Diversity Development: Promoting Early Literacy Skills of ELLs

1. Diversity & Development: Promoting Early Literacy Skills of ELLs Nonie K. Lesaux, PhD Reading First Conference Sturbridge, MA August 16-17, 2006

2. Outline

3. America�s Kindergartners

4. Freshman Statistics

6. Three Pressing Issues 1. Expanding our notion of ELL -size of population -language backgrounds 2. Expanding our notion of Early Intervention 3. Expanding our notion of vocabulary

7. Native Language Background

8. Who is a Language Minority Learner? No single operational definition of ELL No universal classification criteria Significant proportion of children from homes where a language other than English is spoken are not classified as ELL Individuals from homes where a language other than English is actively used limited English proficiency, bilingual or even monolingual in English.

10. Literacy Rates Americans in international reading assessments: 4th graders among the top-scoring students internationally 8th graders score in the middle of the pack 12th graders third from the bottom In urban high-poverty schools, the majority of incoming 9th graders read at or below 7th grade level. Nationally, less than a quarter of Latino and less than a fifth of African-American adolescents can read and understand complex academic text.

11. Context for Instruction Development of literacy skills and successful reading ability begins long before children enter school Ability to prevent reading difficulties by focusing on the early years Language development and experience with print Vocabulary knowledge in kindergarten is a significant predictor of reading comprehension in middle and secondary school

14. First Grade 78% (n=53) of sample still had English vocabulary scores 2 or more standard deviations below the mean at first grade.

15. English Vocabulary (Pre-K, Kindergarten, First grade) Low Vocabulary group: 55.58, 58.66, 63.96 Full Sample: 70.56, 72.75, 78.48English Vocabulary (Pre-K, Kindergarten, First grade) Low Vocabulary group: 55.58, 58.66, 63.96 Full Sample: 70.56, 72.75, 78.48

16. Word reading - English (Pre-K, Kindergarten, First grade) Low Vocabulary group: 86.23, 89.71, 95.69 Full Sample: 91.2, 95.4, 104.39Word reading - English (Pre-K, Kindergarten, First grade) Low Vocabulary group: 86.23, 89.71, 95.69 Full Sample: 91.2, 95.4, 104.39

17. Chart showing gains/declines in from Grades 4-5 in various measures of word reading, oral language, and comprehension: Accuracy, Decoding, Automaticity, Expressive Vocab , Receptive, Listening Comprehension, Passage Comprehension 4th grade: 100.91, 101.2 1, 10.91, 77.62, 82.01, 80.22, 0, 97 5th grade: 103.52, 104.79, 101.32, 82.58, 85.89, 85.72, 0, 95.22Chart showing gains/declines in from Grades 4-5 in various measures of word reading, oral language, and comprehension: Accuracy, Decoding, Automaticity, Expressive Vocab , Receptive, Listening Comprehension, Passage Comprehension 4th grade: 100.91, 101.2 1, 10.91, 77.62, 82.01, 80.22, 0, 97 5th grade: 103.52, 104.79, 101.32, 82.58, 85.89, 85.72, 0, 95.22

18. Chart showing that students score at the 15.97 percentiles on the Gates MacGinitie Comprehension Assessment in Grade 5.Chart showing that students score at the 15.97 percentiles on the Gates MacGinitie Comprehension Assessment in Grade 5.

19. The Role of Vocabulary in Reading Comprehension Robust relationship between vocabulary and comprehension: 1. When father heard that Lisa had ripped up the letter from Steve, father commended her for it. 2. The mother made him get out and he ran off. 3. Directions. Make and record three observations.

20. Current Body of Research Lack of converging lines of evidence of the developmental trajectories of literacy Implications for expectations, developing instructional methods No consensus about circumstances under which learning best happens Contextual and demographic information missing Paradox of research findings and achievement

21. Children from Diverse Backgrounds Low socioeconomic status further compounds the challenges of learning to read in a language in which they are not proficient. Difficult to disentangle the risk associated with poverty from the risk associated with limited proficiency. Neighborhoods and schools

22. Why Early Literacy Screening? For Children self-esteem reading development For Schools less intervention decreased learning assistance time For Society school dropout, unemployment, antisocial and criminal behaviour.

25. Firm FoundationsEarly Literacy Teaching and Learning Circle Time

26. Firm FoundationsEarly Literacy Teaching and Learning Circle Time

27. Firm FoundationsEarly Literacy Teaching and Learning Centre Time

28. Firm FoundationsEarly Literacy Teaching and Learning Performance Assessment

29. Firm FoundationsEarly Literacy Teaching and Learning Home & School Intense Guided Play

30. Firm FoundationsEarly Literacy Teaching and Learning Screening Assessment

31. Firm FoundationsEarly Literacy Teaching and Learning Intense Intervention

32. The Development of Reading 5 year longitudinal study North Vancouver, BC October, 1997 (Kindergarten) 30 schools 197 ESL and 1040 L1 speakers Varying SES Firm Foundations Early Literacy Curriculum

33. Grade 4 Longitudinal Sample

34. Languages in the Study Arabic Armenian Bulgarian Chinese Croatian Czech Dutch English Farsi Finnish French German Greek Hindi Hungarian Indonesian Italian Jakartin Japanese Korean Kurdish Norwegian Polish Punjabi Romanian Russian Serbian Slovak Spanish Swedish Tagalog Tamil Turkish

38. Lesaux & Siegel, 2003 Pie chart 1 shows percent distribution of level of risk of L1 Speakers in Kindergarten: At-risk (22.60%), Not at-risk (73.60%), Borderline (0.038) Pie chart 2 shows percent distribution of level of risk of ESL Speakers in Kindergarten: At-risk (30.45 %), Not at-risk (50.76%), Borderline (0.1879) Pie chart 3 shows percent distribution of level of risk of L1 Speakers in Grade 4: Poor reader (3.57%), Typical reader (94.65%), Borderline (1.78%) Pie chart 4 shows percent distribution of level of risk of ESL Speakers in Grade 4: Poor reader (3.79%), Typical reader (93.18%), Borderline (3.03%)Pie chart 1 shows percent distribution of level of risk of L1 Speakers in Kindergarten: At-risk (22.60%), Not at-risk (73.60%), Borderline (0.038) Pie chart 2 shows percent distribution of level of risk of ESL Speakers in Kindergarten: At-risk (30.45 %), Not at-risk (50.76%), Borderline (0.1879) Pie chart 3 shows percent distribution of level of risk of L1 Speakers in Grade 4: Poor reader (3.57%), Typical reader (94.65%), Borderline (1.78%) Pie chart 4 shows percent distribution of level of risk of ESL Speakers in Grade 4: Poor reader (3.79%), Typical reader (93.18%), Borderline (3.03%)

39. Lesaux & Siegel, 2003 Measures of reading on the following assessments: WRAT reading, WJ word identification, WJ word attack, respectively. All measures expressed in mean percentiles. English typical reader: 75.53, 80.16, 77.15 ESL typical reader: 78.73, 83.86, 81.88 Poor reader: 18.5, 26.07, 29.66 Measures of reading on the following assessments: WRAT reading, WJ word identification, WJ word attack, respectively. All measures expressed in mean percentiles. English typical reader: 75.53, 80.16, 77.15 ESL typical reader: 78.73, 83.86, 81.88 Poor reader: 18.5, 26.07, 29.66

40. Measures of reading comprehension on Stanford reading comprehension test All measures expressed in mean percentiles. English typical reader: 50.66 ESL typical reader: 47.74 Poor reader: 23.08Measures of reading comprehension on Stanford reading comprehension test All measures expressed in mean percentiles. English typical reader: 50.66 ESL typical reader: 47.74 Poor reader: 23.08

41. Syntactic Awareness Measures of syntactic awareness as measured on Oral Cloze: Chinese (6.53), Japanese (7.3), Tagalog (7.36), Farsi (7.57), Spanish (8.08), English (L1) (8.12), Slavic (8.57)Measures of syntactic awareness as measured on Oral Cloze: Chinese (6.53), Japanese (7.3), Tagalog (7.36), Farsi (7.57), Spanish (8.08), English (L1) (8.12), Slavic (8.57)

42. Implications of 5-Year Study ESL students and reading acquisition Achievement Identification Intervention Emphasis on oral language & phonological awareness Reading readiness and acquisition Decreased reading difficulties

43. Global Strategies Previewing and pre-reading strategies Repetition and routine Extending language Use of media Cooperative learning For ELLs: visuals, gestures, and promoting/working with first language

44. Vocabulary Emphasize the words over time and in different contexts Multiple exposures to build depth of knowledge Use stories as contexts for vocabulary learning Questioning, predictions, summary and reflections To the extent possible, choose readings containing only a limited number of new words. Readings should be considered comprehensible input i.e. at or just slightly above the student�s present level.

45. Selecting books At, or slightly below, ability level Ratio of new: known words Alliteration, rhyme, repetition Informational, concrete experiences Build background knowledge Relevant content Considers supports and scaffolds in the home Parents, older siblings

46. Second Language Acquisition: Addressing Misconceptions Age differences Learning situation; time on task Localization vs. levels of learning Amount of language Demands of the environment Teaching methods Pronunciation/Accent

47. Lack of Exposure vs. Disorder Questions to consider Length and intensity of exposure Characteristics of native language Opportunities to learn Individual factors Schooling experience Social-emotional factors Assessment tools

48. Implications to consider� Great majority of learners from diverse backgrounds�including language minority learners �are not receiving any special support Sources of low achievement not limited to disability Opportunities to learn and instruction for all students a pressing issue Early intervention, beyond word reading, efforts a pressing issue oral language and vocabulary

49. Nonie K. Lesaux, PhD Harvard Graduate School of Education lesauxno@gse.harvard.edu