Promoting Literacy Development for English Learners Learning in English: A Case for Explicit Instruction

1
Promoting Literacy Development for English
Learners Learning in English A Case for Explicit
Instruction

• Diane Haager, Ph.D.
• Michelle Windmueller, Ph.D.
• California State University, Los Angeles

2

• Reading First and other state and federal reading
  initiatives call for scientifically based
  reading research to guide reading instruction.
  It is difficult to argue with the notion of
  putting research-validated practices into place.
• However, what of these practices are validated
  for EL students? What evidence do we have to
  guide beginning reading instruction for ELs?

3
To walk into a classroom exhibiting
scientifically based reading research, one would
expect to see

• ? Activities to develop students phonological
  awareness
• ? Systematic explicit instruction in phonetic
  decoding strategies and spelling
• ? Activities that build fluency in both word
  reading and reading of connected text
• ? Explicit introduction of strategies for text
  comprehension
• ? A variety of vocabulary building activities
• Are these practices validated for ELs?

4

• School personnel are challenged to find effective
  methods for schooling EL students, particularly
  if bilingual instruction is not an option, due to
  the lack of bilingual teachers or policy mandates
  limiting native language instruction. The
  knowledge base regarding effective reading
  instruction for ELs is incomplete, fragmented and
  fraught with philosophical and policy-oriented
  discourse.

5

• A recent report by the National Academy of
  Sciences concluded that the best venue for
  reducing disproportionate representation in both
  special education and gifted education programs
  is improvement in the core elements of classroom
  instruction in the early grades (Donovan Cross,
  2002).
• This report makes a strong recommendation for
  research and development to carry promising
  practices and validated practices through to
  classroom applicability (p. 382) including
  research on educational improvement,
  particularly in schools with large numbers of
  children from low-income families (p. 383).

6
Purpose

• What are early predictors of reading achievement
  for EL students?
• What are critical classroom reading practices for
  EL students?
• How do we implement systematic reading
  intervention to prevent reading failure and
  disproportionate representation?

7
Predictive Studies
8
Predictors for Native English Speakers

• Phonological Awareness
• Rapid Automatized Naming
• Letter Naming
• Colors, digits, pictures
• Letter-sound recognition
• How do these predict later reading for ELs?

9
Kindergarten Predictors (Oh, Haager
Windmueller, submitted)

• Predictors of nonsense word reading at end of K
• Letter Naming Fluency (Fall r .32 Wtr r .49)
• Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (Wtr r .36)
• Word Use Fluency (Fall r .19 Wtr r .21)
• What happens to these predictors in a regression
  model?
• See path model, next slide.

10
(No Transcript)
11
First Grade Predictors (Dingle, 2001)

• What language and reading variables predict end
  of 1st grade Oral Reading Fluency?
• LNF, NWF signficant direct and indirect effects
  PSF significant, but less powerful than LNF and
  NWF
• Home Oral Language, Primary Language Ability
  small, significant effect
• English Language level direct and indirect effects

12
First to Third Grade Predictors (Windmueller,
2004)

• Complex web of relationships among language,
  reading, writing and demographic variables
• NWF Fall of 1st grade, ORF mid-1st grade were
  best predictors of end of 3rd grade
• Gender and attendance had direct effects on
  reading and language variables at different
  points in time
• LNF predicted 2nd grade reading and 3rd grade
  oral language
• PSF predicted 3rd grade writing directly and
  indirectly (through 2nd grade NWF)

13
(No Transcript)
14
Defining Teacher Quality Observation Studies of
EL Reading Instruction
15
Defining Effective Beginning Reading Instruction
from Observation Studies

• Series of observational studies in first grade
  classrooms where gt50 of students were ELs
  (Gersten, Baker, Haager, Graves, Goldenberg,
  Dingle)
• Instructional quality measured by English
  Language Learner Classroom Observation
  Instrument, developed by research team.
• Reading gains measured by DIBELS, additional
  comprehension measure

16
Six Clusters of Observed Teaching Practices

• Correlations Between Subscales of Observation
  Instrument and Composite Reading Scores
• Subscale Correlation
• 1. Explicit Teaching/ Art of Teaching .62
• 2. Instruction Geared Toward Low Performers .65
• 3. Sheltered English Techniques .49
• 4. Interactive Teaching .57
• 5. Vocabulary Development .51
• Phonemic Awareness and Decoding .63
• All correlations significant, moderate to strong

17
Explicit Teaching/ Art of Teaching

• ? Models skills and strategies
• ? Makes relationships overt
• ? Emphasizes distinctive features of new concepts
• ? Provides prompts
• Length of literacy activities is appropriate
• Adjusts own use of English during lesson

18
Instruction Geared Toward Low Performers

• ? Achieves high level of response accuracy
• ? Ensures quality of independent practice
• ? Engages in ongoing monitoring of student
  understanding and performance
• ? Elicits responses from all students
• ? Modifies instruction for students as needed
• ? Provides extra instruction, practice and review
• ? Asks questions to ensure comprehension

19
Phonemic Awareness and Decoding

• ? Provides systematic instruction in phonemic
  awareness
• ? Provides systematic instruction in letter-sound
  correspondence
• ? Provides systematic instruction in decoding

20
Interactive Teaching

• ? Secures and maintains student attention during
  lesson
• ? Extent to which students are on task during
  literacy activities
• Selects and incorporates students responses,
  ideas, examples and experiences into lesson
• Gives students wait time to respond to questions

21
Vocabulary Development

• ? Teaches difficult vocabulary prior to and
  during lesson
• ? Structures opportunities to speak English
• Provides systematic instruction to vocabulary
  development
• Engages students in meaningful interactions about
  text

22
Sheltered English Techniques

• ? Uses visuals or manipulatives to teach content
• ? Provides explicit instruction in English
• Encourages students to give elaborate responses
• Uses gestures and facial expressions in teaching
  vocabulary and clarifying

23
High-Gain v. Low-Gain Classrooms

• Significant difference on all subscales, except
  Sheltered English Techniques, with high-gain
  teachers receiving higher quality ratings
• To make significant reading gains, EL students
  need for their teachers to be using effective
  instructional techniques in all six areas

24
Qualitative Descriptors of High-Gain Classrooms

• Teachers integrated vocabulary and language
  fluidly, spontaneously and explicitly throughout
  instruction
• Teachers stopped to explain and demonstrate
  vocabulary critical to the lesson or story
• Teachers also taught basic words that a typical
  first grader would not need explicit instruction
  for e.g. above and below

25
Qualitative Descriptors of High-Gain Classrooms

• Teachers integrated writing instruction into
  reading lessons
• Teachers used writing instruction to
• reinforce vocabulary
• Reinforce language concepts
• Practice spelling and decoding concepts
• Teachers were adept at keeping students engaged
  and focused

26
Implementing Reading Intervention for Struggling
EL Readers
27
PLUS Promoting Literacy in Urban SchoolsHaager
Windmueller

• A response to intervention approach to
  eligibility determination for special education
  identifies students as having a LD learning
  disability if their academic performances in
  relevant areas i.e., reading do not change in
  response to a validated intervention implemented
  with integrity (Gresham, 2002, p. 480-81).

28
Three Tiers of Reading Intervention
Tier 3 Special Education
Project PLUS
Tier 2 Classroom Intervention
Tier 1 Primary Instruction
29
Project Goal Sustainability

• Because schools and districts are constantly
  juggling budget constraints, we felt it would be
  more sustainable if we could design a model that
  could be implemented with low cost, using
  existing personnel to provide intervention.
• Therefore, we provided extensive professional
  development to school administrators, general
  education teachers, and special education
  teachers. PLUS provides a second tier of reading
  intervention for these schools, where
  intervention is provided by classroom teachers
  within the context of general education reading
  instruction. At this time, Tier Three is provided
  by special education personnel.

30
Lessons Learned

• Implementation is the critical element to
  success. If this is not done well, the initiative
  will drop by the wayside.
• Administrator support
• Extensive PD
• Competing mandates
• Value of ongoing systematic assessment
• Importance of ongoing, collaborative grade level
  meetings

31
Recommendations

1. Focus on the Big Ideas of reading, providing
   systematic, explicit instruction in key areas.
2. Integrate English language development with basic
   reading instruction.
3. Develop tiered reading intervention models in
   schools serving EL students.