1. What Kind of Intervention for Whom, and When? Responses of English Language Learners to Intervention

2. Dr. Kathleen J. Brown, Director University of Utah Reading Clinic 5282 South 320 West, Suite D110 Murray, UT 84105 801-265-3951 www.uurc.org email: uurc@ed.utah.edu

3. 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 wpmG4 = 95-120 wpm  G2 = 60-90 wpmG5 = 110-140 wpm  G3 = 80-110wpmG6 = 110-150 wpm comprehend at least 70% (Good, Simmons, & Kame’enui, 2003; Hasbrouck & Tindal, 1992; Leslie & Caldwell, 2000; Morris, 1999)

4. 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)

5. 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)

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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”

9. 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)

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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!!!

21. 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!!!

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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

25. 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!!

26. 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

27. 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”