In this article we report small, but statistically significant, effects of brief supplemental instruction on English reading by Spanish–speaking kindergartners (N = 37) who performed poorly on a bilingual battery of phonological–processing tasks. Intervention design was compatible with the Reading First initiative and with research on use of multitiered intervention strategies for preventing reading failure among young monolingual students (e.g., L. S. Fuchs & Vaughn, 2003). We describe a Core Intervention Model (CIM) comprised of specific instructional behaviors that teachers might easily learn and employ regardless of curriculum, and discuss implications of our findings for building multitiered preventative instruction for young English learners.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlanisI., MunterJ., & TinajeroJ. V. (2003). Preventing reading failure for English language learners: Interventions for struggling first–grade L2 students. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 1, 92–109.
2.
BallE. W., & BlachmanB. A. (1991). Does phonemic segmentation training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling?Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 49–66.
3.
BialystokE., MajumderS., & MartinM. M. (2003). Developing phonological awareness: Is there a bilingual advantage?Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 27–44.
4.
BradleyL., & BryantP. (1983). Categorizing sounds and learning to read: A causal connection. Nature, 301, 419–421.
5.
ChristensenC. A. (1997). Onset, rhymes, and phonemes in learning to read. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1(4), 341–358.
6.
CiseroC. A., & RoyerJ. M. (1995). The development and cross–language transfer of phonological awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 275–303.
7.
Committee on the Prevention of Reading Difficulties in Young Students. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young students. Washington, DC : National Academy Press.
8.
DurgunogluA. Y., NagyW. E., & Hancin–BhattB. J. (1993). Cross–language transfer of phonological awareness. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 453–465.
9.
ElbaumB. E., VaughnS., HughesM. T., & MoodyS. W. (1999). Grouping practices and reading outcomes for students with disabilities. Exceptional Students, 65, 399–415.
10.
FletcherJ. M., FoormanB. R., BoudousquieA., BarnesM. A., SchatschneiderC., & FrancisD. J. (2002). Assessment of reading and learning disabilities: A research–based intervention–oriented approach. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 27–63.
11.
FletcherJ. M., & LyonG. R. (1998). Reading: A research–based approach. In EversW. M. (Ed.), What's gone wrong in America's classrooms? (pp. 49–90). Stanford, CA : Hoover Institute Press.
12.
FoormanB. R., & TorgesenJ. (2001). Critical elements of classroom and small–group instruction promote reading success in all students. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(4), 203–212.
13.
FrancisD. J., ShaywitzS. E., StuebingK. K., ShaywitzB. A., & FletcherJ. M. (1996). Developmental lag versus deficit models of reading disability: A longitudinal, individual growth curves analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 3–17.
14.
FuchsD., FuchsL. S., ThompsonA., Al–OtaibaS., YenL., YangN. J.. (2002). Exploring the importance of reading programs for kindergartners with disabilities in mainstream classrooms. Exceptional Children, 68, 295–311.
15.
FuchsL. S. (2002). Three conceptualizations of “treatment” in a responsiveness to treatment model. In BradleyR., DanielsonL., & HallahanD. (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 521–529). Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
16.
FuchsL. S., & VaughnS. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(3), 137–146.
17.
GerberM. M., & EnglishJ. P. (2003). Project La Patera. Final report. Santa Barbara, CA : Center for Advanced Studies of Individual Differences, University of California.
18.
GevaE., Wade–WoolleyL., & ShanyM. (1997). Development of reading efficiency in first and second language. Scientific Studies in Reading, 1, 119–144.
19.
GoswamiU., & BryantP. (1990). Phonological skills and learning to read. Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum.
20.
GottardoA., YanB., SiegelL. S., & Wade–WoolleyL. (2001). Factors related to English reading performance in students with Chinese as a first language: More evidence of cross–language transfer of phonological processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 530–542.
21.
JusticeL. M., & PullenP. (2003). Promising interventions for promoting emergent literacy skills: Three evidenced based approaches. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 23(3), 99–113.
22.
LeafstedtJ. L. (2002). Crossover of phonological processing skills: A study of Spanish–speaking students in two instructional settings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of California, Santa Barbara.
23.
LeafstedtJ. M., RichardsC. R., & GerberM. M. (this issue). Effectiveness of explicit phonological awareness instruction for at–risk English learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice.
24.
LindseyK. M., ManisF. R., & BaileyC. E. (2003). Prediction of first grade reading in Spanish–speaking English language learners. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 482–494.
25.
LyonG. R. (2003). A definition of dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 53, 1–14.
26.
LyonG. R., FletcherJ. M., ShaywitzS. E., ShaywitzB. A., TorgesenJ. K., WoodF. B.. (2001). Rethinking learning disabilities. In FinnC. E., RothermanA. J., & HokansonC. R. (Eds.), Rethinking special education for a new century (pp. 259–287). Washington, DC : Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and the Progressive Policy Institute.
27.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching students to read: Summary report. Washington, DC : National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
28.
O'ConnorR. E., JenkinsJ. R., & SlocumT. A. (1995). Transfer among phonological tasks in kindergarten: Essential instructional content. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 202–217.
29.
PikulskiJ. J. (1994). Preventing reading failure: A review of five effective programs. Reading Teacher, 48(1), 30–39.
30.
RashotteC. A., MacPheeK., & TorgesonJ. K. (2001). The effectiveness of a group reading instruction program with poor readers in multiple grades. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 24(2), 119–134.
31.
RiccioC. A., AmadoA., JiménezS., HasbrouckJ. E., ImhoffB., & DentonC. (2001). Cross–linguistic transfer of phonological processing: Development of a measure of phonological processing in Spanish. Bilingual Research Journal, 25, 417–437.
32.
RichardsC. R. (2004). Response to instruction: A study of phonological awareness instruction for kindergartener English learners. Unpublished dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara.
33.
SlavinR. E., & CheungA. (2003). Effective reading programs for English language learners: A best–evidence synthesis. Baltimore, MD : Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research on Effective Schooling for Disadvantaged Students.
34.
SnowC., BurnsS., & GriffinP. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young students. Washington, DC : National Academy Press.
35.
StanovichK. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 7–29.
36.
SwansonH. E., SaezL., GerberM. M., & LeafstedtJ. (2004). Literacy and cognitive functioning in bilingual and non–bilingual children at or not at risk for reading disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 3–18.
37.
SwansonH. L., & HoskynsM. (1999). Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta–analysis of treatment outcomes. New York : Guilford Press.
38.
TorgesenJ. K. (2002). Lessons learned from intervention research in reading: A way to go before we rest. In StanthorpR. & TomlinsonP. (Eds.), Learning & teaching reading (pp. 89–103). British Journal of Educational Psychology Monograph Series II: Psychological Aspects of Education. Leicester, UK : British Psychological Society.
39.
ToregesenJ. K., AlexanderA., WagnerR., RaschotteC., VoellerK., & ConwayT. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for students with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long–term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33–58.
40.
TorgesenJ. K., WagnerR., RashotteC., RoseE., LindamoodP., ConwayT.. (1999). Preventing reading failure in young students with phonological processing disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 579–593.
41.
VaughnS., BosC. S., & SchummJ. (2001). Teaching exceptional, diverse, and at–risk students in the general education classroom (3rd ed.). Boston, MA : Allyn & Bacon.
42.
VaughnS., HughesM. T., MoodyS. W., & ElbaumB. (2001). Instructional grouping for reading for students with learning disabilities: Implications for practice. Intervention in School and Clinic, 35, 131–137.
43.
VellutinoF., ScanlonD., SipayE., SmallS., PrattA., ChenR.. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult–to–remediate and readily remediate poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 601–638.
44.
WagnerR. K., & TorgesonJ. K. (1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 192–212.
