What Kind of Intervention for Whom, and When?

Responses of English Language Learners to Intervention

Dr. Kathleen J. Brown, Director

University of Utah Reading Clinic5282 South 320 West, Suite D110Murray, UT 84105801-265-3951www.uurc.orgemail: uurc@ed.utah.edu

Are Porfirio, Juan, & Saul Reading Below Grade Level?

Given sufficient b.k., on a grade level passage, they should: be at least 90% accurate read with sufficient speed

G1 = 40-70 wpm G4 = 95-120 wpm G2 = 60-90 wpm G5 = 110-140 wpm G3 = 80-110wpm G6 = 110-150 wpm

comprehend at least 70%

(Good, Simmons, & Kame’enui, 2003; Hasbrouck & Tindal,1992; Leslie & Caldwell, 2000; Morris, 1999)

Are Bill, Porfirio, Juan, & Saul Reading Below Grade Level?

15-40% depending on SES (Allington, 1994)

2002 NAEP data 31% Utah 4th graders “below basic”

Probability unsuccessful G1 readers still unsuccessful in G4 = .88 (Juel, 1988)

Problem: Porfirio et al. More Likely to Struggle Than Bill

63% of ELLs & 58% of Hispanics “below basic” on G4 Reading (NAEP, 2005)

40% ELL students “drop out” vs. 10% from English-only homes (Gengras & Careaga, 1989)

ELL students “at-risk” for reading difficulties (Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998)

Problem: Current Trend to “Niche” Porfirio et al.

Everything from misbehavior to poor academic achievement explained by “He’s ELL…”

Need an “Act of Congress” to qualify an ELL child for resource or to retain

Porfirio et al. Need Help; Now What?

Guided reading at instructional level (w/comprehension & vocab work)

pacing in controlled, leveled text explicit, sequenced word study & p.a. fluency work

educators with clear understanding of reading DEVELOPS and how instruction can LEAD that development

Porfirio et al. Need Help; Now What?

time on task... a.k.a. “consume” as much text as possible

in an effective format (small group, pairs, 1-on-1)

for as long as he needs it… a.k.a. “there is no quick fix”

Will This Really Help Porfirio et al.?

At-risk G1 students who received 95 sessions of Early Steps finished the year reading between primer and late-G1.

Matched control G1 students who received 135 sessions of regular Title 1 intervention finished the year at preprimer.

(Brown, Reynolds, & Sinatra, 2000; also see Morris, Tyner, & Perney, 2000 & Santa & Hoien, 1999)

Will This Really Help Porfirio et al.?

G2 & G3 ELL students who started the year at primer and received 45 sessions of Next Steps, made 1 year of progress as readers (to early-G2).

Matched control ELL G2 & G3 students who received 135 sessions of regular Title 1 intervention made 1/2 year’s progress (to late-G1).

Brown, Morris, & Fields, 2002; Brown, Morris & Fields, 2003

How long will Porfirio et al. Need Help?

G2 students who received Early Steps in G1, and no intervention in G2 had made 1/2 year’s progress by March (to early-G2).

Matched control G2 students who received no intervention in G2 made 1/2 year’s progress by March (between primer & late-G1).

Brown, Morris, & Fields, 2001

What Do These Data Mean for Porfirio et al.?

Intervention can help them make substantial progress as readers

They may need more than 1 year of intervention to get to/maintain grade level performance

remember Dominique & Shelby!!!

Name Porfirio – pre NS Date 8/22/00

Grade 3 Age 9 Examiner DVG

School Wilmington Test NSSI

WORDRECOGNITION

TEST ORAL

FLASH(%)

UNTIMED(%)

READINGACCURACY

(%)RATE(WPM)

COMP(%)

LISTENINGCOMP

(%)SPELLING

(/66)

PP 94 X X

Primer 97 63 100

L-G1 95 56 100

E-G2 84 38 33

L-G2

3

4

5

6

7

Name Porfirio – post NS Date 5/28/01

Grade 3 Age 10 Examiner DVG

School Wilmington Test NSSI

WORD RECOGNITION

TEST ORAL

FLASH

(%) UNTIMED

(%)

READING ACCURACY

(%) RATE (WPM)

COMP (%)

LISTENING COMP

(%) SPELLING

(/66)

PP 100 99 X

Primer 99 109 100

L-G1 97 90 100

E-G2 97 82 67

L-G2

95 92 67

3 94 66 100

4 96 69 86

5 95 55 86

6

7

Name Porfirio Date 6/01/03

Grade 5 Age 11 Examiner KJB

School St. Mary’s Test NSSI

WORDRECOGNITION

TEST ORAL

FLASH(%)

UNTIMED(%)

READINGACCURACY

(%)RATE(WPM)

COMP(%)

LISTENINGCOMP

(%)SPELLING

(/66)

PP

Primer

L-G1

E-G2 100 154 100

L-G2 99 130 100

3 98 136 100

4 99 131 86

5 99 113 100

6 99 112 71

7

Name Juan Date 8/14/01

Grade 5 Age 10 Examiner CM

School Wilmington Test NSSI

WORD RECOGNITION

TEST ORAL

FLASH

(%) UNTIMED

(%)

READING ACCURACY

(%) RATE (WPM)

COMP (%)

LISTENING COMP

(%) SPELLING

(/66)

PP 84 X X

Primer 95 82 100

L-G1 94 50 100

M-G2 82 47 67

L-G2

3

4

5

6

7

Name Juan – post NS Date 5/22/02

Grade 5 Age 11 Examiner JR

School Wilmington Test NSSI

WORD RECOGNITION

TEST ORAL

FLASH

(%) UNTIMED

(%)

READING ACCURACY

(%) RATE (WPM)

COMP (%)

LISTENING COMP

(%) SPELLING

(/66)

PP X X

Primer 96 125 100

L-G1 94 90 100

E-G2 80 67 100

L-G2

83 81 100

3 84 70 100

4 77 65 14

5

6

7

Name Juan – post Wilson Date 6/05/03

Grade 6 Age 12 Examiner KJB

School Wilmington Test NSSI

WORDRECOGNITION

TEST ORAL

FLASH(%)

UNTIMED(%)

READINGACCURACY

(%)RATE(WPM)

COMP(%)

LISTENINGCOMP

(%)SPELLING

(/66)

PP X X

Primer 98 130 100

L-G1 96 95 100

E-G2 94 90 100

L-G2 94 80 100

3 89 71 100

4

5

6

7

Name Saul – pre NS Date 9/21/02

Grade 2 Age 7 Examiner BH

School Petal Ridge Test NSSI

WORD RECOGNITION

TEST ORAL

FLASH

(%) UNTIMED

(%)

READING ACCURACY

(%) RATE (WPM)

COMP (%)

LISTENING COMP

(%) SPELLING

(/66)

PP N/A

Primer

L-G1

E-G2

L-G2

3

4

5

6

7

Name Saul – post ES Date 5/19/03

Grade 2 Age 8 Examiner BB

School Petal Ridge Test NSSI

WORDRECOGNITION

TEST ORAL

FLASH(%)

UNTIMED(%)

READINGACCURACY

(%)RATE(WPM)

COMP(%)

LISTENINGCOMP

(%)SPELLING

(/66)

PP 82 N/A N/A

Primer 73 23 100

L-G1

E-G2

L-G2

3

4

5

6

7

What Do These Data Suggest re: ELL Struggling Readers?

Some ELL are “curriculum casualties” and just need basic intervention (Porfirio)

Some ELL are truly LD and need intensive, ongoing intervention (Juan)

Some ELL are “garden variety poor readers” and need intensive, ongoing intervention (Saul)

BEWARE OF POLITICS & LABELS!!!

What Needs to Be in Place to Help Porfirio et al? ...

Materials lots of controlled, leveled text (carefully

selected little books and controlled basal selections)

Enough Trained Bodies for Each Student educators who understand reading

development and know how to deliver effective intervention efficiently

What Do Educators Need?

Clinical Experience/Practicum

watch mentor model with student

work 1-on-1 with a student

get “on-line” feedback & theoretical framework from mentor

observe other tutors and students

Critical Issues: Time & 1-on-1

Clinical Experience/Practicum 1-on-1 clears management issues so educators can see

reading development “up close and personal” over time intensive and ongoing:

tutoring needs to happen 2-5x/week for 1 year to see reading development happen from ground zero (no words to independence (primer or better)

on-line mentoring needs to happen weekly or at least monthly

Goal = Develop a“Team Approach”

teachers group for reading to allow students to function at instructional level AMAP

in non-Title I schools, staff + volunteers build a tutoring program

in Title I schools, paraprofessionals are effective intervention tutors

remember Granger Elementary!!

What Role Do Universities Play?

Develop courses that focus on what we know from research about reading development and how instruction leads it

Help students develop an understanding of rigorous empirical research methods (quan + qual) vs. random, preferred anecdote

What Role Do Universities Play?

Resurrect a “clinical tradition” in graduate coursework

Build a “clinical tradition” in undergraduate coursework

Require methods professors have “clinical experience”