Early Reading Interventions for ELLs and Native English Speakers

Tess M. Dussling, Education Department, Saint Michael's College, Colchester, Vermont, USA.

Study investigated a reading intervention emphasizing phoneme awareness and phonics.
Participants included at-risk native English-speakers and English language learners (ELLs).
Utilized a multiple-baseline-across-participants design to assess intervention effects.
Findings showed benefits for both demographic groups in small reading groups.
Emphasizes evidence-based instruction and inclusive teaching practices.
Discussion on educational implications and future research directions.

Growth of ELL population in U.S. schools; need for effective interventions.
Research indicates a lack of services for ELLs, leading to mislabeling for special education due to language proficiency vs. learning disabilities issues.
Early reading interventions crucial for leveling academic playing field for at-risk ELLs.

Reading achievement gap: 38 percentage points in 4th grade, 45 points in 8th grade (NAEP, 2013).
High retention rates and dropout rates among ELLs, nearly double those of native-English speakers.
Importance of effective early literacy instruction and intervention for ELLs; many studies mainly focus on Spanish-speaking ELLs.

Effective reading instruction includes phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension for both ELLs and native English-speakers (August & Shanahan, 2006).
Essential for students to detect sounds and connect sounds to printed symbols for effective decoding.
Limited intervention research on ELLs; studies often focus exclusively on Spanish speakers.

Dussling's pilot with non-Spanish-speaking kindergartners demonstrated gains in phoneme awareness and phonics in a small group setting.
All students from different language backgrounds made gains using the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test indicators.
- Caution in interpreting results due to lack of control group.

Aim to investigate early reading interventions for non-Spanish-speaking ELLs and native English-speakers together.

Is the supplemental reading program effective in small mixed groups for phoneme awareness and phonics?
Does the effectiveness remain when analyzed by language status?

Conducted at elementary school with demographic data: 363 students; 53% economically disadvantaged; 9% Limited English Proficient.
Recommended by teachers, students assessed for reading risk using a battery of tests (WRMT-R, TPRI, nonsense words).
Final sample: 13 students (7 ELLs, 6 native English-speakers) consisting of 9 boys and 4 girls.

Pretest and Posttest Measures: Battery of assessments administered including CTOPP, Phoneme Segmentation Test, and WRMT-R.
Progress Monitoring Probes: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Literacy Skills (DIBELS) Nonsense Word Fluency to measure progress; administered twice weekly.

Utilized modified multiple-baseline-across-participants design to stagger treatment introduction.
Each group received assessment and intervention phases, followed by maintenance data collection.

Intervention lasted six weeks with small groups receiving 30 minutes of targeted reading instruction daily.
Instructional materials: Road to Reading program emphasizing phonological awareness and systematic phonics.

Sound-symbol Correspondences: Identification of letter names and sounds.
Decoding Skills: Manipulation of letter cards to form words.
Word Review: Reading, spelling, and writing words aligning with phonetic patterns introduced.
Oral Reading: Use of decodable books for enhancing fluency.
Dictation: Writing dictation aligned with lesson content.

All students benefitted from mixed group instruction; statistically significant growth observed.
Significant increase in scores across multiple measures with large effect sizes in most domains.
- Notable gains in blending, segmenting, letter sound knowledge, word identification, and spelling.

ELLs and natives both showed statistically significant gains; analyzed separately.
Higher proportions of ELLs (86%) and natives (83%) reaching grade-level benchmarks for correct letter sounds after intervention.

Reading attitude survey indicated positive self-perceptions among participants in their reading abilities.

Intervention successful in showing growth for both ELLs and native speakers, promoting inclusive teaching practices.
Evidence supports combining language learners from diverse backgrounds with native speakers for enhanced achievement.

Encouragement for mixed group instructional approaches; benefits felt across demographic lines.
Schools may utilize shared resources for teaching reading across different groups, enhancing teacher confidence in teaching ELLs within mainstream classes.

Acknowledgment of Dr. Benita Blachman and Dr. Qiu Wang for contributions to the study.

Comprehensive list of citations based on materials mentioned throughout the text, encompassing statistical analyses, instructional strategies, and relevant studies in literacy research including works by Blachman, Gunn, Kamps, and others.
Each study referenced provides context and underpins the findings of this present research, enriching the academic discourse on early literacy interventions for diverse learners.