# data[].attributes.headline
What are some evidence-based practices for teaching phonemic awareness to English learners?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are some evidence-based practices for teaching phonemic awareness to English learners?

# data[].attributes.headline
What is the process and purpose of reading?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is the process and purpose of reading?

# data[].attributes.headline
What role do morphology and contextual analysis have on vocabulary development?

# data[].attributes.subject
What role do morphology and contextual analysis have on vocabulary development?

# data[].attributes.headline
How can an English Learner’s home language be utilized to support and strengthen the development of foundational phonics in English?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can an English Learner’s home language be utilized to support and strengthen the development of foundational phonics in English?

# data[].attributes.headline
What is your understanding of the necessary components for effective comprehension, including well-developed language, multiple higher-order thinking processes, and self-correction?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is your understanding of the necessary components for effective comprehension, including well-developed language, multiple higher-order thinking processes, and self-correction?

# data[].attributes.headline
How can evidence-based best practices be utilized to improve comprehension in English learners, including those with reading difficulties and dyslexia?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can evidence-based best practices be utilized to improve comprehension in English learners, including those with reading difficulties and dyslexia?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Reading is making meaning from print. It requires that we do the following:

Identify the words in print: a process called word recognition

Construct an understanding from them: a process called comprehension

Coordinate identifying words and making meaning so that reading is automatic and accurate: an achievement called fluency

Sometimes you can make meaning from print without being able to identify all the words. Remember the last time you got a note in messy handwriting? You may have understood it, even though you couldn't decipher all the scribbles.

Sometimes you can identify words without being able to construct much meaning from them. Read the opening lines of Lewis Carroll's poem, "Jabberwocky," and you'll see what I mean.

'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

Finally, sometimes you can identify words and comprehend them, but if the processes don't come together smoothly, reading will still be a labored process. For example, try reading the following sentence:

It isn't as if the words
are difficult to identify or
understand, but the spaces
make you pause between
words, which means your
reading is less fluent.

Reading in its fullest sense involves weaving together word recognition and comprehension in a fluent manner. These three processes are complex, and each is important. How complex? Here goes?

To develop word recognition, children need to learn:

How to break apart and manipulate the sounds in words - this is phonemic awareness
example: feet has three sounds: /f/, /e/, and /t/

Certain letters are used to represent certain sounds - this is the alphabetic principle
example: s and h make the /sh/ sound

How to apply their knowledge of letter-sound relationships to sound out words that are new to them - this is
example: ssssspppoooon - spoon!

How to analyze words and spelling patterns in order to become more efficient at reading words - this is
example: Bookworm has two words I know: book and worm.

To expand the number of words they can identify automatically, called their sight vocabulary
example: Oh, I know that word - the!

To develop comprehension, children need to develop:

Background knowledge about many topics
example: This book is about zoos - that's where lots of animals live.

Extensive oral and print vocabularies
example: Look at my trucks - I have a tractor, and a fire engine, and a bulldozer.

Understandings about how the English language works
example: We say she went home, not she goed home.

Understandings about how print works
example: reading goes from left to right

Knowledge of various kinds of texts
example: I bet they live happily ever after.

Various purposes for reading
example: I want to know what ladybugs eat.

Strategies for constructing meaning from text, and for problem solving when meaning breaks down
example: This isn't making sense. Let me go back and reread it.

To develop fluency, children need to:

Develop a high level of accuracy in word recognition

Maintain a rate of reading brisk enough to facilitate comprehension

Use phrasing and expression so that oral reading sounds like speech

Transform deliberate strategies for word recognition and comprehension into automatic skills

But if reading isn't pleasurable or fulfilling, children won't choose to read, and they won't get the practice they need to become fluent readers.

Therefore, reading also means developing and maintaining the motivation to read. Reading is an active process of constructing meaning. The key word here is active.

To develop and maintain the motivation to read, children need to:

Appreciate the pleasures of reading

View reading as a social act, to be shared with others

See reading as an opportunity to explore their interests

Read widely for a variety of purposes, from enjoyment to gathering information

Become comfortable with a variety of different written forms and genres

So ... what is reading?
Reading is the motivated and fluent coordination of word recognition and comprehension.
Quite an achievement for a six year old!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Reading is a multifaceted process involving word recognition, comprehension, fluency, and motivation. Learn how readers integrate these facets to make meaning from print.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We all know that reading is, or should be, an important part of our lives. Whether we read to learn, to relax, or simply because we want to take advantage of the many benefits of reading for our health, one thing is clear: understanding the purpose of reading could be a lot more complicated than we might expect.

Here at Basmo, we are completely dedicated to helping you improve your reading experience, enhance your performance, and ultimately, give you the proper tools to stay motivated to read more. Part of what motivates us, in general, is understanding why we do certain things.

In this case, answering the question " What is the purpose of reading? " could help us not only grasp its importance but also find the inner strength to keep doing it.

What Is the Main Purpose of Reading?

The purpose of reading books might differ from one person to another. As much as I would like to provide you with a clear answer to this question, unfortunately, a lot of other smarter and better-prepared people before me have tried with no success.

There are several schools of thought when it comes to identifying the one main purpose of devouring books and other reading material. For some, the importance of reading and its purpose could be summarized as the process of acquiring information, gathering general or specialized knowledge, and improving comprehension.

For others, reading is mainly a tool to develop cognitive skills, improve communication skills, develop better imagination, and enhance levels of empathy. Since reading comprehension can have a huge impact on a series of aspects of our intellect, from enhanced vocabulary to gaining a deeper understanding of the world around us, it's easy to understand why for so many the most important and relevant purpose for reading is to be a means to an end for personal growth.

Last but not least, there is no denying the fact that reading is, for many of us, a form of entertainment, a stress-relief tool, or simply a way to pass the time.

To conclude, reading is a very complex activity, and it comes with enough benefits to make finding its true purpose virtually impossible. Ultimately, the main purpose for reading differs from one reader to another and that is perfectly fine.

We all have different perspectives and that is what makes life so beautiful. The purpose of reading can be whatever you find to be the most important thing you earn every time you open a book and let yourself be immersed in its pages.

What Are Other Purposes of Reading?

Regardless of the actual purpose for reading you consider as being the most relevant to you, one thing you need to make sure of is to understand what other purposes of reading are there. Reading can be done with a lot of intentions, and whether you're engaging in active reading or just skimming some written material, there is a different motivation that can guide you through this activity.

1. Reading for Research

Reading is an important instrument for gathering information on a specific topic, analyzing and finding gaps in our current knowledge to add new ideas. Reading for research helps us develop a better understanding of a particular topic, it can aid in our efforts to connect different ideas from different sources and provides us with an invaluable tool to synthesize data, comprehend it, and retain it for future use.

2. Reading to Integrate Information

Reading allows us to synthesize and connect ideas from various sources, fostering our ability to think critically and create a comprehensive understanding of complex topics that are of interest to us.

This process is crucial not only for actually acquiring information and processing it through our own filters, but also plays a role in developing our ability for problem-solving, decision-making, and making well-informed opinions.

3. Reading to Write

Reading is an invaluable tool when it comes to improving writing skills. Putting out ideas in our own words is sometimes more complicated than it sounds. Through reading, we get to enrich our vocabulary, which makes finding the right words to use a lot easier.

On top of this, reading forces us to explore diverse writing styles, enables us to discover new techniques, and teaches us to better structure our writing in a manner that aids the efficiency of the way we communicate our ideas.

Ultimately, reading will inevitably help you become a better writer.

4. Reading to Learn

Reading is a fundamental tool that aids us in the process of gathering information about a certain topic or acquiring general knowledge. Nowadays, we can gain information in a series of other ways, but reading remains the most prevalent and efficient technique.

Whether we learn for academic success or simply to develop our knowledge in certain topics, reading will help us grow and stay informed in the fields that are of interest to us.

5. Reading to Critique

Especially through active reading, we engage actively with the content we are reading through. And on top of comprehension and retention, there is one more aspect of reading that makes it a very internal and personal process.

Reading encourages us to form our own opinions. We can evaluate the ideas we are presented with by the author, as well as the way these ideas were presented by the writer.

Through this process of analyzing and critiquing the things we read, we develop our critical thinking skills, refine or expand our own perspectives, and we get to challenge ideas or assumptions.

6. Reading to Unwind

There should come as no surprise for any of us that for many, the purpose of reading is to simply unwind after a long day. Reading is a very efficient stress-relief tool and can help us relax without the need for any other additional techniques.

Reading pushes us to engage with fictional worlds and characters, allows us to explore the things that are of interest to us, and gives us a mental break and a way to escape our daily stressors.

7. Reading for Personal Growth

Whether we want to improve reading comprehension, enhance vocabulary or simply become better writers, reading is an amazing tool for personal growth.

It can provide us with important information regarding the exact skills we are looking to improve, or it can facilitate self-reflection and self-improvement through a huge range of techniques.

Reading allows us to gain a deeper understanding and intriguing insights into other cultures, exposes us to different philosophies, and helps us become more mindful and self-aware.

Ultimately, this makes us more empathetic and boosts our emotional intelligence, while also promoting our self-growth by improving the way we relate to others.

8. Reading for Social Connection

Last but not least, another common reading purpose is as simple as pure social connection. Reading can provide us with common ground, giving us simply something to talk about with others.

Meeting like-minded people who enjoy reading the same books we love can allow us to share opinions, expand on our own ideas, and discuss the experience of reading with others.

Whether you decide to join a book club or you simply discuss your favorite books with close friends or family members, reading is definitely an activity that can bring us closer to others and promotes or even facilitates some pretty satisfying discussions.

How to Achieve Your Reading Purpose With Basmo?

Regardless of what your purpose is, you can improve both your experience and the efficiency of your reading sessions with Basmo, the ultimate reading-tracking app. Here's how it can help you achieve your goals and take full advantage of what reading can do for you.

Basmo allows you to set goals. Regardless of your deeper purpose, it's always a good idea to set clear goals for your reading. This helps you stay motivated and pushes you to progress as a reader. Reading opens our minds whether we are learning or simply doing it for fun, but having clear goals makes the process a lot more rewarding. With Basmo, you can set different kinds of goals to meet your exact needs.

Final Thoughts

What makes reading important might differ from one person to another. What our individual purposes are whenever we decide to open a book might be something else for each of us and we may never find a universal purpose for reading. But what really matters is to keep on reading, improving ourselves as much as possible, and using reading as a tool to help us become the absolute best version of ourselves. Try Basmo and see how easy, fun, and rewarding it is!

Image by vectorjuice on Freepik

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Is the Purpose of Reading and Why Does It Matter? - Basmo

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Discover the Purpose of Reading - for personal/professional growth, cognitive development, and empathy. Learn more here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Purpose and Process of Reading | Management Study HQ

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Before actually beginning to read, it is important to know the purpose and process of reading. Knowing the purpose greatly enhances the effectiveness of the reading.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Ready4K® - Evidence-Based Family Engagement

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I recently got into a debate about learning languages with a fellow educator. As an ELL teacher, my friend had worked with students who spoke a huge variety of home languages - Urdu, Spanish, Mandarin, French, Russian, Hindi, and Bengali, just to name a few. Our conversation centered on the question of which language was most complex to learn, as a first or as a second language.

After dueling over the intricacies of sentence structure, pronunciation, and verb conjugation, we arrived at the topic of vocabulary development. Our debate morphed into curiosity, and we ended up researching the alphabet and the total count of words estimated in each of the top three languages spoken in the world today (according to Berlitz). Here's what we learned:

1. English is estimated to have over 1 million words made using 26 letters (though the average dictionary only contains around 400,000 defined entries.)

2. Mandarin uses about 7,000 characters to create 106,230 words.

3. In Hindi, writers have access to over 1.5 lakh (i.e. 150,000 words) using 48 letters, but only if they're using the Devanāgarī alphabet - Brahmi is a bit different.

Though we still have differing opinions about language complexity, my friend and I did agree on one thing: our students' vocabulary development is essential for their future success in school and the world beyond.

Vocabulary development and its impact on literacy

Let's take a closer look at the intricacies of vocabulary development and its impact on a student's reading skills like decoding and other core abilities!

What do educators mean by "vocabulary"?

Put simply, when we educators talk about a student's vocabulary, we are referring to the words they know and can use accurately to communicate. There are four types of vocabulary that children build as they grow:

Listening vocabulary, which refers to the words a child needs to know to understand what they hear

Speaking vocabulary, or the words a child uses when talking

Reading vocabulary, also known as the words a child needs to know to understand what they are reading

Writing vocabulary, which refers to the words a child uses in writing

Each plays an important role in vocabulary development overall. They also have positive effects in building early reading skills and more, too.

What's the nature of vocabulary acquisition and growth?

Language is a foundation for literacy, so it's not surprising that vocabulary development in children starts at the same time as their oral language development, beginning as early as 10 months of age. There are two types of language that children build in these early years. Expressive language refers to the use of words, sentences, gestures, and writing to convey meaning to others. Receptive language refers to understanding words and language around a child, though not necessarily using them.

Both expressive vocabulary and receptive vocabulary are important for children to communicate effectively. They also play an essential role in vocabulary development and other areas of literacy, such as phonetic skills, later in that child's life. Individual differences in children's early language skills can be affected by a number of factors, too, like home environment and socio-economic status. When combined, these can contribute to or reduce the risk of a vocabulary gap developing between kids by the time they reach age 2 ( Attig & Weinert, 2020).

This method of learning has been studied by researchers for decades, helping educators understand why a language-rich environment matters for early vocabulary development in young children ( Hansen & Broekhuizen, 2020). Educators and families both can make meaningful differences in individual children's literacy when they help them build both expressive vocabulary and receptive vocabulary early on.

How do teachers teach vocabulary?

In addition to exposing children to a wide range of words in multiple ways, educators can - and should - also explicitly teach vocabulary to individual children to build their knowledge of words and expand their ability to communicate in multiple ways. More specifically, effective and explicit vocabulary instruction should "[bring] students' attentional focus to words in ways that promote not just knowing word meanings, but also understanding how words work and how to utilize word knowledge effectively" ( McKeown, 2019).

Here's how one teacher describes her approach to vocabulary instruction in the classroom:

"My daily Language Arts classroom routine begins with silent independent reading (indirect). We continue on with the direct instruction of the day's two new vocabulary words and then on to the literary analysis [of reading material] and/or writing tasks of the day... No matter what, vocabulary instruction is paramount."Vocab Gal

Because of the nature of vocabulary acquisition, teachers have a huge variety of ways they can teach students new words and their meanings from context or more explicitly. These include, but are not limited to:

Using semantic mapping, where words are visually displayed with connections linking to related words or concepts

Repeatedly exposing students to words across multiple contexts, such as seeing them on a poster board in class, hearing them spoken by their teacher, and reading them in different texts

Teaching students specific word analysis strategies that help students break apart a word into recognizable parts to help them practice saying it and understanding it in context

Creating a visual reference for a word, like a picture or even a visual dictionary, to pair with print vocabulary and help students understand its meaning from context

For more methods driving vocabulary development in school, take a look at WeAreTeachers' list of activities for kids across grades K-12.

How can teachers assess vocabulary growth? Do "vocabulary scores" exist?

Vocabulary growth and knowledge is highly nuanced, which makes any measure of vocabulary equality nuanced. In their article published with Reading Rockets, Katherine Stahl and Marco Bravo share that US educators often assess vocabulary development in American children "at the end of a unit using a multiple-choice task, a fill-in-the-blank task or matching task." There are other generalized tools available to teachers as a measure of vocabulary, such as the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test or other standardized tests that might vary by state.

In short, there are a number of tools available that may serve as a measure of vocabulary, but no single method is the way to assess this knowledge. What's clear, though, is that becoming a strong, confident reader means much more than having specific vocabulary scores or other measures of word knowledge.

Continue reading Stahl and Bravo's article to explore the nuances of vocabulary assessments further.

What impact does learning vocabulary have on reading?

A student's development of vocabulary isn't just about learning a new language, independent reading, or improving crossword puzzle skills - though it certainly helps! Vocabulary is a core factor that contributes to a child's overall literacy and reading competency, both of which help children thrive academically, socially, and emotionally.

As the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education explains, "To learn to read, children must develop both fluent word reading and language comprehension ( Gough & Tunmer, 1986). Language comprehension encompasses vocabulary and morphology, knowledge, syntax, and higher-level language skills."

It's worth noting that each of these factors of literacy come from a body of scientific literature known as the science of reading. Though commonly misunderstood as a specific curriculum or type of instruction, the science of reading really refers to what research tells us about reading development and things like the nature of vocabulary acquisition.

In their 2015 study, Duff, Tomblin, and Catts found meaningful differences in vocabulary growth between students, impacted by a student's reading ability. A student's rate of vocabulary growth after 4th grade was significantly related to that student's word reading in the 4th grade. As the authors described it, "Strong readers [in 4th grade] experienced a higher rate of vocabulary growth than did average readers."

This effect on vocabulary growth rates matters hugely for vocabulary development - especially for the 25 million American children who struggle with reading and English language learners who may need up to 14 exposures to a word and its meaning in order to fully learn it.

It's essential to understand that vocabulary development isn't just critical for toddlers or school-age children. Yes, little ones are especially good at absorbing new information about the world around them, sponging up things like words and their meanings. And yes, the number of words in a student's vocabulary in kindergarten can affect the expansiveness of their 10th-grade vocabulary.

However, vocabulary development also continues well into adulthood. In their 2022 examination of longitudinal studies on adult vocabulary, Gitit Kavé found that in general vocabulary scores and knowledge increases across one's life all the way up to and through their mid-60s. While there is much to be studied about the precise nature of vocabulary acquisition in adulthood, it's clear that learning new words and gaining exposure to them benefits students long after they leave the classroom.

The role of families in building a strong vocabulary

And... vocabulary development in school can be positively impacted by vocabulary development at home, and vice versa!

Parents, caregivers, and guardians play an essential role in their children's language development across all ages, from fundamentals like phonetic skills to more complex knowledge like academic vocabulary. Families also possess immense wealth of knowledge about that child's use of language at home and out in the community. This information can be crucial for an educator to guide that student's vocabulary growth. Further, for multilingual learners especially, effective family engagement strategies are especially powerful in helping them improve their knowledge of the English language.

When school staff employ a strengths-based approach to partnership, they unlock amazing support for student vocabulary development that complements formal reading instruction. If you're familiar at all with ParentPowered and our ParentPowered curricula, our enthusiasm for getting families involved in vocabulary development shouldn't be a surprise!

High-impact family engagement is at the heart of everything that we build. This emphasis on strong family-school partnerships stems from research long indicating the benefits that engaged families offer to school communities. Among these benefits are improved reading scores, increased attendance rates, and increased graduation rates - just to name a few.

In the end, families contribute greatly to student literacy, and especially vocabulary development. It takes the adults both at school and at home to create strong readers with expansive vocabularies.

Expanding vocabulary development at home, from birth to adolescence

Across all grade levels, families have the opportunity to positively influence students' level of vocabulary knowledge. We've compiled a list of family activities geared towards building reading, writing, listening, and oral vocabulary with kids, from birth to adolescence. Share them with your community today, or continue exploring more examples of family engagement activities at home!

Infancy & early childhood

In the first months of a child's life, they develop their earliest speech and language skills that will later support learning vocabulary as they get older. A variety of factors can influence this early learning and rates of vocabulary growth, for better or worse. In fact, longitudinal studies have shown that the effects of socio-economics are evident in children at just 18 months of age ( Fernald, Marchman & Weisleder, 2013).

Insights like this underscore the essential role of families in vocabulary development - and the need for educators and community organizations to support all families equitably in that role. After all, equity in education is critical for student success at any age.

Here is a family-friendly and equitable activity from ParentPowered curricula to support infants with early language development:

For more insights about early language and speech development, take a look at key milestones by age outlined by Stanford Children's Health.

PreK & Kindergarten

As children approach their first day of formal schooling, their vocabulary development shifts into a higher gear. Children's total vocabulary expands rapidly between ages 4 to 6, with students acquiring an average of 70 new words and their meanings per month!

Research also shows that children's vocabulary during these years is closely connected with their development of comprehension skills later in elementary school, so it is essential for families to continue nurturing word recognition, usage, and exposure.

Share this activity from our ParentPowered programs with your PreK families to expand kids' vocabularies and set them up for successful reading in the future:

Did you know? ParentPowered has a series of family workshops for families and kids alike! These videos guide students to explore and practice critical academic and life skills, including learning new words. Share these and more clips from The Big Fancy Word Lady with your PreK and kindergarten families!

Elementary school

Students continue expanding their vocabularies throughout elementary school, combining this knowledge with greater maturity as they also develop their comprehension skills, fluency, and more abilities that contribute to reading.

While classroom activities often apply explicit approaches to build vocabulary, teachers also use subtle ways, such like reading out loud. As one elementary school teacher puts it, "The key to 'real-life-like' vocabulary instruction is not to force it...what's more crucial to ongoing vocabulary development is modeling when and how to be inquisitive about words."

Outside of the classroom, families can also foster students' curiosity through exposure to new words, their meanings in context, and their use in language. Most recommendations emphasize the importance of creating a language-rich environment around their children, which research suggests boosts not only children's vocabulary in kindergarten but also later in elementary school ( Walker et al, 1994). But "language-rich" doesn't just mean having more books or other resources around a student at home. Elementary school families can nurture vocabulary development without needing extra time, tools, or expertise.

Your upper elementary school families will love this ParentPowered activity geared towards helping 4th-grade students explore new words:

For more family-friendly ways to support elementary school vocabulary growth, take a look at this list of activities from Upper Elementary Snapshots.

Middle & high school (aka adolescence)

Between the ages of 6 and 12, just before adolescence, an average student has grown their total vocabulary knowledge from about 20,000 words to over 50,000! That rate of word acquisition is the fastest in a student's learning life thus far. But vocabulary development in school doesn't stop here - and neither does a family's role in building these skills.

Research indicates that ongoing growth of vocabulary is essential for middle school students' literacy needs ( Harmon, 2000), as larger vocabularies allow students to dive deeper into learning in other subject areas. But vocabulary development can be challenging for adolescents who already struggle with reading. A lack of word knowledge also disrupts both reading comprehension and fluency in reading, two critical literacy skills at any grade level.

It's also important to recognize that high school and middle school family engagement look quite different from that of elementary school. Rather than take a direct approach to support student learning, families can make a greater impact in adolescents' learning through indirect approaches like academic socialization and supporting social-emotional development.

This activity is one of our favorite ways to encourage adolescent family engagement and boost vocabulary and reading development in students at home:

Many classroom-based activities can also be adapted to the home environment. Take a look at Professor William P. Bintz' exploration of middle school vocabulary instruction, or explore these activities shared by teachers from the field. For both middle and high school activities, this guide to vocabulary development in secondary grades is a helpful starting point.

Expanded vocabulary unlocks expanded potential

"There's a power in words. There's a power in being able to explain and describe and articulate what you know and feel and believe about the world, and about yourself."Tracy Chapman

A student's words hold immense potential and influence in their learning journey. Developing and expanding their vocabulary knowledge becomes essential to empower each and every child to become a self-sufficient, compassionate, and collaborative adult in the world.

When educators and families come together with this mission in mind, they create a continuous and supportive learning community around a student that catalyzes their growth. In such an environment, students can navigate any challenge - whether it's learning multiple languages, solving a crossword puzzle, or changing the world!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
4 Vocabulary Development Activities for Families at All Ages

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Vocabulary development is essential for reading and writing. Discover how ParentPowered helps families boost students' word knowledge!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Danger of a Single Story: "Novelist Chimamanda Adichie ... warns that if we hear only a single story about another person or country, we risk a critical misunderstanding." In addition to our biases and misunderstandings, it is also important to recognize how we can send hidden messages to our students by the content we select, what and who we use as examples, language we use or don't use, etc.

A Class Divided: "The day after Martin Luther King, Jr. was killed, Jane Elliott, a teacher in a small, all-white Iowa town, divided her third-grade class into blue-eyed and brown-eyed groups and gave them a daring lesson in discrimination. This is the story of that lesson, its lasting impact on the children, and its enduring power 30 years later ( original clips along with supplemental resources).​"
​

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
english language learners teaching strategies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Effective teaching strategies for English Language Learners in K-12 classes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Reading, whether for work, study or leisure, our librarians have collated a list of benefits from increasing your vocab to reducing stress and more.

# data[].attributes.body
E

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Research Based-Reading Strategies for Teaching Phonemic Awareness

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Is Comprehension? The Five Components of Reading

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Is Comprehension? The Five Components of Reading

# data[].attributes.body
By using these evidence based practices you are using methods that will help the students learn reading skills and comprehension. Students with dyslexia and other reading difficulties will be able to understand the phonics of the English language better leading to more successful reading and writing.

# data[].attributes.body
meghan settles

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A recent blog post by Tim Shanahan titled "What should morphology instruction look like?" reminded me how important it is to teach students about word parts (i.e., roots, prefixes, suffixes) as a useful tool for determining the meaning of unfamiliar words and growing academic vocabularies.

One of the five components of our Key Vocabulary Routine is Teach Word Learning Strategies, which includes how to look for clues outside the word (use of context) and inside the word (use of word parts) when encountering an unknown word while reading. Outside clues include rereading the sentences before and after the word and using the context of the text. Inside clues come from recognizing meaningful parts of the word, i.e., using morphological knowledge.
Morphemes and Morphological Awareness
Morphemes are the smallest units of meaning in a language. The dictionary defines a morpheme as "a word or part of a word that has a meaning and that contains no smaller part that has a meaning." Morphemes include base words and roots, prefixes, and suffixes. They can be combined in different ways to express particular meaning or to fill grammatical roles. Some morphemes are free - they can stand alone (e.g., cat, walk, govern). Other morphemes are bound - they cannot stand alone and must be attached to another morpheme (e.g., re-, un-, geo, phon, -ed, -ment). Here are some examples:

The word cat contains one free morpheme

The word cats contains one free morpheme (cat) and one bound morphemes (s)

The compound word sandbox contains two free morphemes (sand, box)

The word unfit contains one bound morpheme (un) and one free morpheme (fit)

The word transportable contains three bound morphemes (trans, port, able)

Morphology means the study of word parts, and morphological awareness refers to the ability to recognize the presence of morphemes in words. Research suggests that students can be taught various morphemic elements as a way to determine the meaning of new words (Edwards et al., 2004). Carlisle (2010) analyzed 16 studies about the relation of morphological awareness instruction to key components of literacy development. The findings showed that instruction about word parts was associated with improvements in word reading and spelling, and in determining the meaning of unfamiliar words.
Academic, School Morphemes
Academic vocabulary that must be learned beyond grade three often consists of words that combine a root, prefix, and suffix (e.g., poly + nom + ial = polynomial; manu + script = manuscript). In the upper elementary grades and higher, there are many opportunities to find words in content reading that contain Greek and Latin morphemes. Children in primary grades can begin to learn how morphemes combine by adding common prefixes and suffixes to short Anglo-Saxon words and also compounding them. For example:

jump, jumps, jumped, jumping, jumper

read, reread, reader, nonreader, reading

sunshine, schoolhouse, upstream

There are some limitations to morphemic analysis. Although it is useful, teachers must also make students aware that it doesn't always work. This is because some prefixes are not consistent in meaning (e.g., in- means both not and in). It is also because the meaning of many Greek and Latin roots have changed substantially over hundreds of years, so they no longer lend themselves to literal translation. For example, the literal translation of circumspect should be look around ( circum means around, spect means look), while the real meaning is to be cautious, careful.
Introducing Morphology
One way to introduce word analysis skills is to teach students how words are made up of word parts, and how words can be related in word families, such as the word family below for the Latin root port (to carry).

Keys to Literacy trainers often see examples of teachers using word families when we visit classrooms. Here are some examples:

Another instructional strategy is to have students build word families by providing a main root and then prefixes and suffixes that can be combined with the root to generate words. Word Matrix boxes such as the examples below can be used for this purpose. For more examples, visit Peter Bowers' website
convoy, envoy, convoys, envoys, convoying, convoyed, voyage, voyages, voyaging, voyaged, voyager, voyagers retake, retakes, retaken, retaking, untaken, mistake, mistakes, mistakable, mistakably, mistaken, mistakenly, mistaking, intake, intakes, overtake, overtakes, overtaken, overtaking, undertake, undertakes, undertaker, undertaken, undertaking, undertakings, uptake, uptakes, breathtaking, caretaker, caretaking, takes, taker, taken, taking, takeaway, takeover Teaching Morphology
Here are two additional suggestions from our Key Vocabulary Routine professional development program:

Find opportunistic moments: Often, unplanned moments come up during content instruction to provide examples of word analysis. Words from content vocabulary lists may include common word parts, or an opportunity to make a connection between the root of a new word and a word previously covered in class may arise. Content teachers in particular are in a position to point out examples of words that contain roots, prefixes, and suffixes from content reading material.

School-wide focus: Most of the general academic words that students need to learn are derived words with word parts. A school-wide approach to teaching academic vocabulary involves teachers from different grades and subjects agreeing to focus on a few root words and their associated word families each week or two.

A 2015 piece posted by the Institute for Multi-Sensory Education's blog suggests these strategies for teaching morphology in the classroom based on research by Dr. Nonie Lesaux:

1. Morphology should be taught as a distinct component of a vocabulary improvement program throughout the upper elementary years.

2. Morphology should be taught as a cognitive strategy to be learned. In order to break a word down into morphemes, students must complete the following four steps:

Recognize that they don't know the word.

Analyze the word for recognizable morphemes, both in the roots and suffixes.

Think of a possible meaning based upon the parts of the word.

Check the meaning of the word against the context.

Students also need to understand the use of prefixes, suffixes, and roots, and how words get transformed.
Lists of Roots, Prefixes, Suffixes
There is a significant body of research indicating that instruction of prefixes is beneficial, and many vocabulary researchers recommend instruction of the most common prefixes as the first and best component of word analysis (Graves, 2004; Carlisle, 2007). White, Sowell, and Yanagihara (1989) found that 20 prefixes account for almost 97% of the 2,959 prefixed words that most frequently appear in school reading materials. Given how often these 20 prefixes occur, it makes sense to teach their meaning and use. To access a free list of these prefixes, visit the Keys to Literacy free resources page at our website, and go to the Vocabulary section. You will also find free lists of the following:

Common Numerical Prefixes

Common and Useful Suffixes

Common Greek and Latin Roots

References:
Carlisle, J.F. (2010). Effects of instruction on morphological awareness on literacy achievement: An integrative review. Reading Research Quarterly, 45 (4) 464-487.

Carlisle, J.F. (2007). Fostering morphological processing, vocabulary development, and reading comprehension. In R.K. Wagner, A.E., Muse, & K.R. Tannenbaum (Eds.). Vocabulary acquisition: Implications for reading comprehension. New York: Guilford Press.

Edwards, C.E., Font, G., Baumann, J.F., & Boland, E. (2004). Unlocking word meanings: Strategies and guidelines for teaching morphemic and contextual analysis. In James, R. Baumann & Edward J. Kame/ennui (Eds.). Vocabulary instruction: Research to practice. New York: Guilford Press.

Graves, M.F. (2004). Teaching prefixes: As good as it gets? In James, R. Baumann & Edward J. Kame/ennui (Eds.). Vocabulary instruction: Research to practice. New York: Guilford Press.

White, T.G., Sowell, J., & Yanagihara, A. (1989). Teaching elementary students to use word-part clues. The Reading Teacher, 42.

Joan Sedita

Joan Sedita is the founder of Keys to Literacy and author of the Keys to Literacy professional development programs. She is an experienced educator, nationally recognized speaker and teacher trainer. She has worked for over 35 years in the literacy education field and has presented to thousands of teachers and related professionals at schools, colleges, clinics, and professional conferences.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Using Morphology to Teach Vocabulary - Keys to Literacy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Suggestions for teaching vocabulary by analyzing word parts.

# data[].attributes.body
Meghan Settles

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Using Contextual Analysis to evaluate texts

A contextual analysis is simply an analysis of a text (in whatever medium, including multi-media) that helps us to assess that text within the context of its historical and cultural setting, but also in terms of its textuality - or the qualities that characterize the text as a text. A contextual analysis combines features of formal analysis with features of "cultural archeology, " or the systematic study of social, political, economic, philosophical, religious, and aesthetic conditions that were (or can be assumed to have been) in place at the time and place when the text was created. While this may sound complicated, it is in reality deceptively simple: it means "situating" the text within the milieu of its times and assessing the roles of author, readers (intended and actual), and "commentators" (critics, both professional and otherwise) in the reception of the text.

A contextual analysis can proceed along many lines, depending upon how complex one wishes to make the analysis. But it generally includes several key questions:

1. What does the text reveal about itself as a text?

- Describe (or characterize) the language ( the words, or vocabulary) and the rhetoric (how the words are arranged in order to achieve some purpose). These are the primary components of style.

2. What does the text tell us about its apparent intended audience(s)?

- What sort of reader does the author seem to have envisioned, as demonstrated by the text's language and rhetoric?
- What sort of qualifications does the text appear to require of its intended reader(s)? How can we tell?
- What sort of readers appear to be excluded from the text's intended audiences? How can we tell?
- Is there, perhaps, more than one intended audience?

3. What seems to have been the author's intention? Why did the author write this text? And why did the author write this text in this particular way, as opposed to other ways in which the text might have been written?

- Remember that any text is the result of deliberate decisions by the author. The author has chosen to write (or paint, or whatever) with these particular words and has therefore chosen not to use other words that she or he might have used. So we need to consider:
- what the author said (the words that have been selected);
- what the author did not say (the words that were not selected); and
- how the author said it (as opposed to other ways it might or could have been said).

4. What is the occasion for this text? That is, is it written in response to:

- some particular, specific contemporary incident or event?
- some more "general" observation by the author about human affairs and/or experiences?
- some definable set of cultural circumstances?

5. Is the text intended as some sort of call to - or for - action?

- If so, by whom? And why?
- And also if so, what action(s) does the author want the reader(s) to take?

6. Is the text intended rather as some sort of call to - or for - reflection or consideration rather than direct action?

- If so, what does the author seem to wish the reader to think about and to conclude or decide?
- Why does the author wish the readers to do this? What is to be gained, and by whom?

7. Can we identify any non-textual circumstances that affected the creation and reception of the text?

- Such circumstances include historical or political events, economic factors, cultural practices, and intellectual or aesthtic issues, as well as the particular circumstances of the author's own life.

Stephen C. Behrendt - Spring 2008

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A contextual analysis is simply an analysis of a text (in whatever medium, including multi-media) that helps us to assess that text within the context of its historical and cultural setting, but also in terms of its textuality – or the qualities that characterize the text as a text. A contextual analysis combines features of formal analysis with features of “cultural archeology, ” or the systematic study of social, political, economic, philosophical, religious, and aesthetic conditions that were (or can be assumed to have been) in place at the time and place when the text was created. While this may sound complicated, it is in reality deceptively simple: it means “situating” the text within the milieu of its times and assessing the roles of author, readers (intended and actual), and “commentators” (critics, both professional and otherwise) in the reception of the text.

# data[].attributes.body
meghan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Skills for Early Reading: Phonological Awareness - Evidence Based Early Literacy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The goal of the Massachusetts public K-12 education system is to prepare all students for success after high school. Massachusetts public school students are leading the nation in reading and math and are at the top internationally in reading, science, and math according to the national NAEP and international PISA assessments.

# data[].attributes.body
meghan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
12 Effective Strategies for Teaching Phonemic Awareness - My Teaching Cupboard

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Looking for the most effective strategies for teaching phonemic awareness? If you want your students to reach their reading benchmarks and have success learning to read and write, you need to know the latest Science of Reading research and use it to effectively teach phonemic awareness to your kids.

# data[].attributes.body
meghan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Learning to read is a complicated process. If you teach English language learners (ELLs), however, there are a number of ways you can support their literacy and language development through targeted instruction.

This article highlights ELL instructional strategies based on the five components of reading as outlined in Teaching Children to Read by the National Reading Panel (2000). This report is a study of research-based best practices in reading instruction and it focuses on the following five instructional areas: Phonemic Awareness, Phonics, Vocabulary, Fluency, Comprehension. In addition, the article includes information related to two additional important areas of instruction for ELLs, oral language and the role of the home language.

Each of these topics is explored below, and each section includes:

a definition

an explanation of why the component is important when learning to read

challenges that ELLs may face

strategies for ELL instruction

You will find references to more in-depth information about ELLs and effective reading instruction from recommended resources below.

Note: Since this article includes in-depth information on a number of topics, we encourage you to use it in professional learning communities, jigsaw activities, and other collaborative settings!

What does the research say?

Before jumping in, it's important to note that, in general, what we know about effective literacy instruction for English speakers holds true for ELLs, but modifications and adjustments may be needed (Goldenberg, 2008). Since the original National Reading Panel did not include ELLs' literacy development as part of its research review, a subsequent panel reviewed the research related to language learners and released a report authored by principal investigator Dr. Diane August and panel chair Dr. Timothy Shanahan titled Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth.

Within the executive summary of that report, the authors note that, "Instruction that provides substantial coverage in the key components of reading - identified by the National Reading Panel (NICHD, 2000) as phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension - has clear benefits for language-minority students." They continue, "However, while approaches that are similar to those used with native-language populations are effective, the research suggests that adjustments to these approaches are needed to have maximum benefit with language-minority students." (p. 3)

For example, many practices may need modifications or scaffolds which may not be reflected in different reading programs or materials (August, 2018; Goldenberg, 2008), and in some cases, certain strategies may not be appropriate even with adjustments. In addition, the authors note the important role of two areas that were not addressed in the original National Reading Panel: students' home language and oral language.

Many examples of specific modifications are outlined in the strategies below, along with discussion of home language and oral language. You can find additional research resources at the end of the article, including a recent working paper published by Pivot Learning, Narrowing Down to Find Common Ground: Shared Agreements for Effective Literacy Instruction in California.

An in-depth video book study highlighting Literacy Foundations for English Learners by Dr. Elsa Cárdenas-Hagan is also publicly available on YouTube.

When working with ELLs, students' home languages are a powerful tool that educators can use - even if they don't speak those languages or are working in a classroom with students who speak many languages. Drs. August and Shanahan write, "Oral proficiency and literacy in the first language can be used to facilitate literacy development in English" (2006, p. 5). And in hisColorín Colorado article about the value of students' home language, Dr. Fred Genesee writes:

Extensive research, again from around the world, has found that children who are learning to read in a second language are able to transfer many skills and knowledge from their first language to facilitate their acquisition of reading skills in the second language. The best evidence of this comes from studies showing that students with strong reading skills in the home language also have strong reading skills in their second language. Much of this work has been done on ELLs in the U.S. (August & Shanahan, 2006; Riches & Genesee, 2006).

Tapping into students' home languages (also referred to as a first or native language) as a resource can take different forms:

Helping students make connections between their language and English in order to identify similarities and differences, such as English/Spanish cognates

Providing opportunities to use the home language in the classroom for reading, writing, and discussion

Encouraging students to draw on all of their language skills across languages, which is called translanguaging

Promoting biliteracy through bilingual or dual-language instruction, which can support students' future opportunities and family ties (not to mention brain health!), with initiatives such as the Seal of Biliteracy, which has been adopted in many states

It is important to keep in mind that the extent to which a student's literacy skills from their first language transfer depends on many factors, such as how similar the alphabetic systems between the two languages are and whether they share any connection in their origins, such as two languages that both derive from Latin (Nieser & Cárdenas-Hagan, 2020, p. 65). The students' levels of literacy in their home language will also have an impact on their literacy development in their new language. Learning more about the languages students speak can help educators target instruction, notice patterns among speakers of the same language, and help students understand the relationship between their language and English

You can also provide students and families with access to bilingual books and texts and encourage families to continue using and developing the home language through activities such as rhymes, storytelling, and conversation at home. You will also find specific strategies related to home language throughout the key components below.

Recommended resources

In addition, as you will see below, oral language has a role to play across all reading skills, yet it often does not receive much attention as a critical part of ELLs' language and literacy development. Drs. August and Shanahan write, "Instruction in the key components of reading is necessary - but not sufficient - for teaching language-minority students to read and write proficiently in English. Oral proficiency in English is critical as well - but student performance suggests that it is often overlooked in instruction." (2006, p. 5)

Oral language supports students' literacy skills in different ways. For example, students need to be familiar not only with the sounds and letters they are learning but also the words in which they appear in order to support their word recognition and comprehension. Other more global oral language skills, such as facility with English syntax and grammar, and the ability to navigate specific language functions like describing, predicting, and comparing, also contribute to both reading and writing development for ELLs.

In addition, strengthening oral language supports students' ability to participate in peer groups and their proficiency in speaking and writing using academic language. Students need opportunities to practice applying their emerging oral language skills through partner talk and peer work (scaffolded with supports such as sentence frames), activities such as partner reading, and responding to comprehension questions using academic language.

Dr. Carrie Simkin, the director of our sister site AdLit.org, offers the following suggestions related to oral language:

Make it a learning target for lesson planning (e.g. be intentional about planning for it).

Consider how much of the learning time in your classroom is text based vs. discussion. Do students have opportunities to discuss ideas or do they mostly respond in written formats? We want to engage students in lively discussions!

Consider if students have opportunities to work in pairs as well as small groups and not just respond to teacher-generated questions.

Have you modeled how to orally respond to questions using the question as a sentence starter? Do you have sentence starters visible for share-outs?

Our strategies related to oral language are also woven throughout the components below.

Recommended resources

Note: You can read more about the role of oral language in the foreword of Comprehension and English Language Learners.

Phonemic Awareness and ELLs

Keeping the areas of home language and oral language in mind, let's dive into the five key skill areas, starting with phonemic awareness.

Phonemic awareness is an important indicator of how well children will learn to read. Sometimes it is difficult, however, for speakers of a second language to "hear" and say sounds in the language they are learning. If you have had a student who could not master a particular sound in English, the sound may not have been a part of the student's native language.

In her chapter of Literacy Foundations for English Learners, Dr. Virginia Lovelace-Gonzalez notes that, "Phonological awareness skills can transfer across languages when students have opportunities to build these skills in their native language and English" (2020, p. 53).

For example, there are multiple sounds in English and Spanish that will directly transfer between languages, even if the sounds are associated with different letters (p. 50). Dr. Lovelace-Gonzalez writes, "For ELs, phonemic activities in English can be complicated by having to recognize sounds in English that do not exist in their native language...Instructionally, it is important for teachers to determine some of the similarities and differences between English and the student's native language to ensure the opportunity to learn" (p. 53).

Phonemic Awareness: Considerations and Strategies

What: The ability to hear and manipulate the different sounds in our language.

Why it matters: Phonemic awareness is the foundation for spelling and word recognition skills.

Considerations for ELLs

Learn more about the students' home languages.

Start by visiting a resource such as MyLanguages.org or Omniglot.com, which shares an overview of many different global languages.

Ask bilingual colleagues about how their languages are similar or different from English and common areas that need attention when learning English. For example, a group of Ukrainian teachers shared some of the questions that Ukrainian speakers have when learning English in this Colorín Colorado article.

Identify whether there are any sounds that your students' languages share with English. Use these as a starting point in your instruction. In addition, find out which sounds might be new to your students and be sure to include explicit practice of those sounds.

Help students think about the connection between their language and English.

Ask students how their language is the same or different than English in terms of how the language is written, the sounds that letters or symbols make, and words that might be related.

Help students become familiar with sounds, letters, and symbols that are shared between languages, as well as those that are not shared between the languages. (Some examples across different languages are included in Literacy Foundations for English Learners.)

Ask students if they have words that begin with a particular sound, or if there are any words related to a particular word in English. This can work with students who have limited literacy skills in their first language too.

Help beginning readers learn to identify sounds in short words.

Have students practice identifying the sounds in the beginning, middle, and end of these words. You may wish to use words that begin with a consonant, have a short vowel, and end in a consonant (CVC words) such as mat, top, and bus.

One very effective method is having students match pictures of words that have the same beginning, middle, or ending sound.

Use words that students already know in English.

Videos

Learn how to pronounce the 44 phonemes in English.

Phonics and ELLs

Phonics instruction aims to help new readers understand that there are systematic and predictable relationships between written letters and spoken sounds. Students benefit from learning and practicing sounds and symbols, including blended combinations. ELLs often show many strengths in mastering early phonics skills but it's important to remember that decoding while reading and correctly spelling words does not ensure good comprehension.

That's why it's important to ensure that ELLs are familiar with the words they are learning to decode in order to support their comprehension. The authors of Words Their Way with English Learners write, "English learners need structured opportunities to learn many new words to add to their repertoires so that these words can become the material of their literacy learning" (2011, p. 79).

Phonics: Considerations and Strategies

Considerations for ELLs

Use a word study approach.

Word study is a powerful approach that connects letters, sound, meaning, word parts, and usage so that students are learning explicit foundational skills within a meaningful context. For example, ELLs need lots of opportunities to connect the sounds, letters, and words they are learning.

The authors of Words Their Way with English Learners write, "What is key to literacy development for English learners in the emergent stage is that they use language with teachers and peers and see oral language they understand captured in print" (Helman et al, 2011).

Look for opportunities to reinforce phonics in context.

Using literature and content material, you can introduce and reinforce:

letter recognition

beginning and ending sounds

blends

rhyming words

silent letters

homonyms

Vocabulary and ELLs

Vocabulary plays an important part in learning to read, as well as in understanding what is read.

As students learn to read more advanced texts, they must learn the meaning of new words that are not part of their oral vocabulary. For ELLs, vocabulary development is especially important as students' develop academic language - in all subjects and activities! There are numerous ways to support explicit vocabulary instruction, which is essential for developing students' vocabulary knowledge. Dr. Coleen D. Carlson writes,

For EL students, drawing attention to unknown words during the initial presentation of the text, providing appropriate levels of definitions (e.g., providing English labels for words for which concepts and labels in one's native language are understood, quick definitions or demonstrations for simple words) and tying to background knowledge is critical. No amount of simply reading and rereading words will produce knowledge of unknown vocabulary. (2020, p. 97)

Vocabulary: Considerations and Strategies

Considerations for ELLs

Draw upon students' home languages.

You can draw upon students' home languages to build vocabulary by:

It is important to give students as much exposure and experience with new vocabulary words as possible before asking students to use them in a lesson or activity.

Select words that will support the reader's understanding of the story or text, as well as for other phrases and connectors that affect comprehension (even though, except, etc.). You can pre-teach vocabulary by using English as a second language (ESL) methods such as:

Role playing or pantomiming

Using gestures

Showing real objects

Pointing to pictures

Doing quick drawings on the board

Using the equivalent in students' languages and then asking students to say the word in English

Providing a student-friendly definition

Using graphic organizers

Cognates are words in different languages that are derived from the same original word or root. About 40% of all English words have cognates in Spanish (such as the English/Spanish cognate "family/familia"). This is an obvious bridge to the English language for Spanish speakers if the student is made aware of how to use this resource.

Teach students to recognize and use cognates, or words that are related across languages, and encourage students to be on the lookout for cognates from other languages as well.

Give students an opportunity to practice using new words.

As the teacher, you can explicitly teach word meanings to improve comprehension. However, to know a word means knowing it in all of the following dimensions:

The ability to define a word

The ability to recognize when to use that word

Knowledge of its multiple meanings

The ability to decode and spell that word

The ability to use different definitions word accurately in different contexts

Ensure students understand a new word by asking them to produce it themselves either orally or in writing.

I taught a summer school unit on habitats and healthy environments, and every student had to learn the phrase, "Reduce, reuse, recycle." Over the course of four weeks I gave students many opportunities to use those words to describe what we were doing: "We are reusing the grocery bag," or "We reused the scratch paper."

Build students' academic vocabulary.

You can increase students' academic vocabulary by teaching common structures and terms used in a specific content area. For example, sentence frames are a great way to get students familiar with these structures and can be used in writing and speaking:

You can learn more strategies in this related article.

The _____ is ______ than the _____.

I can conclude ______ because _______.

Videos

ESOL Specialist Sheila Majdi: Using sentence frames with ELLs

ESOL specialist Sheila Majdi from Arlington, VA explains what a sentence frame is and how she might use this strategy with ELLs.

Interactive reading of a story

In this classroom clip, first-grade teacher Albuquerque teacher Ali Nava leads her students through an interactive reading of Burro's Tortillas, a Southwestern adaptation of "The Little Red Hen."

Focusing on language in literacy instruction

In this classroom clip, fifth-grade teacher Clara Gonzales-Espinoza helps her students expand their understanding of the way language is used in a picture book version of Cinderella.

Instruction of key academic vocabulary with high school ELLs

In this lesson, students read a letter that Captain John Smith of the English Army wrote to Queen Anne in 1616. You can see lesson materials and reflection interviews from ELL teacher Anne Formato in our related classroom module.

Fluency and ELLs

Fluency is a tricky area when it comes to ELL reading instruction. For native English speakers, fluency and reading comprehension often share a strong correlation because fluent readers recognize words and comprehend at the same time. This is not always the case for ELLs.

Many ELLs can be deceptively fast and accurate in their reading because they are good readers in their primary language and have strong decoding skills. Yet they may demonstrate little understanding of the text, and hearing the text out loud may not necessarily provide a step towards comprehension as it is likely to do for native speakers. One important factor in the connection between fluency and comprehension is ELLs' oral language skills, which Dr. Carlson describes as "an important foundation that supports the role of fluency as a bridge to comprehension" (p. 93).

Fluency: Considerations and Strategies

Inaccurate indicator of ELLs' comprehension

It is not unusual for an ELL student to read a passage beautifully and then not be able answer more than a couple of comprehension questions correctly. Decoding skills (sounding out words) and comprehending the text are two different skills.

Limited benefit from hearing texts read aloud

Native speakers who are not strong decoders can often comprehend text that is read to them better than text that they read themselves. That's because when someone else is doing the reading, they can focus on meaning without having to struggle to get the words off the page.

With ELLs, however, comprehension problems tend to be associated with limited vocabulary and limited background knowledge. Thus, listening to text read by someone else won't enhance comprehension.

Comprehension and ELLs

Comprehension is the understanding and interpretation of what is read. To be able to accurately understand written material, children need to be able to 1) decode what they read; 2) make connections between what they read and what they already know; and 3) think deeply about what they have read. Comprehension can be the most difficult skill to master, however, and can elude students who have mastered word-level skills. According to the executive summary of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth,

An important finding that emerges from the research is that word-level skills in literacy - such as decoding, word recognition and spelling - are often taught well enough to allow language-minority students to attain levels of performance equal to those of native English speakers. However, this is not the case for text-level skills - reading comprehension and writing. (p. 4)

ELLs at all levels of English proficiency, and literacy development, will benefit from explicit instruction in comprehension skills along with other skills because improved comprehension will not only help them in language arts and ESL classes - it will help them in content-area classes and in daily activities. It will also improve the chances of their interest in reading for pleasure.

Learn more from the following articles:

Comprehension: Considerations and Strategies

Considerations for ELLs

ELLs who struggle with comprehension may read more slowly, have a hard time following a text or story, have a hard time picking out important events, and feel frustrated. They may also have problems mastering new concepts in their content-area classes or completing assignments and assessments because they cannot comprehend the texts and tests for these subjects.

Check comprehension frequently.

As students read, ask them open-ended questions about what they are reading, and informally test students' ability to sequence material from sentences or a story by printing sentences from a section of the story on paper strips, mixing the strips or word order, and having students put them in order.

Use questions after reading.

After the ELLs and/or whole class have completed the reading, you can test their comprehension with carefully crafted questions, taking care to use simple sentences and key vocabulary from the text they just read.

These questions can be at the:

Videos

This video showcases a 5 th-grade team planning a science lesson about the difference between vascular and non-vascular plants. ESOL specialist Katy Padilla plays a key role in advocating for ELLs throughout the lesson planning process and sharing her strategies for engaging and supporting students.

Making Dual-Language Immersion Work

This video provides an introduction to Claremont Immersion School's dual language model and shows how teachers collaborating to develop a language arts language in English and Spanish.

Assessment for ELLs

Learn how third-grade teacher Samantha Kirch uses informal assessment in her classroom to better evaluate ELLs and their progress.

Story setup: Pre-reading strategies for comprehension

Learn about pre-reading strategies that will lay the groundwork before high school newcomer ELLs tackle a new text.

Teaching ELLs in upper elementary, middle school, and high school

Older ELLs bring a lot of valuable experience and interests to the classroom. At the same time, they face the double challenge of needing to learn content and a new language at the same time, which is further complicated if their literacy skills are limited. While they may still need foundational skills work, it can be hard to find materials that are age-appropriate. You can learn more about specific tips for supporting this diverse population from the following resources:

For great classroom videos at the secondary level, see our classroom video library!

Concluding Thoughts

This is a lot of information, but we hope that these resources and recommendations can inform your work with students as well as the conversations about literacy in your setting. The more familiar your team is with best practices for ELLs, the more effectively you can determine which practices and resources will best support your students in their ongoing literacy development - and future successes!

Recommend Resources

This new working paper released by Pivot Learning reflects collective consensus among literacy experts on key topics concerning (1) literacy and multilingual and English learner students; (2) early screening and assessment; and (3) foundational skills.

To learn more about the paper and how it was developed, see Can common ground be found on teaching reading in California? (EdSource)

Research articles and chapters

Books

Literacy Foundations for English Learners by Dr. Elsa Cárdenas-Hagan (You can see the related book study on YouTube.)

Words Their Way with English Learners: Word Study for Phonics, Vocabulary, and Spelling (2nd Ed.) by Dr. Lori Helman, Dr. Donald R. Bear, Dr. Shane Templeton, Dr. Marcia Invernizzi, and Dr. Francine Johnston

Literacy Instruction for English Language Learners by Dr. Nancy Cloud, Dr. Fred Genesee, and Dr. Else Hamayan

Dual Language Instruction from A to Z: Practical Guidance for Teachers and Administrators by Dr. Else Hamayan, Dr. Fred Genesee, and Dr. Nancy Cloud

Webcasts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reading 101 for English Language Learners

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learning to read is a complicated process. If you teach English language learners (ELLs), however, there are a number of ways you can support their literacy and language development through targeted instruction. This article highlights ELL instructional strategies based on the five components of reading as outlined in Teaching Children to Read by the National Reading Panel (2000).

# data[].attributes.body
meghan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
August, D., Hakuta, K. (1997). Improving schooling for language-minority children: A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Research Council.

Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement. (2001). Put reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read. The Partnership for Reading: National Institute for Literacy; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; and U.S. Department of Education.

Clay, M. (1993). Reading Recovery in English and other languages. Keynote address presented at the West Coast Literacy Conference, Palm Springs, CA.

Collier,V. & Thomas, W. (1992). A synthesis of studies examining long-term language minority student data on academic achievement. Bilingual Research Journal, 16(1-2), 187-212.

Cummins, J. (1989). Empowering minority students. Sacramento, CA: California Association for Bilingual Education.

Cummins, J. (1992). Language proficiency, bilingualism, and academic achievement. In P. A. Richard-Amato and M. A. Snow (Eds.), The multicultural classroom: Readings for content-area teachers. White Plains: Longman.

Escamilla, K. (1987). The relationship of native language reading achievement and oral English proficiency to future achievement in reading English as a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer-sity of California, Los Angeles.

Hiebert, E. H., Pearson, P.D., Taylor, B.M., Richardson, V., Paris, S.G. (1998). Every child a reader: Applying reading research to the classroom. Center for the Improvement of Earl Reading Achievement. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan School of Education.

International Reading Association. (2001). Summary of the National Reading Panel Report, "Teaching Children to Read." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Reading Association, Washington, DC, July 2001.

Moats, L.C. (1999). Teaching reading is rocket science: What expert teachers of reading should know and be able to do. Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers.

National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education (2002). Survey of the states' limited English proficient students and available educational programs and services, 1999-2001. Washington, DC: NCBE.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (2000a). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (2000b). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (NIH Publication No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

National Reading Panel (2001). "Frequently asked questions." [Online]. Available: http:// www.nationalreadingpanel.org/faq/faq.htm

New York State Education Department, Office of Bilingual Education. (2000). The teaching of language arts to limited English proficient/English language learners: A resource guide for all teachers. Albany, NY: Author.

Peregoy, S. F. & Boyle, O. F. (2000). English learners reading English: What we know, what we need to know. Theory into practice, 39(4), 237-247.

Ramirez, J.D. (2001). Bilingualism and literacy: Problem or opportunity? A synthesis of reading research on bilingual students. A Research Symposium on High Standards in Reading for Students in Diverse Language Groups: Research, Policy, and Practice. Washington, D.C.: Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs, U.S. Department of Education.

Rodriguez, A. (1988). Research in reading and writing in bilingual education and English as a second language. In A. Ambert (Ed.), Bilingual Education and English as a Second Language. New York: Garland Pub.

Snow, C., Burns, S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

U.S. Congress, No Child Left Behind Act (P.L. 107-110), 2001.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
English Language Learners and the Five Essential Components of Reading Instruction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find out how teachers can play to the strengths and shore up the weaknesses of English Language Learners in each of the Reading First content areas.

# data[].attributes.body
meghan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Reading is an astoundingly complex cognitive process. While we often think of reading as one singular act, our brains are actually engaging in a number of tasks

# data[].attributes.body
meghan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Add to favorites
By Kim R. Fitzer and James B. Hale
Is Reading Natural?

Reading is not a natural part of human development. Children do not automatically learn how to read and need to be taught to read. Statistics Canada (2009) reported that of all children with disabilities (ages 5 to 14), more than half (59.8%) have learning disabilities (LDs).

Most of these children have a disability in reading (89.6%) (Gabel, Gibson, Gruen, LoTurco, 2010; Semrud-Clikeman, Fine, & Harder, 2005). This may be due to the importance of reading in all academic areas, as studies suggest math and writing LDs are also very common (Shaywitz, 2007; Willis, 2008).

Word Attack Skills, Reading Decoding, and Reading Competency
Defining Terms

Phonological Awareness: skill at identifying and manipulating sounds.

Phonemic Awareness: understanding that words are made of sounds (44 English phonemes) that can be used to create new words.

Grapheme Awareness: understanding that symbols in reading (letters) correspond to sounds.

Early exposure to sounds and letters is critical, even before school begins (Richards, 2009; Tallal, 2012). Children must learn four things:

1. Awareness that speech is composed of the smallest meaningful units of sounds (phonemes);

2. Awareness that letters (graphemes) and word parts (morphemes) are visual language symbols;

3. Recognition that written letters represent the sounds (alphabetic principle);

4. Understanding that phonemes and morphemes can be manipulated (Segmenting and Blending).

A Common Problem Seen in Early Reading and Word Reading LDs

Children can memorize words by sight instead of developing word attack or reading decoding skills. This is a common problem in children who have reading LDs (Fiorello, Hale, & Snyder, 2006).

This memorizing strategy allows children to guess at most words in the early grades from the initial letter or whole word configuration (shape of word) and still achieve average scores on most reading tests. What they often struggled with is pseudoword reading tasks (e.g., read the words belped, fralt, nockess). Although these children may not be identified with a reading LD, because of their average scores in early grades, later in elementary school they may have significant reading problems (Berninger et al., 2000; Hale et al., 2008).

Why would that lead to reading problems later in school?

In kindergarten, children are exposed to words that are easily memorized, because there aren't that many of them. However, as the lexicon expands dramatically through elementary school - with approximately 2000 to 3000 new words learned each year (Biemeller, 2003) - this visual memorizing strategy becomes less effective.

These same children cannot memorize enough words over time, and so their word reading and reading comprehension decline with age (Shaywitz, 2003). A child has to decode harder words not visually recognized to link the words to lexical-semantic word memory and their definitions (Biemeller, 2003).

What should parents and teachers do?

It is important to build word attack skills and good understanding of phoneme-grapheme correspondence throughout the early grades (Ramus et al, 2003; Shaywitz et al., 1999). Parents and teachers should watch for children who often guess at words or skip words they don't know. These children will often read much quicker during silent reading (because of the guessing/skipping strategy) and try to avoid oral reading. Comprehension too may be better during silent reading because they are able to "fill in the gaps" when they miss a word, and still understand what they read.

The Neuropsychology of Word Reading

There are many brain areas involved in reading competency, even at the basic word reading level (Feifer & Della Toffalo, 2007; Hale & Fiorello, 2004; Shaywtiz, 2005), so problems in one or more of these areas of the brain could lead to reading disabilities.

In a landmark study, Pugh et al. found a functional disconnect between the phonemic and graphemic systems in the inferior parietal lobe, which is likely the most common cause of word reading disability (Fiorello et al., 2006).

Click here to access the handout Brain Areas and Reading Skills.

Reading Fluency/Speed and Reading Comprehension

Reading comprehension requires reading quickly ( reading fluency),keeping track of what words are in the sentences ( working memory), vocabulary meaning and text conventions ( semantics/grammar), and understanding what is read ( receptive language) (Berninger & Richards, 2002; Cutting, Materek, Cole, Levine, & Mahone, 2009).

Children must learn six things:

1. Automatic recognition of words as "pictures" in the brain (sight word recognition);

2. Quickly retrieving words in visual long-term memory for rapid naming (retrieval/fluency);

3. Linking read words with word meanings (vocabulary) in long-term memory (lexical/semantic knowledge);

4. Keeping track of words and meanings for sentences and passages (verbal working memory);

5. Knowledge of sentence structure and punctuation (grammar);

6. Linking read words, word meanings, and grammar for understanding (receptive language).

Common Problems Seen in Children with Reading Comprehension LDs

Most proficient readers read words by sight, and some children may be good at word decoding/attack, but they don't transfer those words to long-term visual memory (Hale & Fioello, 2004). Without automatic sight word recognition, too much effort is spent on decoding and comprehension is impaired (Ehri, 2005; Wolf, Miller, & Donnelly, 2000).

Why would poor sight word recognition lead to reading comprehension problems?

Problems with long-term visual memory can lead to poor sight word recognition. Without a good sight word vocabulary, reading speed is reduced, and working memory is consumed with reading decoding/attack. This does not allow for working memory to keep track of the words read, and comprehension is subsequently impaired (Elliott et al., 2010; Torgesen, Wagner, Rashotte, Burgess, & Hecht, 1997).

This seems in direct contrast with the earlier comments about not allowing children to use a sight word approach only for reading. This is because reading is hierarchical. A child first learns to decode words, then transfer the decoded words to long-term visual memory so the words can be rapidly named, and thus comprehension can develop as word reading competency increases (see Fiorello et al., 2006).

What should teachers do?

It is important to build vocabulary first and foremost, and then decoded words can be translated into reading sight words efficiently. With sight word recognition and reading speed, the demands on working memory are less, and so working memory can be used for reading comprehension to occur.

Watch for children who always try to "sound out" (decode) words, and/or have slow reading speed (Willis, 2008; Wolf, 2007).

The Neuropsychology of Reading Fluency/Speed and Comprehension

There are many brain areas involved in reading comprehension, even if basic word reading and reading speed are adequate (Berninger & Richards, 2002; Feifer & Della Toffalo, 2007; Hale & Fiorello, 2004; Shaywtiz, 2005). Reading comprehension and oral language comprehension are highly related, so any child with receptive or expressive language problems may also have a problem with reading comprehension (Feifer & Della Toffalo, 2007; Roth, Speece, & Cooper, 2002).

Click here to access the handout Brain Areas and Comprehension Skills.

Putting it Together: A Model of Word Reading and Comprehension

There are "fast" and "slow" routes for reading in the brain. In the beginning stages, one learns to decode words using the connection between sound and symbol in the brain's dorsal stream. But the fastest way to read a word is by sight, which is important for reading fluency and comprehension. Without reading fluency, word reading takes all of one's working memory, and comprehension is impaired.

So the reader's goal is to transfer an unknown word from the dorsal stream (word attack) to the ventral stream (automatic sight word reading) (Feifer, Nader, Flanagan, Fitzer, Hicks, 2014). Competency in both decoding and sight word recognition are needed however, with the former proceeding the latter during reading skill development.

Should we teach children to memorize words instead of decoding them?

The answer is NO. It is important to NOT let children try to learn words by sight only (e.g., guessing at words based on initial letter or total word configuration).

Why?

Because as the lexicon expands with increasing age there are too many words to try to memorize, so decoding of harder words is necessary for words we don't automatically recognize by sight, and then we can access them via the slower dorsal stream (Hale & Fiorello, 2004).

What do specific problems with reading look like? What are the implications for intervention?

The following table highlights some of the problems students experience during reading. No one pattern is "clear cut" because reading competencies are interrelated, and there may be more than one of the following problems in the same child, especially if a reading LD is present. However, understanding these patterns is a good first step toward developing effective interventions for children with reading disabilities (Crews & D'Amato, 2010; Feifer & DeFina, 2000; Fletcher & Vaughan, 2009).

Phonetic Coding and Sound/Symbol Association Word Recognition Visual Procssing/Rapid Automatic Naming Reading Comprehension

Difficulty learning visual letters

Difficulty recognizing words and letters in print, may see lip movement when reading

May have difficulty with visual discrimination or recognition of letters; makes phonemic equivalent errors

Comprehension not impaired for oral language or sentences presented orally, but impaired for written sentences

Difficulty learning sounds for letters

Over-relies on sight word approach. Guesses at words by initial letter or whole word configuration

Good visual memory may lead to adequate reading performance in early grades (not later grades, where decoding is needed)

Comprehension directly related to words misread; as number of inaccurate guesses increases, comprehension declines

Difficulty with sound (phoneme) - symbol (grapheme) association

Slow and laborious reading, with many misread words; reads with little expression, but lip movement seen during silent reading

Letter reversals, b for d, p for q; m for w, Letter and number inversions; poor memorization of words and linking meaning to read words

Comprehension errors frequent as majority of working memory is taxed by decoding, oral comprehension may be adequate

Difficulty breaking apart words or combining parts of words

Slow and laborious reading, with many misread words; some sight word reading may be used

Re-reads words and skips lines while reading; complains that eyes hurt or rubs eyes; loses place while reading

Confuses word order (syntax); Frequent errors in comprehension due to working memory being taxed or poor word relationships

Reasonable phonetic misspellings "akshun" for action

Rarely uses punctuation when reading, sounds out all words, even sight words, such as "righut" for the word right

Sequencing and tracking errors, will say "on" for no or "saw" for was; Complains of eyes hurting or sore when reading, and words or letters move ("jump") on the page

Slow laborious reading interferes with fluency, working memory, and comprehension; often re-reads a passage numerous times before understanding it

Good sound-symbol association for decoding words

Recognizes a majority of words taught

May not have problems with visual processes, but could have sequential processing problem

Working memory problem leads to poor text meaning or connected text understanding; so poor comprehension of sentences and passages despite good word reading

Most children may experience one or more of these problems during their reading skill development, therefore, it is important to note if the pattern is consistent over time, and resistant to intervention (Crews & D'Amato, 2010; Feifer & Della Toffalo, 2007).

In addition, it is important to recognize that good readers and children with reading LDs differ in their brain function and error patterns, so a good error analysis is critical for developing effective interventions for affected children (Feifer et al, 2014; Cao, Bitan, Chou, Buma, & Booth, 2006; Simos et al., 2005, 2007).

Teaching Reading: Linking Assessment and Intervention

There are a number of valuable resources for teaching children with reading problems and reading LDs. The following evidence-based intervention strategies were developed based on a number of important resources, including Berninger & Wolf (2009), Feifer & Della Toffalo (2007), Fry, 2010; Mercer, Mercer, & Pullen (2008), and Shawitz (2005). Several of these intervention strategies recognize the National Reading Panel (2000) findings that effective reading instruction addresses alphabetics, fluency, and comprehenison.

Click here to access the handout Interventions for Sound/Symbol Association and Phonetic Coding (K-2).

Click here to access the handout Interventions for Sound/Symbol Association and Phonetic Coding (3+).

Click here to access the handout Interventions for Word Recognition/Automaticity (K-2).

Click here to access the handout Interventions for Word Recognition/Automaticity (3+).

Click here to access the handout Interventions for Reading Fluency (K-2).

Click here to access the handout Interventions for Reading Fluency (3+).

Click here to access the handout Interventions for Reading Comprehension (K-2).
Click here to access the handout Interventions for Reading Comprehension (3+).
Related Resources on the LD@school Website

Click here to access the article WIST Program: A strategy to improve orthographic memory in students with reading disabilities.

Click here to access the article Improving Reading Fluency: Which Interventions are the Most Effective?.

Click here to access the article Integrating Vocabulary Instruction with Reading Comprehension Strategies.

Click here to access the article Direct Instruction of Reading for Elementary-aged Students.

Click here to access the article Effective Vocabulary Strategies for Students with Learning Disabilities.

Additional Resources

Click here to access the resource Phonemic Awareness: Developing Sound Sense.

References

Biemiller, A. (2003). Vocabulary: Needed if more children are to read well. Reading Psychology, 24(3-4), 323-335.

Berninger,V.W., Abbott, R. D., Brooksher, R., Lemon, Z., Ogier, S., Zook, D., & Mostafapour, E. (2000). A connectionist approach to making the predictability of English orthography explicit to at-risk beginning readers: Evidence for alternative, effective strategies. Developmental Neuropsychology, 17(2), 241-271.

Berninger, V. W. & Richards, T. L. (2002). Brain Literacy for Educators and Psychologists. USA: Academic Press.

Berninger, V. W., & Wolf, B. J. (2009). Teaching students with dyslexia and dysgraphia. New York: Paul H. Brooks Publishing.

Cao, F., Bitan, T., Chou, T. L., Buman, D. D., & Booth, J. R. (2006). Deficient orthographic and phonological representations in children with dyslexia revealed by brain activational patterns. . Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47, 1041-1050.

Crews, K. J., & D'Amato, R. C. (2010). Subtyping children's reading disabilities using a comprehensive neuropsychological measure. Journal of Neuroscience, 119( 10), 1615-1639.

Cutting, L. E., Materek, A., Cole, C. A., Levine, T. M., & Mahone, E. M. (2009). Effects of fluency, oral language, and executive function on reading comprehension performance. Annals of Dyslexia, 59(1): 34-54.

Ehri, L. C. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(2), 167-188.

Elliott, C. D., Hale, J. B., Fiorello, C. A., Dorvil, C., & Moldovan, J. (2010). Differential Ability Scales-II prediction of reading performance: Global scores are not enough. Psychology in the Schools, 47(7), 698-720.

Feifer, S. G., & DeFina, P. D. (2000). The neuropsychology of reading disorders: Diagnosis and intervention. Middletown, MD: School Neuropsych Press.

Feifer, S. G., Nader, R. G., Flanagan, D. P., Fitzer, K. R., & Hicks, K. (2014). Identifying Specific

Reading Disability Subtypes for Effective Educational Remediation. [Special Issue]. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 1, 18-30.

Fiorello, C. A., Hale, J. B., & Snyder, L. E. (2006). Cognitive hypothesis testing and response to intervention for children with reading problems. Psychology in the Schools, 43(8), 835-853.

Fletcher, J. M., & Vaughn, S. (2009). Response to intervention: Preventing and remediating academic difficulties. Child Development Perspectives, 3, 30-37.

Fry, E. (2010). How to teach reading (4th ed.). Huntington Beach, CA: Shell Educational.

Gabel, L. A., Gibson, C. J., Gruen, J. R., LoTurco, J. J. (2010). Progress towards a cellular neurobiology of reading disability. Neurobiology of Disease, 38, 173-180.

Hale, J., Alfonso, V., Berninger, V., Bracken, B., Christo, C., Clark, E., Davis, A., Decker, S., Denckla, M., Dumont, R., Elliott, C. Feifer, S., Fiorello, C., Flanagan, D., Fletcher-Janzen, E., Geary, D., Gerber, M., Gerner, M., Goldstein, S., Gregg, N., Hagin, R., Jaffe, L., Kaufman, A., Kaufman, N., Keith, T., Kline, F., Kochhar-Bryant, C., Lerner, J., Marshall, G., Mascolo, J., Mather, N., Mazzacco, M., McCloskey, G., McGrew, K., Miller, D., Miller, J., Mostert, M., Naglieri, J., Noggle, C., Ortiz, S., Phelps, L., Podhajski, B., Reddy. L., Reynolds, C., Riccio, C., Schrank, F., Schultz, E., Semrud-Clikeman, M., Shaywitz, S., Silver, L., Swanson, L., Urso, A., Wasserman, T., Willis, J., Wodrich, D., Wright, P., & Yalof, J. (2010). Critical Issues in response-to-intervention, comprehensive evaluation, and specific learning disabilities identification and intervention: An expert white paper consensus. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33, 223-236.

Hale, J. B., & Fiorello, C. A. (2004). School neuropsychology: A practioner's handbook. New York: Guilford.

Mercer, C. D., Mercer, A. R., & Pullen, P. C. (2010). Teaching students with learning problems (8 th ed.). New York: Pearson.

National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: US Government.

Pugh, K. R., Mencl, W. E., Shaywitz, B. A., Shaywitz, S. E., Fulbright, R. K., Constable, R. T., ... & Gore, J. C. (2000). The angular gyrus in developmental dyslexia: task-specific differences in functional connectivity within posterior cortex. Psychological science, 11(1), 51-56.

Ramus, F., Rosen, S., Dakin S. C., Day, B. L., Castellote, J. M.,White, S., & Frith U. (2003). Theories of developmental dyslexia: insights from a multiple case study of dyslexic adults. Brain, 126, 841-865.

Richards, T. L., Aylward, E. H., Berninger, V. W., Field, K. M., Grimme, A. C., Richards, A. L., & Nagy, W. (2006). Individual fMRI activation in orthographic mapping and morpheme mapping after orthographic or morphological spelling treatment in child dyslexics. Journal of Neurolinguistics 19, 56-86.

Roth, F. P., Speece, D. L., & Cooper, D. H. (2002). A longitudinal analysis of the connection between oral language and early reading. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(5), 259-272.

Semrud-Clikeman, M., Fine, J., & Harder, L. (2005). The school neuropsychology of learning disabilities. R.K. D'Amato E. Fletcher-Janzen, & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.). Handbook of School Neuropsychology. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Shaywitz, S. (2005). Overcoming dyslexia: A new and complete science-based program for reading problems at any level. Vintage.

Shaywitz, S. E, Fletcher, J. M., Holahan, J. M., Schneider, A. E., Marchione, K. E., Stuebing, K. K., et al. (1999). Persistence of dyslexia: The Connecticut Longitudinal Study at adolescence. Pediatrics, 104, 1351-1359.

Simos, P. G., Fletcher, J. M., Sarkari, S., Billingsley, R. L., Francis, D. J., Castillo,...Papanicolaou, A. C. (2005). Early development of neurophysiological processes involved in normal reading and reading disabilities. Neuropsychology, 19, 787-798.

Simos, P. G., Fletcher, J. M., Sarkari, S., Billingsley-Marshall, R., Denton, C. A., & Papanicolaou, A. C. (2007). Intensive instruction affects brain magnetic activity associated with oral word reading in children with persistent reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 7 (1), 37-48.

Statistics Canada (2009). The performance of Canada's youth in reading, mathematics and science. Ottawa, ON: Author

Tallal, P. (2012). Improving neural response to sound improves reading. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,109(41), 16406-16407.

Torgesen, J. K. Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Burgess, S., & Hecht, S. (1997). Contributions of Phonological Awareness and Rapid Automatic Naming Ability to the Growth of Word-Reading Skills in Second-to Fifth-Grade Children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1(2), 161-185.

Willis, J. (2008). Teaching the brain to read: Strategies for improving fluency, vocabulary, comprehension. USA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Wolf, M., Miller, L., & Donnelly, K. (2000). RAVE-O: A comprehensive fluency-based reading intervention program. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 375-386. (Special Issue on the Double-Deficit Hypothesis: Special Issue Editors:M. Wolf & P. Bowers).

Wolf, M. (2007). Proust and the squid: The story and science of the reading brain. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

-

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reading and the Brain: Strategies for Decoding, Fluency, and Comprehension

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Kim R. Fitzer and James B. Hale Is Reading Natural? Reading is not a natural part of human development. Children do not automatically learn how to read and need to be taught to read. Statistics Canada (2009) reported that of all children with disabilities (ages 5

# data[].attributes.body
meghan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

The number of English Language Learners (ELLs) has been growing worldwide. ELLs are at risk for reading disabilities due to dual difficulties with linguistic and cultural factors. This raises the need for finding practical and efficient reading interventions for ELLs to improve their literacy development and English reading skills. The purpose of this study is to examine the evidence-based reading interventions for English Language Learners to identify the components that create the most effective and efficient interventions. This article reviewed literature published between January 2008 and March 2018 that examined the effectiveness of reading interventions for ELLs. We analyzed the effect sizes of reading intervention programs for ELLs and explored the variables that affect reading interventions using a multilevel meta-analysis. We examined moderator variables such as student-related variables (grades, exceptionality, SES), measurement-related variables (standardization, reliability), intervention-related variables (contents of interventions, intervention types), and implementation-related variables (instructor, group size). The results showed medium effect sizes for interventions targeting basic reading skills for ELLs. Medium-size group interventions and strategy-embedded interventions were more important for ELLs who were at risk for reading disabilities. These findings suggested that we should consider the reading problems of ELLs and apply the Tier 2 approach for ELLs with reading problems.

Keywords: English language learners, Evidenced-based intervention, Meta-analysis, Reading

English language learners, Evidenced-based intervention, Meta-analysis, Reading.

1. Introduction

There is a growing body of literature that recognizes the importance of quality education for learners who study in a language other than their native language ( Estrella et al., 2018; Ludwig et al., 2019). As cultural, racial, ethnic, and linguistic diversification takes place globally, the number of students studying a second language different from their native language is also increasing worldwide. In the United States, nearly 5 million learners who are not native speakers of English are currently attending public schools, and this figure has increased significantly over the past decade ( NCES, 2016). As the number of children whose native language is not English increased, the need for educational support also increased. Furthermore, the implementation of NCLB policy emphasizes the need for quality education for all students included in all schools. Accordingly, NCLB has emerged as a critical policy for learners to study in their second language. In other words, there is an urgent need to ensure that non-native English speakers receive appropriate education due to NCLB, which has not only increased the demand for education but also led to the practice of enhanced education for learners whose English is not their native language.

ELLs (English language learners) refer to the education provided for learners whose native language is not English in English-speaking countries ( National Center for Education Statistics, 2021). The education provided to these ELLs is called ESL (English as a second language), ESOL (English to speakers of other languages), EFL (English as a foreign language), and so on. Each term is adopted differently depending on the policy, purpose, and status of operation of the state and/or school district. While a variety of terms have been suggested, this paper uses the term 'ELLs' to refer to learners who are not native speakers of English and uses the terms 'the English education program' and the 'ELL program' to refer to the English education program provided to ELLs.

To ensure quality education, students identified as ELLs can participate in supportive programs to improve their English skills. These ELL programs can be broadly divided into two methods: "pull-out" and "push-in" ( Honigsfeld, 2009). In the pull-out program, students are taken to a specific space other than the classroom at regular class time and are separately taught English. In the push-in program, the ELL teacher joins the mainstream ELLs' classroom and assists them during class time. Through these educational supports, ELLs are required to achieve not only English language improvements addressed in Title III of NCLB but also language art achievements appropriate to their grade level addressed in Title I of NCLB. ELLs are expected to achieve the same level of academic achievement as students of the same grade level, as well as comparable language skills.

A considerable amount of literature has been published on the achievement and learning status of ELLs ( Ludwig, 2017; Soland and Sandilos, 2020). These studies revealed that despite the intensive, high-quality education support for ELLs, they encounter difficulties learning and academic achievement. The National Reading Achievement Test (NAEP) results show that the achievement gap between non-ELLs and ELLs is steadily expanding in the areas of both mathematics and reading ( Polat et al., 2016). Ultimately, ELLs are reported to have the highest risk of dropping out of school ( Sheng et al., 2011). These difficulties are not limited to early school age. Fry (2007) reported that the results from a national standardized test of 8th-grade students found that ELLs performed lower than white students in both reading and math. Callahan and Shifrer (2016) analyzed data from a nationally representative educational longitudinal study in 2002 and found that, despite taking into account language, socio-demographic and academic factors, ELLs still have a large gap in high school academic achievement. Additionally, research has suggested that ELLs are less likely to participate in higher education institutions compared to non-ELL counterparts ( Cook, 2015; Kanno and Cromley, 2015).

Factors found to influence the difficulties of ELLs in learning have been explored in several studies ( Dussling, 2018; Thompson and von Gillern, 2020; Yousefi and Bria, 2018). There are two main reasons for these difficulties. First, ELLs face many challenges in learning a new language by following the academic content required in the school year ( American Youth Policy Forum, 2009). Moreover, language is an area that is influenced by sociocultural factors, and learning academic contents such as English language art and math are also influenced by sociocultural elements and different cultural backgrounds, which affects the achievement of ELLs in school ( Chen et al., 2012; Orosco, 2010). Second, it is reported that the heterogeneity of ELLs makes it challenging to formulate instructional strategies and provide adequate education for them. Due to the heterogeneous traits in the linguistic and cultural aspects of the ELL group, there are limitations in specifying and guiding traits. Therefore, properly reflecting their characteristics is difficult.

The difficulties for ELLs in academic achievement raise the necessity for searching practical and efficient reading interventions for ELLs to improve English language and academic achievement, including ELLs' English language art achievement. These needs and demands led to the conduct of various studies that analyze the difficulties of ELLs. Over the past decade, these studies have provided important information on education for ELLs. The main themes of the studies are difficulties in academic achievement and interventions for ELLs, including reading ( Kirnan et al., 2018; Liu and Wang, 2015; Roth, 2015; Shamir et al., 2018; Tam and Heng, 2016), writing ( Daugherty, 2015; Hong, 2018; Lin, 2015; nullP) or both reading and math ( Dearing et al., 2016; Shamir et al., 2016). The influences of teachers on children's guidance ( Kim, 2017; Daniel and Pray, 2017; Téllez and Manthey, 2015; Wasseell, Hawrylak, Scantlebuty, 2017) and the influences of family members ( Johnson and Johnson, 2016; Walker, Research on 2017) are also examined.

Reading is known to function as an important predictor of success not only in English language art itself but also in overall school life ( Guo et al., 2015). This is because reading is conducted throughout the school years, as most of the activities students perform in school are related to reading. Furthermore, reading is considered one of the major fundamental skills in modern society because it has a strong relationship with academic and vocational success beyond school-based learning ( Lesnick et al., 2010). In particular, for ELLs, language is one of the innate barriers; thereafter, reading is one of the most common and prominent difficulties in that it is not done in their native language ( Rawian and Mokhtar, 2017; Snyder et al., 2017). In this respect, several studies have investigated reading for ELLs. These studies explore effective interventions and strategies ( Kirnan et al., 2018; Mendoza, 2016; Meredith, 2017; Reid and Heck, 2017) and suggest reading development models or predictors for reading success ( Boyer, 2017; Liu and Wang, 2015; Rubin, 2016). For these individual studies to provide appropriate guidance to field practitioners and desirable suggestions for future research, aggregation of the overall related studies, not only of the individual study, and research reflections based on them are required. Specifically, meta-analysis can be an appropriate research method. Through meta-analysis, we can derive conclusions from previous studies and review them comprehensively. Furthermore, meta-analysis can ultimately contribute to policymakers and decision-makers making appropriate decisions for rational strategies and policymaking.

Although extensive research has been carried out on the difficulties of ELLs and how to support them, a sufficiently comprehensive meta-analysis of these studies has not been carried out. Some studies have focused on specific interventions, such as morphological interventions ( Goodwin and Ahn, 2013), peer-mediated learning ( Cole, 2014), and video game-based instruction ( Thompson and von Gillern). Ludwig, Guo, and Georgiou (2019) demonstrated the effectiveness of reading interventions for ELLs. However, they divided reading-related variables into "reading accuracy", "reading fluency", and "reading comprehension" and examined the effectiveness of the reading-related attributes in each of the variables. Therefore, the study has limitations for exploring the various aspects of reading and their effectiveness for reading interventions.

Individual studies have their characteristics and significance. However, for individual studies to be more widely adopted in the field and to be a powerful source for future research, it is necessary to analyze these individual studies more comprehensively. Meta-analysis reviews past studies related to the topic by 'integrating' previous studies, analyzes and evaluates them through 'critical analysis', provides implications to the field, and gives rise to intellectual stimulation to future studies by 'identifying issues' ( Cooper et al., 2019). Through this, meta-analysis can be a useful tool for diagnosing the past where relevant research has been conducted, taking appropriate treatment for the present, and providing intellectual stimulation for future studies.

Therefore, the purposes of this study are to examine evidence-based reading interventions for ELLs presented in the literature to analyze their effects and to identify the actual and specific components for creating the most effective and efficient intervention for ELLs. The findings of this study make a major contribution to research on ELLs by demonstrating the implications for the field and future study.

2. Method

2.1. Selection of studies

A meta-analysis of peer-reviewed articles on ELL reading interventions published between January 2008 and March 2018 was conducted. According to the general steps of a meta-analysis, data related to reading interventions for English language learners were collected as follows. First, educational and psychological publication databases, such as Google Scholar ( https://scholar.google.co.kr), ERIC ( https://eric.ed.gov/), ELSEVIER ( http://www.elsevier.com), and Springer ( https://www.springer.com/gp) were used to find the articles to be analyzed using the search terms "ELLs," ESL," "Reading," "Second language education," "Effectiveness," and "Intervention" separately and in combination with each other. We reviewed the results of the web-based search for articles and included all relevant articles on the preliminary list. We selected the final list of the articles to be analyzed by applying inclusion and exclusion criteria to the preliminary list of articles. Studies were included in the final list based on three primary criteria. First, each study should evaluate the effectiveness of a school-based reading intervention using an experimental or quasi-experimental group design. In this process, single case, qualitative, and/or descriptive studies for ELLs were excluded from the analysis. Second, we included all types of reading-related interventions (i.e., phonological awareness, word recognition, reading fluency, vocabulary, and reading comprehension). Third, each study needed to report data in a statistical format to calculate an effect size. Fourth, we only included studies whose subjects were in grades K-12. The preliminary list had 75 articles, but since some of these studies did not meet the inclusion criteria, we excluded them from the final list for analysis. In total, this meta-analysis included 28 studies with 234 effect sizes (see Figure 1 ).

2.2. Data analysis

2.2.1. Coding procedure

To identify the relevant components of the evidence-based reading interventions for ELLs, we developed an extensive coding document. Our interest was in synthesizing the effect sizes and finding the variables that affect the effectiveness of reading interventions for ELLs. The code sheet was made based on a code sheet used in Vaughn et al. (2003) and Wanzek et al. (2010). All studies were coded for the following: (a) study characteristics, including general information about the study, (b) student-related variables, (c) intervention-related variables, (d) implementation-related variables, (e) measurement-related variables, and (f) quantitative data for the calculation of effect sizes.

Within the study characteristics category, we coded the researchers' names, publication year, and title from each study to identify the general information about each study. For the student-related variables, mean age, grade level(s), number of participants, number of males, number of females, sampling method, exceptionality type (reading ability level), identification criteria in case of learning disabilities, race/ethnicity, and SES were coded. We divided grade level(s) into lower elementary (K-2), upper elementary (3-5), and secondary (6-12). When students with learning disabilities participated in the study, we coded the identification criteria reported in the study. For race/ethnicity, we coded white, Hispanic, black, Asian, and others. Within intervention-related variables, we coded for the title of the intervention, the key instructional components of the intervention, the type of intervention, and the reading components of the intervention. The reading components coded were phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, reading comprehension, listening comprehension, and others. If an intervention contained multiple reading components, all reading components included in the intervention were coded. Fourth, within implementation-related variables, we coded group size, duration of the intervention (weeks), the total number of sessions, frequency of sessions per week, length of each session (minutes), personnel who provided the intervention (i.e., teacher, researchers, other), and the setting. Fifth, in measurement-related variables, we coded the title of the measurement, reliability coefficient, validity coefficient, type of measurement, type of reliability, and type of validity. We also coded quantitative data such as the pre- and posttest means, the pre- and posttest standard deviations, and the number of participants in the pre- and posttests for both the treatment and control groups. These coding variables are defined in Table 1 . The research background and sample information are in Appendix 1.

2.2.2. Coding reliability

The included articles were coded according to the coding procedure described above. Two researchers coded each study separately and reached 91% agreement. Afterward, the researchers reviewed and discussed the differences to resolve the initial disagreements.

2.2.3. Data analysis

First, we calculated 234 effect sizes from the interventions included in the 28 studies. The average effect size was calculated using Cohen's d formula. In addition, we conducted a two-level meta-analysis through multilevel hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) using the HLM 6.0 interactive mode statistical program to analyze the computed effect sizes and find the predictors that affect the effect sizes of reading interventions. HLM is appropriate to quantitatively obtain both overall summary statistics and quantification of the variability in the effectiveness of interventions across studies as a means for accessing the generalizability of findings. Moreover, HLM easily incorporates the overall mean effect size using the unconditional model, and HLM is useful to explain variability in the effectiveness of interventions between studies in the conditional model. The aim of the current study is to provide a broad overview of interventions for ELLs. To achieve this aim, we conducted an unconditional model for overall mean effect size and conducted a conditional model to identify factors that have an impact on the strength of effect sizes. In regard to variables related to the effectiveness of interventions, we conducted a conditional model with student-related, measurement-related, intervention-related, and implementation-related variables. In the case of quantitative meta-analyses, it is assumed that observations are independent of one another ( How and de Leeuw, 2003). However, this assumption is usually not applied in social studies if observations are clustered within larger groups ( Bowman, 2003) because each effect size within a study might not be homogeneous ( Beretvas and Pastor, 2003). Thus, a two-level multilevel meta-analysis using a mixed-effect model was employed because multiple effect sizes are provided within a single education study. To calculate effect size (ES) estimates using Cohen's d, we use the following equation [1]:

The pooled standard deviation, SD pooled, is defined as

In HLM, the unconditional model can be implemented to identify the overall effect size across all estimates and to test for homogeneity. If an assumption of homogeneity is rejected by an insignificant chi-square coefficient in the unconditional model, this means that there are differences within and/or between studies. This assumption must go to the next step to find moderators that influence effect sizes. This step is called a level two model or a conditional model. A conditional model is conducted to investigate the extent of the influence of the included variables.

The level one model (unconditional model) was expressed as [3], and the level two model (the conditional model was expressed as [4].

In equation (3), δ j represents the mean effect size value for study j, and e j is the within-study error term assumed to be theoretically normally distributed with a mean of 0 and a variance of V j . In the level two model equation [4], γ 0 represents the overall mean effect size for the population, and u j represents the sampling variability between studies presumed to be normally distributed with a mean of 0 and a variance τ .

Regarding publication bias, we looked at the funnel plot with the 'funnel()' command of the metafor R package ( Viechtbauer, 2010), and to verify this more statistically, we used the dmetar R package ( Harrer et al., 2019). Egger's regression test ( Egger et al., 1997) was conducted using the 'eggers.test()' command to review publication bias. Egger's regression analysis showed that there was a significant publication error (t = 3.977, 95% CI [0.89-2.54], p < .001). To correct this, a trim-and-fill technique ( Duval and Tweedie, 2000) was used. As a result, the total effect size corrected for publication bias was also calculated. The funnel plot is shown in [ Figure 2 ].

3. Results

We analyzed 28 studies to identify influential variables that count for reading interventions for ELLs. Before performing the multilevel meta-analysis, the effect size of 28 studies was analyzed by traditional meta-analysis. The forest plots for the individual effect sizes of 28 studies are shown in Appendix 2. We present our findings with our research questions as an organizational framework. First, we showed an unconditional model for finding the overall mean effect size. Then, we described the variables that influenced the effect size of reading interventions for ELLs using a conditional model.

3.1. Unconditional model

An unconditional model of the meta-analysis was tested first. In the analysis, restricted maximum likelihood estimation was used. This analysis was conducted to confirm the overall mean effect size and to examine the variability among all samples. The results are shown in Table 2 .

Table 2

Fixed Effect

Coefficient

Standard Error

t Ratio(df)

95% CI

Lower

Upper

Intercept

0.653

0.063

10.173∗∗(233)

0.530

0.776

Random Effect

Variance Component
Standard Deviation
Chi

Intercept

0.589

0.767

1245.90∗∗∗

The intercept coefficient in the fixed model is the overall mean effect size from 234 effect sizes. This means that the effect of reading intervention for English language learners is medium based on Cohen's d. Cohen's d is generally interpreted as small d = 0.2, medium d = 0.5 and large d = 0.8. The variance component indicates the variability among samples. The estimate was 0.589 and remained significant (χ ² = 1245.90, p < . 001). This statistical significance means that moderator analysis with dominant predictors in a model is required to explore the source of variability.

3.2. Conditional model

Moderator analysis using the conditional model was expected to identify factors that have an impact on the strength of effect sizes. In this study, the moderator analysis was administered by nine critical variable categories: students' grade, exceptionality, SES, reading area, standardized test, test reliability, intervention type, instructor, and group size. Variables in each category were coded by dummy coding. Dummy coding was used to identify the difference in dependent variables between the categories of independent variables. For example, we used four dummy variables to capture the five dimensions. The parameter estimates capture the differences in effect sizes between the groups that are coded 1 and a reference group that is coded 0. From a mathematical perspective, it does not matter which categorical variable is used as the referenced group ( Frey, 2018). We labeled one variable in each category as a reference group to make the interpretation of the results easier. We used an asterisk mark to denote the reference group for each category; if a word has an asterisk next to it, this indicates that it is the reference group for that category.

Student-related variables

The results of the conditional meta-analysis for students' grade variables are presented in Table 3 . In Table 3 , the significant coefficients mean that mean effect sizes are significantly larger for studies in reference conditions. For student grades, upper elementary students showed significantly larger mean effect sizes than secondary students (2.720, p = 0.000), but preschool students showed significantly lower mean effect sizes than secondary students (-0.103, p = 0.019). The Q statistic was significant for students' grades ( Q = 27.20, p < 0.001) (see Table 4 ).

For the student-related variables, students with low achievement showed significantly larger mean effect sizes scores than general students (0.707, p = 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between students with low achievement and general students. The Q statistic was significant for students' exceptionality ( Q = 0.0278, p < 0.001).

Table 5 shows that low and low-middle SES was not significantly different from students with no information about SES (0.055, p = 0.666). Moreover, students with middle and upper SES did not have significantly smaller effect sizes than students with nonresponse (-0.379, p = 0.444). The Q statistic was significant for students' SES ( Q = 68.50, p < 0.001).

Measurement-related variables

Table 6 shows the results of the moderator analysis for measurement types. The coefficient for the standardized measurement-related variable was not significant. The Q statistic was significant for the standardization of measurement tools ( Q = 5.28, p < 0.001).

Table 7 shows the results of the moderator analysis for the reliability of the measurement tools. The coefficient for the measurement reliability-related variable was significant (0.409, p = 0.003), which means that the effect sizes of measurements that reported reliability (ES = 0.770) were significantly larger than the effect sizes of measurements that had information about reliability (ES = 0.361). The Q statistic was significant for the reliability of the measurement tools ( Q = 5.82, p < 0.001) (see Table 8 ).

Intervention-related variables

Content of the intervention

The content of the intervention was divided into phonological awareness, reading fluency, vocabulary, reading comprehension, listening comprehension, and other areas. Studies measured other areas that functioned as a reference group. For the measurement area, all reading areas were significantly larger than other areas. Reading fluency (1.150, p = 0.001), reading comprehension (0.971, p = 0.000) and listening comprehension (0.834, p = 0.002) were significantly larger than those in the other areas. However, phonological awareness and vocabulary were significantly larger than other areas but lower than reading fluency, reading comprehension, and listening comprehension (0.528, p = 0.013; 0.442, p = 0.000). The Q statistic was significant for the content of the intervention ( Q = 24.005, p < 0.001).

For intervention types, strategy instruction, peer tutoring, and computer-based learning were compared to other methods, which were fixed as a reference group. Table 9 shows that strategy instruction was significantly larger than other methods in mean effect sizes (0.523, p = 0.001). However, studies that applied peer tutoring and computer-based learning showed lower than other methods, but these differences were not statistically significant (-0.113, p = 0.736; -0114, p = 0.743). The Q statistic was significant for intervention types ( Q = 73.343, p < 0.001).

Implementation-related variables

For instructor-related variables, other instructor-delivered instructions were assigned as a reference group. Table 10 shows that the teacher and researcher groups showed significantly larger than the other instructors. Moreover, the teacher group showed larger than the researcher group (0.909, p = 0.000). The Q statistic was significant for instructor-related variables ( Q = 14.024, p < 0.001).

For group size, mixed groups were fixed as a reference group. Group size variables were divided into a small group (1 or more and 5 or less), a middle group (6 or more and 15 or less), and a large group or class size (16 or more). Table 11 shows that the middle group (6 or more and 15 or less) and the small group (1 or more and 5 or less) were significantly larger than the mixed group (0.881, p = 0.000; 0.451, p = 0.006). However, the difference between the large group and the mixed group was not significant (0.120, p = 0.434). The Q statistic was significant for group size variables ( Q = 17.756, p < 0.001).

4. Discussion

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to explore the effects of reading interventions for ELLs and to identify research-based characteristics of effective reading interventions for enhancing their reading ability. To achieve this goal, this study tried to determine the answers to two research questions. What is the estimated mean effect size of reading interventions for ELLs in K-12? To what extent do student-, intervention-, implementation-, and measurement-related variables have effects on improving the reading ability of ELLs in K-12? Therefore, our study was limited to recent K-12 intervention studies published between January 2008 and March 2018 that included phonological awareness, fluency, vocabulary, reading comprehension, and listening comprehension as intervention components and outcome measures. A total of 28 studies were identified and analyzed. To inquiry the two main research questions, a two-level meta-analysis was employed in this study. For the first research question, the unconditional model of HLM was conducted to investigate the mean effect size of reading interventions for ELLs. The conditional model of HLM was conducted to determine which variables have significant effects on reading interventions for ELLs. Below, we briefly summarized the results of this study and described the significant factors that seem to influence intervention effectiveness. These findings could provide a better understanding of ELLs and support implications for the development of reading interventions for ELLs.

4.1. Effectiveness of reading interventions for ELLs

The first primary finding from this meta-analysis is that ELLs can improve their reading ability when provided appropriate reading interventions. Our findings indicated that the overall mean effect size of reading interventions of ELLs yielded an effect size of 0.653, which indicates a medium level of effect. From this result, we can conclude that the appropriate reading interventions generally have impacts on reading outcomes for ELLs in K-12. This is consistent with prior syntheses reporting positive effects of reading interventions for ELLs ( Vaughn et al., 2006; Abraham, 2008).

Effect size information is important to understand the real effects of the intervention. Therefore, this finding indicated that supplementary reading interventions for ELLs will be developed and implemented. This finding also showed that states are required to develop a set of high-quality reading interventions for ELLs. Language interventions for ELLs have become one of the most important issues in the U.S. Increasing numbers of children in U.S. schools have come from homes in which English is not the primary language spoken. NCES (2016) showed that 4.9 million students, or 9.6% of public school students, were identified as ELLs, which was higher than the 3.8 million students, or 8.1%, identified in 2000 ( NCES, 2016). While many students of immigrant families succeed in their academic areas, too many do not. Some ELLs lag far behind native English speakers in the school because of the strong effect of language factors on the instruction or assessment. Although English is not their native language, ELLs should learn educational content in English. This leads to huge inequity in public schools. Thus, improving the English language and literacy skills of ELLs is a major concern for educational policymakers. This finding can support practitioners' efforts and investments in developing appropriate language interventions for ELLs.

4.2. The effects of moderating variables

The second primary finding of this meta-analysis relates to four variable categories: student-, intervention-, implementation-, and measurement-related variables. Effective instruction cannot be designed by considering one factor. The quality of instruction is the product of many factors, including class size, the type of instructions, and other resources. This finding showed which factors affected the effectiveness of reading interventions. Specifically, we found that the variables that proved to have significant effects on reading outcomes of ELLs were as follows: upper elementary students, reliable measurement tools, reading and listening comprehension-related interventions, strategy instruction, and the middle group consisting of 6 or more and 15 or less. Teachers and practitioners in the field may choose to adopt these findings into their practices. ELL teachers may design their instruction as strategy-embedded instruction in middle-sized groups.

We found that grades accounted for significant variability in an intervention's effectiveness. Specifically, we found that reading interventions were substantially more effective when used with upper elementary students than secondary students. This means that the magnitude of an intervention's effectiveness changed depending on when ELLs received reading interventions. Specifically, the larger effect sizes on upper elementary students than secondary schools showed the importance of early interventions to improve ELLs' language abilities. Students who experience early reading difficulty often continue to experience failure in later grades. ELLs, or students whose primary language is other than English and are learning English as a second language, often experience particular challenges in developing reading skills in the early grades. According to Kieffer (2010), substantial proportions of ELLs and native English speakers showed reading difficulties that emerged in the upper elementary and middle school grades even though they succeeded in learning to read in the primary grades.

Regarding students' English proficiency and academic achievement, there was no statistically significant difference between students with low achievement and general students. Given the heterogeneity of the English language learner population, interventions that may be effective for one group of English language learners may not be effective with others ( August and Shanahan, 2006). This result is similar to the results achieved by Lovett et al. (2008). Lovett et al. (2008) showed that there were no differences between ELLs and their peers who spoke English as a first language in reading intervention outcomes or growth intervention. This finding suggests that systematic and explicit reading interventions are effective for readers regardless of their primary language.

For students' socioeconomic status (SES), there was no significant difference between the low-middle group and the nonresponse group. However, we cannot find that students' SES is critical for implementing reading interventions. Low SES is known to increase the risk of reading difficulties because of the limited access to a variety of resources that support reading development and academic achievement ( Kieffer, 2010). Many ELLs attend schools with high percentages of students living in poverty ( Vaughn et al., 2009). These schools are less likely to have adequate funds and resources and to provide appropriate support for academic achievement ( Donovan and Cross, 2002). Snow, Burns and Griffin (1998) highlighted multiple and complex factors that contribute to poor reading outcomes in school, including a lack of qualified teachers and students who come from poverty. Although this study cannot determine the relationship between the effectiveness of reading interventions and the SES of students, more studies are needed. In addition, these results related to students' characteristics showed that practitioners and teachers can consider for whom to implement some interventions. Researchers should provide a greater specification of the student samples because this information will be particularly critical for English language learners.

Although many of the studies measured a variety of outcomes across all areas of reading, interventions that focused on improving reading comprehension and listening comprehension obtained better effects than other reading outcomes. This result is similar to those discussed in previous findings ( Wanzek and Roberts, 2012; Carrier, 2003).

With regard to effective intervention types, the findings indicated that strategy instruction was statistically significant for improving the reading skills of ELLs. However, computer-based interventions, which are frequently used for reading instruction for ELLs in recent years, showed lower effect sizes than mixed interventions. Strategy instructions are known as one of the effective reading interventions for ELLs ( Proctor et al., 2007; Begeny et al., 2012; Olson and Land, 2007; Vaughn et al., 2006). These strategies included activating background knowledge, clarifying vocabulary meaning, and expressing visuals and gestures for understanding after reading. Some studies have shown that computer-based interventions are effective for ELLs ( White and Gillard, 2011; Macaruso and Rodman, 2011), but this study does not. Therefore, there is little agreement in the research literature on how to effectively teach reading to ELLs ( Gersten and Baker, 2000). Continued research efforts must specify how best to provide intervention for ELLs.

With respect to the implementation of the intervention, teachers and researchers as instructors would produce stronger effects than other instructors. In this study, multiple studies showed that various instructors taught ELLs, including teachers, graduate students, and researchers. The professional development of instructors is more important than that of those who taught ELLs. This finding is consistent with Richards-Tutor et al. (2016). They also did not find differences between researcher-delivered interventions and school personnel-delivered interventions. Continuing professional development should build on the preservice education of teachers, strengthen teaching skills, increase teacher knowledge of the reading process, and facilitate the integration of newer research on reading into the teaching practices of classroom teachers ( Snow et al., 1998). Overall, professional development is the key factor in strengthening the reading skills of ELLs.

This study showed that medium-sized groups of 6 or more and 15 or less had larger effect sizes than the mixed groups. In addition, the medium-sized group showed a larger effect size than the small group of 5 or less. This finding showed that a multi-tiered reading system should be needed in the general classroom. This finding is linked to the fact that the reaction to intervention (RTI) approach is more effective for ELLs. Linan-Thompson et al. (2007) pointed out that RTI offers a promising alternative for reducing the disproportionate representation of culturally and linguistically diverse students in special education by identifying students at risk early and providing preventive instruction to accelerate progress. Regarding interventions for ELLs who are struggling with or at risk for reading difficulties, Ross and Begeny (2011) compared the effectiveness between small group interventions and implementing the intervention in a 1/1 context for ELLs. They showed that nearly all students benefitted from the 1/1 intervention, and some students benefitted from the small group intervention. This finding is commensurate with a previous study investigating the comparative differences between group sizes and suggests research-based support for the introduction of the RTI approach.

However, most implementation-related variables, including duration of intervention, the total number of sessions, frequency per week, length of each session, settings, and instructor, did not have any significant effect on the reading ability of ELLs. That is, ELLs are able to achieve their reading improvement regardless of the duration of intervention, where they received the reading intervention, and who taught them. This finding is similar to those discussed by Snyder et al. (2017). They also synthesized the related interventions for ELLs and showed that the length of intervention did not seem to be directly associated with overall effect sizes for reading outcomes. This finding is also the same as recent research on intervention duration with native English speakers ( Wanzek et al., 2013). Wanzek and colleagues examined the relationship between student outcomes and hours of intervention in their meta-analysis. The findings showed no significant differences in student outcomes based on the number of intervention hours. Elbaum et al. (2000) stated that the intensity of the interventions is most important for effectiveness. Our results somewhat support these researchers' opinions, but we cannot be certain that a brief intervention would have the same overall effect on reading outcomes as a year-long intervention. Thus, we should consider the intervention intensity, such as student attendance at the sessions, with the duration of the intervention.

4.3. Implications for practice and for research

The most effective and efficient education refers to education that is made up in the right ways, that includes proper content, and that is delivered on time so that the students can benefit the most. To implement this, research to identify a particular framework based on the synthesis of research results through meta-analysis, such as this study, must be conducted. Furthermore, the implications based on the results must be deeply considered. In this respect, important implications for the practice and research of practitioners, researchers, and policymakers on enhancing reading competence for ELLs of this study are as follows.

First, reading interventions for ELLs are expected to be the most efficient when conducted on a medium-sized group of 6-15 students. This indicates that implementing reading interventions for ELLs requires a specially designed group-scale configuration rather than simply a class-wide or one-to-one configuration. Second, the implementation of reading interventions for ELLs is most effective when conducted for older elementary school students. This is in contrast to Morgan and Sideridis (2006), who demonstrated the characteristics of students with learning disabilities using multilevel meta-analysis and showed that age groups were irrelevant in the effect size of reading interventions for students with learning disabilities. Therefore, it can be seen that the ELLs group, unlike the learning disability group, the students of which have reading difficulty due to their disabilities, is in the normal development process but has reading difficulty due to linguistic differences. Accordingly, it can be seen that the senior year of elementary school, in which a student has been exposed to the academic environment for a sufficiently long time and language is sufficiently developed, is the appropriate time for learning English for ELLs. Third, effective reading interventions for ELLs should be performed with a strategy-embedded instruction program. This is based on the fact that strategic instructions are effective for vocabulary or concepts in unfamiliar languages ( Carlo et al., 2005; Chaaya and Ghosn, 2010).

The above implications require the implementation of Tier 2 interventions for reading interventions for ELLs in practice. In Tier 2 interventions, students can participate in more intensive learning through specially designed interventions based on their personal needs ( Ortiz et al., 2011). In other words, in policymaking and administrative decision-making, intensive education programs for ELLs who have been exposed to the academic environment for a certain period but still have reading difficulties, including having achievements that fall short of the expected level, are needed.

Considering further applications, these findings could guide practitioners and policymakers to develop effective evidence-based reading programs or policies. The significant variables in this study can be considered to develop new programs for ELLs.

Declarations

Author contribution statement

All authors listed have significantly contributed to the development and the writing of this article.

Funding statement

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2020S1A3A2A02103411).

Data availability statement

Data included in article/supplementary material/referenced in article.

Declaration of interests statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

No additional information is available for this paper.

Appendix A. Supplementary data

The following is the supplementary data related to this article:

References for studies included in the meta-analysis

American Youth Policy Forum. (2009). Issue brief Moving English language learners to college and career readiness. Retrieved November 22,2009, from: www.aypf.org/documents/ELLIssueBrief

Articles from Heliyon are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Evidence-based reading interventions for English language learners: A multilevel meta-analysis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The number of English Language Learners (ELLs) has been growing worldwide. ELLs are at risk for reading disabilities due to dual difficulties with linguistic and cultural factors. This raises the need for finding practical and efficient reading interventions ...

# data[].attributes.body
Meghan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Reading is making meaning from print. It requires that we do the following:

Identify the words in print: a process called word recognition

Construct an understanding from them: a process called comprehension

Coordinate identifying words and making meaning so that reading is automatic and accurate: an achievement called fluency

Sometimes you can make meaning from print without being able to identify all the words. Remember the last time you got a note in messy handwriting? You may have understood it, even though you couldn't decipher all the scribbles.

Sometimes you can identify words without being able to construct much meaning from them. Read the opening lines of Lewis Carroll's poem, "Jabberwocky," and you'll see what I mean.

'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

Finally, sometimes you can identify words and comprehend them, but if the processes don't come together smoothly, reading will still be a labored process. For example, try reading the following sentence:

It isn't as if the words
are difficult to identify or
understand, but the spaces
make you pause between
words, which means your
reading is less fluent.

Reading in its fullest sense involves weaving together word recognition and comprehension in a fluent manner. These three processes are complex, and each is important. How complex? Here goes?

To develop word recognition, children need to learn:

How to break apart and manipulate the sounds in words - this is phonemic awareness
example: feet has three sounds: /f/, /e/, and /t/

Certain letters are used to represent certain sounds - this is the alphabetic principle
example: s and h make the /sh/ sound

How to apply their knowledge of letter-sound relationships to sound out words that are new to them - this is
example: ssssspppoooon - spoon!

How to analyze words and spelling patterns in order to become more efficient at reading words - this is
example: Bookworm has two words I know: book and worm.

To expand the number of words they can identify automatically, called their sight vocabulary
example: Oh, I know that word - the!

To develop comprehension, children need to develop:

Background knowledge about many topics
example: This book is about zoos - that's where lots of animals live.

Extensive oral and print vocabularies
example: Look at my trucks - I have a tractor, and a fire engine, and a bulldozer.

Understandings about how the English language works
example: We say she went home, not she goed home.

Understandings about how print works
example: reading goes from left to right

Knowledge of various kinds of texts
example: I bet they live happily ever after.

Various purposes for reading
example: I want to know what ladybugs eat.

Strategies for constructing meaning from text, and for problem solving when meaning breaks down
example: This isn't making sense. Let me go back and reread it.

To develop fluency, children need to:

Develop a high level of accuracy in word recognition

Maintain a rate of reading brisk enough to facilitate comprehension

Use phrasing and expression so that oral reading sounds like speech

Transform deliberate strategies for word recognition and comprehension into automatic skills

But if reading isn't pleasurable or fulfilling, children won't choose to read, and they won't get the practice they need to become fluent readers.

Therefore, reading also means developing and maintaining the motivation to read. Reading is an active process of constructing meaning. The key word here is active.

To develop and maintain the motivation to read, children need to:

Appreciate the pleasures of reading

View reading as a social act, to be shared with others

See reading as an opportunity to explore their interests

Read widely for a variety of purposes, from enjoyment to gathering information

Become comfortable with a variety of different written forms and genres

So ... what is reading?
Reading is the motivated and fluent coordination of word recognition and comprehension.
Quite an achievement for a six year old!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Reading is a multifaceted process involving word recognition, comprehension, fluency, and motivation. Learn how readers integrate these facets to make meaning from print.

# data[].attributes.body
Meghan

# data[].attributes.body
meghan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Provide guided practice to students as they work with two or three more examples. (Teacher and students work together to locate clue words/phrases in the sentences that will provide clues to the meanings of unfamiliar words.)

# data[].attributes.body
Meghan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A student's level of phonemic awareness when they enter kindergarten is a strong predictor of how easy it will be for them to learn how to read. All students in preschool and many in the primary grades are learning phonemic awareness skills. Teaching phonemic awareness skills to young ELLs is similar to their native English peers. Older ELLs may also benefit from short and targeted instruction and practice with the sounds of English.

What is Phonemic Awareness?

Phonemic awareness refers to the ability to identify and manipulate phonemes in spoken words. It is also the understanding that the sounds of spoken language work together to make words ( Reading Rockets.) Phonemic awareness activities are done without letters so that the focus is on sounds.

Components of Phonemic Awareness

Isolation

What is the beginning, middle, ending sound in cat?

Identification

Which word had the same beginning sound as cat? Dog, bug, cut (cut)

Categorization

Which word does not start with the same beginning sound, it does not belong? blue, black, red (red)

Blending

Put the sounds together to make a word. /c/ /a/ /t/ is cat. If a student struggle with blending each sound give them the initial sound (onset) and the rest of the sounds (rime) /c/ /at/.

A simple activity is to play a guessing game with students. Segment a word /t/ /r/ /e/. Students say the word and then look around and try and find it. This helps ELLs build their vocabulary as they are practicing sounds.

Segmenting

Say the sounds you hear in the word cat /c/ /a/ /t/. One way to help students with this task is to give blocks for them to move with each sound or tap their finger for each sound.

Deletion

Have students remove a sound to create a new word. Say blog. Now say blog without the /b/ log.

Addition

Have students add a sound to create a new word. Say at. Now say at and add /s/ to the beginning sat.

Substitution

Say mat. Change the /m/ to /r/. What is the new word? (rat)

Exposure to the Sounds of English

You can help ELLs strengthen their knowledge of the sounds of the English language through read alouds, songs, poems, and other word games. Choral reading is also helpful as it gives students practice pronouncing English words without the stress of people hearing if they mispronounce a word.

Focus on Sounds that are Different

Especially for older Ells, it is helpful to focus on the sounds that are different between English and their native language. Phonological awareness skills transfer from one language to another. If a student is literate in their native language then they only require instruction in sounds that are different.
English and Spanish similarities and differences
Use Pictures

ELLs need to understand the vocabulary words that are being used for a phonemic awareness lesson. Using pictures is a simple way to help students both learn new sounds and vocabulary.

Older Students

For older ELLs photographs are one way to keep instruction age-appropriate. Students can work on completing a picture alphabet book. Use magazines, teacher provided pictures and student drawings that connect to the content that students are learning. Students can sort the pictures based on the beginning sounds.

Resources

Phonemic Awareness Bundle - This set includes print and digital phonemic awareness games with pictures and rhyming puzzles.

A Fresh Look at Phonics
https://www.readnaturally.com/research/5-components-of-reading/phonological-awareness

The Big Five: Phonological and Phonemic Awareness Part 2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Phonemic Awareness with ELLs - A World of Language Learners

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn ideas for teaching phonemic awareness skills to English Langauge Learners. For ELLs it is important to give instruction...

# data[].attributes.body
meghan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Home Language: An English Language Learner’s Most Valuable Resource

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In this article written for Colorín Colorado, Dr. Fred Genesee discusses the research supporting the importance of a child’s home language. In addition, Dr. Genesee explores the question of why an approach that is well-supported by research has been largely ignored in the era of “research-based” policy.OverviewWebcast: ELLs and ReadingLearn more about using the home language to support ELLs’ reading instruction in our Teaching ELLs to Read webcast featuring Dr. Genesee!The education of English language learners (ELLs) is one of the most important issues facing U.S. educators. ELLs are a large and growing proportion of the school-age population — according to National Center for Educational Statistics, in 2007, about 10.8 million (or 20%) school-aged children in the U.S. spoke a language other than English at home (Planty, Hussar, Snyder, Kena, Kewal Ramani, Kemp, Bianco, & Dinkes, 2009). This situation is not likely to change because ELLs are currently the fastest growing population in U.S. schools (National Center for Education Statistics, 2004), with the number of ELLs expected to increase another 50% by 2025 (Passel & Cohn, 2008).The importance of the issues goes beyond the sheer number of ELLs, however. It has been shown in numerous national studies and surveys that, on average, ELLs under achieve in comparison to their English-speaking peers in academic domains and that the achievement gap tends to increase the higher the grade level (e.g., Fry, 2007; Rumberger, 2007; McNeil et al., 2008). As we consider ways to help ELLs increase their academic achievement, then, it is clear that educators need all the resources at their disposal to meet these challenges.Policy and Home LanguageUntil recently, significant efforts were made to enhance the educational outcomes of ELLs by offering alternative forms of education that incorporate use of ELLs’ home language (Genesee, 1999, for a review). These programs were justified on the grounds that educating ELLs in English only posed a triple threat to their educational success since it would require that they simultaneously:learn academic English to high levels,master challenging academic skills and content taught through English,adopt new social skills that would permit them to integrate with their English-speaking classmates and teachers.However, in recent years, recent political and legislative initiatives that disfavor bilingual education have made these educational options difficult to access, despite evidence of their success (Goldenberg, 2009). Along with these politically-motivated changes, it would appear that educators and policy-makers no longer recognize the native language skills of ELLs as an important educational resource and, indeed, it would even appear that they discredit it having any role in the education of ELLs.What does the research say?At the same time that the role of the home language is diminishing in public education policy, there have been growing political and legislative expectations that educational policies and classroom practices be backed up by scientific, empirical evidence. With respect to ELLs, there is undeniable and growing evidence that the home language of ELLs is of considerable benefit to their overall academic success. There are multiple sources of such evidence. First, recent meta-analyses have shown that educational programs that systematically incorporate use of ELLs’ home language result in levels of academic success, including achievement in literacy and other academic subjects, that are as high as and often better than that of ELLs in English-only programs (Genesee & Lindholm-Leary, in press). In a review of these meta-analyses, Goldenberg (2008) notes “Readers should understand how unusual it is to have five meta-analyses on the same issue conducted by five independent researchers or groups of researchers with diverse perspectives. The fact that they all reached essentially the same conclusion is worth noting. No other area in educational research with which I am familiar can claim five independent meta-analyses based on experimental studies — much less five that converge on the same basic finding.” (p. 15).Second, in a study of ELLs in two-way immersion programs, Lindholm and Aclan (1991) found a significant positive relationship between individual student’s level of bilingual proficiency and their achievement in math and reading in English. Furthermore, the students who were classified as “high bilinguals” were able to attain grade level results by fourth grade in English reading and by third grade in English math.Third, a growing body of evidence from researchers around the world has shown that bilingual children exhibit significant cognitive advantages in comparison to monolingual children (e.g., Bialystok 2006; Chin & Wigglesworth, 2007; Kovaacs & Mehler, 2009). These advantages have been demonstrated in executive control processes related to selective attention and inhibition and monitoring of attention when, for example, children are engaged in problem solving.Fourth, and finally, extensive research, again from around the world, has found that children who are learning to read in a second language are able to transfer many skills and knowledge from their first language to facilitate their acquisition of reading skills in the second language. The best evidence of this comes from studies showing that students with strong reading skills in the home language also have strong reading skills in their second language. Much of this work has been done on ELLs in the U.S. (August & Shanahan, 2006; Riches & Genesee, 2006).What we see in the U.S., then, is a push for research-based policy but the creation of policies that contradict the research. Debate concerning the value of using ELLs’ home language in specially-designed programs, such as two-way immersion, will undoubtedly continue, and so it should since it makes little educational sense to diminish U.S. students’ opportunities to become bilingual in an increasingly globalized community.Back to topHome Language in the ClassroomIn the meantime, teachers and students can’t wait for these policy debates to be settled before deciding how or whether to draw upon ELLs’ home language. The question arises how can schools and teachers, even those who are monolingual, act on evidence that clearly shows the personal, cognitive, linguistic and educational value of using the linguistic resources that ELLs bring to school. There is no simple or single answer to this question, but a number of options are worth exploring that, at the moment, are often overlooked and discounted. Cloud, Genesee, and Hamayan (2009, Chapter 3) offer a number of suggestions:To encourage students to see connections between their languages and, thus, to better understand how languages are structured and organized, talk to ELLs about their home language — ask them:How is the home language the same and how it is different from English?Are there words in the home language that sound the same and mean the same thing in both languages?Are there words in the home language and English that sound the same but mean different things?As part of phonological and metalinguistic awareness exercises to facilitate reading acquisition, ask students:to say words that start with the same sound(s) in English or the L1.how words are changed and formed in the home language — singular and plural forms, present tense and past tense forms of verbs — to enhance their word knowledgewho are new to your class, to read books in their home language to show you what they know about reading.By using the collective skills and knowledge of all students (both ELL and English-L1 students) in the classroom, even a monolingual teacher can tap into these valuable language resources that ELLs have and do so with the confidence that these methods will promote their language development — in English as well as the home language.Back to topEducation for AllA hallmark of public education in the U.S. is respect for and appreciation of the individual skills and backgrounds of students as a foundation for furthering their education. Taking advantage of ELLs’ home language resources is asking no more than the same respect and appreciation for this group of learners. At the same time, parents, teachers, educational leaders in local school districts, and politicians should discuss how best to provide all students in the U.S. with high quality educational programs that promote competence in additional languages. At stake is not only the competitiveness of individual students once they enter the work force but, indeed, the ability of the U.S. itself to compete in an increasingly multilingual and multicultural world.Back to topVideo: Using the Home Language as a ResourceDearborn Public Schools ELD Director Rose Aldubaily discusses the value of using students’ home language as a resource. About the AuthorFred Genesee is Professor in the Psychology Department at McGill University, Montreal. He has conducted extensive research on alternative forms of bilingual and immersion education for language minority and language majority students. His current research interests also include language acquisition in pre-school bilingual children, internationally-adopted children, second language reading acquisition, and the language and academic development of students at-risk in bilingual programs. He is the recipient of the Canadian Psychological Associate Award for Distinguished Contributions to Community or Public Service and the 2-Way CABE Award of Promoting Bilingualism. Publications include:Genesee, F., Paradis, J., & Crago (Eds.) (2010). Dual Language Development and Disorders: A Handbook on Bilingualism and Second Language Learning, 2nd Edition. Baltimore, Maryland: Brookes Publishing.Cloud, N., Genesee, F., and Hamayan, E. (2009). Literacy Instruction for English Language Learners: A Teacher’s Guide to Research-Based Practices. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Back to topAcknowledgementsOur policy section is made possible by a generous grant from the Carnegie Corporation. The statements and views expressed are solely the responsibility of the authors.

# data[].attributes.body
meghan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Adams, M., Treiman, R., & Pressley, M. (1998). Reading, writing and literacy. In I. E. Siegal and K. A. Renniger (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Child psychology in practice (5th ed., Vol. 4, pp. 275-355). New York: Wiley.

Bear, D. Invernizzi, M., Templeton, S., & Johnston, F. (1996). Words their way: Word study for phonics, vocabulary, and spelling. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (1991). Conditions of vocabulary acquisition. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), The Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. 2, pp. 789-814). New York: Longman Press.

Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Omanson, R. C. (1984). The fertility of some types of vocabulary instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., Hamilton, R. L., & Kucan, L. Getting at the meaning: How to help students unpack difficult text. American Educator, 22, 66-71, 85.

Beck, I. L., McCaslin, E. C., & McKeown, M. G. (1980). The rationale and design of a program to teach vocabulary to fourth-grade students. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Learning Research and Development Center.

Berninger, V., Vaughan, K., Abbott, R., Brooks, A., Abbott, S., Reed, E., Rogan, L., & Graham, S. (1998). Early intervention for spelling problems: Teaching spelling units of varying size within a multiple connections framework. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 587-605.

Berninger, V., Vaughan, K., Abbott, R., Abbott, S., Brooks, A., Rogan, L., Reed, E., & Graham, S. (1997). Treatment of handwriting fluency problems in beginning writing: Transfer from handwriting to composition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 652-666.

Durkin, D. (1993). Teaching them to read (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Ehri, L., & Soffer, A. (1999). Graphophonemic awareness: Development in elementary students. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 1-30.

Fletcher, J. M., & Lyon, G. R. (1998). Reading: A research-based approach. In W. Evers (Ed.), What's gone wrong in America's classrooms (pp. 49-90). Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press.

Graham, S., Berninger, V., Abbott, R., Abbott, S., & Whitaker, D. (1997). The role of mechanics in composing of elementary school students: A new methodological approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 170-182.

Learning First Alliance (1998). Every child reading: An action plan. Washington, DC: Author.

Moats, L. C. (1995). The missing foundation in teacher education. American Educator, 19(2), 9, 43-51.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Fluency. Chap. 3 in Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: Reports of the subgroups (pp. 3-1-3-43). Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Text comprehension. Part 2 of Chap. 4 in Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: Reports of the subgroups (pp. 4-39-4-118). Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Vocabulary instruction. Part 1 of Chap. 4 in Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: Reports of the subgroups (pp. 4-15-4-38). Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.

Pressley, M. (1998). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching. New York: Guilford Press.

Scarborough, H., Ehri, L., Olson, R., & Fowler, A. (1998). The fate of phonemic awareness beyond the early school years. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2, 115-142.

Snow, C., Burns, S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children (pp. 80-83). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Treiman, R. (1993). Beginning to spell. New York: Oxford University Press.

In addition to their mention in Every Child Reading: An Action Plan, these components are commonly delineated in documents such as research reviews, state standards on instruction, the Reading Excellence Act funding criteria, curriculum guidelines, and teacher instructional manuals.

Of course, as the National Reading Panel notes, "phonics teaching is a means to an end... . In implementing systematic phonics instruction, educators must keep the end in mind and ensure that children understand the purpose of learning letter sounds and that they are able to apply these skills accurately and fluently in their daily reading and writing activities" (Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institute of Health, 2000, p. 10). The panel's report also states that, notwithstanding the fact that explicit, systematic, synthetic phonics is the most effective approach, there remain unanswered questions on how to make this instruction as effective as possible. For example, the panel notes that more research is needed on questions such as how long single instruction sessions should last, how many letter-sound relations should be taught, and how many months or years a phonics program should continue. Moreover, some children will learn and appropriately apply phonics skills quickly and effortlessly, while others must be taught slowly, step by step. The individual variation in any group remains a continual challenge to teacher judgment, resourcefulness, and program management skill.

In the standardization of the Texas Primary Reading Inventory, these subtests combined predict the likelihood of success or failure with about 90 percent accuracy.

The readability of text, as reflected in sentence complexity and frequency of vocabulary, can now be assessed with software. Readability formulas tend to have more validity for children who have attained a reading level above 2nd grade than they do for those who are just beginning to read, and readability does not reflect the extent to which a text is decodable on the basis of what a child has been taught.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
9 Components of Effective, Research-Supported Reading Instruction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We know from research that an effective reading program must address several aspects of reading. Among others, these aspects include the alphabetic code, fluency, comprehension, and motivation.

# data[].attributes.body
Meghan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When you've got a few minutes left before the period ends, it's only normal to wonder: Do my students really understand what we covered? Do they remember what we started with, as well as what we just discussed?

While cleaning up and going over homework assignments often take up those final moments of class time, effective closing activities allow you to make better use of them by checking for understanding, correcting misunderstandings, and putting a little fun into the process to motivate your students to make sense of what they've just learned.

Closing activities don't need to happen every day, and they don't always require lots of advanced planning. They can occur at the end of a chapter, or even at the end of a large learning unit, and can also take various forms-incorporating movement, technology, and even components of social and emotional learning to build a stronger classroom community.

Here are 10 creative and fun closing activities we sourced from experienced teachers that you can try in your classroom.

1. Two-Dollar Summary: Ask students to write a two-dollar (or more) summary of the lesson they've just learned. Each word they use is worth 10 cents. For extra scaffolding, ask students to include specific words in their statement. For a twist on this, ask students to explain something as if they were teaching it to a first grade student. This will also push them to simplify complex ideas for themselves and therefore understand them better.

For a different spin on this, try educator Sarah Frisby Cook's "six-word summary" of the most important idea or concept. On Facebook, Cook told Edutopia that because students are limited in word choice, "they really have to think about what is most crucial to say."

6. Video Journals: Educator John Thomas uses the free app ChatterPix to get students creating and sharing video journals describing what they've learned. Because this can take a little time to create, this strategy might be best suited as a wrap-up activity at the end of a unit. The videos are playful and fun, and can easily be posted to classroom platforms like Seesaw.

8. Quiz the Next Class: Nikki Cobb-Struzynski gets her students to use the free platform Kahoot! to come up with quiz questions and multiple choice answers to give to their peers studying the same material in other classes. Recent research suggests that generating good questions promotes deeper engagement with content and improves retention. When a person formulates a question, "One has to reflect what one has learned and how an appropriate knowledge question can be inferred from this knowledge," University of Kassel researcher Mirjam Ebersbach told Edutopia.

9. Make Your Classroom a Beach: This activity will get students out of their seats and sharing with the whole class. Educator Eman Bekheet told Edutopia that she writes reflective questions on a beach ball using dry erase markers. Questions might include things like: "What is one thing you learned during today's lesson?" or "What was challenging about today's lesson?"

As the ball bounces around the room, you can come up with a mechanism for deciding which question they have to answer out loud-such as the question their left thumb is touching, or the very first question they see. Use the responses to generate further discussion about the day's lesson.

The Human Bar Graph is another twist that gets students moving. Label points along a line drawn on the floor or across a wall that show different levels of mastery: I'm confused, I'm okay, I got this. Ask students to stand where they feel most comfortable. This exercise requires a certain level of vulnerability, so it's best to try it once you built some trust with students.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Instead of cleaning up or going over homework assignments, try these creative activities that can help students make sense of new material-and have fun in the process.