first, next, and last—and then had the content reinforced by placing those words in separate paragraphs, their ability to reproduce the sequence improved. That pattern shows the difficulty was with the sequencing concept itself and with holding and arranging events in order, not with understanding the story’s meaning overall. The instruction provided the scaffolds needed to map the events step by step, reducing linguistic and working-memory load so the sequence could be clearer and more manageably practiced. Once those supports were in place, the student could demonstrate correct sequencing, which indicates the underlying issue was the need for additional support to understand the sequencing concept.

Why the other possibilities don’t fit as well: a difficulty in comprehending the story the first time would likely persist even after explicit sequencing practice, because it would reflect a broader comprehension struggle rather than a targeted sequencing skill. A preference for alternate endings or different elements doesn’t address the ability to order events, which is the core skill being measured here. Finally, “could not understand” is too vague and doesn’t capture the specific difficulty with sequencing that improved with structured, explicit instruction.