1. Building Learner Profiles for EFL Reading Intervention through the Use of the ABLE (Assessing Basic Literacy in English) Kit
Dr. Susie Russak,
Beit Berl Academic College
Dr. Lisa Amdur National Authority of Measurement and Evaluation
in Education (RAMA)
ACROLT Conference May 7,2012

2. Overview of ABLE kit
A research-based assessment tool designed to help teachers identify learners at risk for reading difficulties in the EFL classroom at the end of the first year of literacy instruction.
Comprised of a whole class screening and an individual diagnostic test.
Using the results from the two stages of the assessment kit, individual learner performance profiles can be used to inform personalized reading intervention.

3. Rationale for development
To provide a valid and reliable kit for use by teachers to assess literacy acquisition in EFL
To diagnose pupils at risk for reading difficulties in EFL as early as possible
To provide teachers with clear guidelines and practical tools of “best practices” in teaching beginning literacy in EFL
TEACHER EMPOWERMENT

4. Screening test: Diagnostic test: Objectives
Identify pupils having difficulty acquiring basic literacy skills in EFL
Diagnostic test:
Identify domains of difficulty within different pupils
Inform intervention options through test performance profiles

5. Full class screening: classroom administration
Components
Full class screening: classroom administration
Listening comprehension
Reading comprehension
Spelling
Individual diagnostic test: individual administration
Phonological representations
Phonological awareness
Letter sound knowledge
Word decoding

6. Notes on task construction
All words for the class screening section were chosen from a corpus of all lexical items that appear in text books used from the beginning of formal literacy instruction ( 3rd grade).
Phonemic inventories of Arabic, Hebrew, and English were considered.
All items that the pupils needed to hear were recorded by a native speaker ( Arabic for Arab sector, Hebrew for Jewish sector).

7. Theoretical framework
Thanks to Prof.Esther Geva

8. Theoretical framework
Phonological Distinctness/Representations hypothesis (Elbro, 1996, Goswami, 2000, Snowling, 2000)
Linguistic Affiliation Constraint (Saiegh-Haddad, 2003, 2004, 2007; Russak & Saiegh-Haddad, 2010)
Linguistic coding difficulties hypothesis (Sparks, Ganschow, & Pohlman, 1989).

9. Theoretical framework
English/language-specific characteristics
Linguistic features
Phonological inventory, complexity
Orthographic depth
Foundation literacy acquisition
More prolonged route of acquisition (accuracy and speed)
Processing mechanisms
Dual route to reading model (Seidenberg & McClelland, 1989)

10. Theoretical framework
Dual route to reading model
Pre-lexical assembled phonology route:
Grapheme-phoneme correspondences which are regular and consistent
Visual route:
Orthographic patterns which are irregular but consistent
Sight words which are irregular and inconsistent
Lexical access

11. Preliminary findings - letter-sound knowledge (N=58)

12. Preliminary findings - word repetition (N=58)

13. Preliminary findings - phonological awareness (N=58)

14. Preliminary findings - word decoding (N=58)

15. Building performance profiles
Qualitative analysis on a random sample of 10 native Hebrew and 10 native Arabic speaking pupils’ test protocols from the pilot stage of individual diagnostic test
Answers for each item of each sub-test were mapped out
Categories were identified based on error patterns and characteristics

16. Letter sound knowledge
Arabic speakers
Hebrew speakers
W-10
J-9
H- 8
U,Y- 7
G, P, L- 6
B,K,I -5
H -8
W, L-7
J -6
U, N - 5

17. Word repetition Arabic speakers Hebrew speakers Linoleum – 7
Articulate – 5
Metropolis – 4
Pertain - 4
Articulate – 5
Reciprocate – 5
Thorough – 5
Linoleum - 4
4 syllable words
Novel phonemes
ACROLT Conference May 7,2012

18. Phonological awareness
Arabic speakers
Hebrew speakers
Lame* – 8
Main* – 7
Lift – 6
Must – 6
* Strange errors!
Bend – 8
Must – 6
Lift – 5
Ramp* - 5
* Primarily difficulties with pronouncing the r (as a w)
Deletion of the first consonant in a final consonantal cluster
ACROLT Conference May 7,2012

19. Specific difficulties
lack of sound-letter correspondence knowledge
representation of novel phonemes orally and in writing
short vowels
vowel digraphs
consonant digraphs
bi and tri-consonantal clusters
magic e
directionality (b-d)
orthographic patterns
sight words
ACROLT Conference May 7,2012

20. Tentative learner profiles
L1 based
EFL specific
poor phonological representation
phonological awareness
sound-letter correspondences
orthographic patterns
lack of familiarity with novel sounds
decoding and spelling esp. regular consistent words: phonological
decoding and spelling esp. irregular consistent words: orthographic

21. susie.russak@gmail.com lamdur.rama@education.gov.il
Thank you