This study determined the effectiveness of Kindergarten Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies (K—PALS) for English Learners (ELs). We compared 20 K—PALS ELs to 20 Control ELs and to 20 K—PALS non-ELs on early reading skill acquisition, using a pretest—posttest control group design with matched samples. We also compared proportions of ELs unresponsive to K—PALS to ELs unresponsive to traditional instruction. Teachers implemented K—PALS 4 times per week for 18 weeks. Following intervention, analyses of covariance on posttest measures indicated that K—PALS ELs performed reliably higher than Control ELs on measures of phonemic awareness and letter sound recognition, and they performed similarly to K—PALS non-ELs. Findings are discussed in terms of K—PALS efficacy for ELs in a response-to-intervention framework.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbediJ. (2004). The No Child Left Behind Act and English language learners: Assessment and accountability issues. Educational Research, 33, 4–14.
2.
CumminsJ. (1980). The entry and exit fallacy in bilingual education. NABE Journal, 4, 25–29.
3.
D'AngiulliA.SiegelL. S.MaggiS. (2004). Literacy instruction, SES, and word-reading achievement in English-language learners and children with English as a first language: A longitudinal study. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 19, 202–213.
4.
de la ColinaM. G.ParkerR. I.HasbrouckJ. E.Lara-AlecioR. (2001). Intensive intervention in reading fluency for at-risk beginning Spanish readers. Bilingual Research Journal, 25, 503–538.
5.
DentonC. A.AnthonyJ. L.ParkerR.HasbrouckJ. E. (2004). Effects of two tutoring programs on the English reading development of Spanish—English bilingual students. The Elementary School Journal, 104 (4), 289–305.
6.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?. Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 92–99.
7.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.ThompsonA.Al OtaibaS.YenL.YangN. (2001). Is reading important in reading-readiness programs? A randomized field trial with teachers as program implementers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 251–267.
8.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.ThompsonA.Al OtaibaS.YenL.YangN. (2002). Exploring the importance of reading programs for kindergartners with disabilities in mainstream classrooms. Exceptional Children, 68, 295–311.
9.
FuchsD.MockD.MorganP. L.YoungC. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities, Research, & Practice, 18, 157–171.
10.
FuchsL. S. (2003). Assessing intervention responsiveness: Conceptual and technical issues. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 172–186.
11.
GallM. D.GallJ. P.BorgW. R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
12.
GerberM.JimenezT.LeafstedtJ.VillaruzJ.RichardsC.EnglishJ. (2004). English reading effects of small-group intensive intervention in Spanish for K—l English learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 19, 239–251.
13.
GerstenR.BakerS. (2000). What we know about effective instructional practices for English-language learners. Exceptional Children, 66, 454–470.
14.
GerstenR.BakerS.HaagerD.GravesA. (2005). Exploring the role of teacher quality in predicting reading outcomes for first-grade English learners: An observational study. Remedial & Special Education, 26, 197–206.
15.
GerstenR.GevaE. (2003, April). Teaching reading to early language learners. Educational Leadership, 60, 44–49.
16.
GunnB.BiglanA.SmolkowskiK.AryD. (2000). The efficacy of supplemental instruction in decoding skills for Hispanic and non-Hispanic students in early elementary school. Journal of Special Education, 34, 90–103.
17.
HaagerD.WindmuellerM. P. (2001). Early reading intervention for English language learners at-risk for learning disabilities: Student and teacher outcomes in an urban school. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24, 235–250.
18.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act, Pub. L. 108–446 U.S.C. (2004).
19.
KlingnerJ. K.EdwardsP. A. (2006). Cultural considerations with response to intervention models. Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 108–117.
20.
LeafstedtJ. M.RichardsC. R.GerberM. M. (2004). Effectiveness of explicit phonological-awareness instruction for at-risk English learners. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 19, 252–261.
21.
LevyB. A.LysunchukL. (1997). Beginning word recognition: Benefits of training by segmentation and whole word methods. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 359–387.
22.
Linan-ThompsonS.VaughnS.Hickman-DavisP.KouzekananiK. (2003). Effectiveness of supplemental reading instruction for second-grade English language learners with reading difficulties. Elementary School Journal, 103, 221–238.
23.
Linan-ThompsonS.VaughnS.PraterK.CirinoP. T. (2006). The response to intervention of English language learners at risk for reading problems. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 390–398.
24.
LongM. H.PorterP. A. (1985). Group work, interlanguage talk, and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 207–228.
25.
LyonG. R.FletcherJ. M.ShaywitzS. E.ShaywitzB. A.TorgesenJ. K.WoodF. B. (2001). Rethinking learning disabilities. In FinnC. E.Jr.RotherhamA. J.KokansonC. R.Jr. (Eds.), Rethinking special education for a new century (pp. 259–288). Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
26.
McCardleP.Mele-McCarthyJ.CuttingL.LeosK.D'EmilioT. (2005). Learning disabilities in English language learners: Identifying the issues. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20, 1–5.
27.
McMasterK. L.FuchsD.FuchsL. S. (2002). Using peer tutoring to prevent early reading failure. In ThousandJ. S.VillaR. A.NevinA. (Eds.), Creativity and collaborative learning: The practical guide to empowering students, teachers, and families (pp. 235–246). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
28.
Minnesota Department of Education. (2003). Minnesota modified student oral language observation matrix. Retrieved May 9, 2006, from http://children.state.mn.us/mde/static/.
29.
Minnesota Department of Education. (2004). Minnesota English Language Proficiency Standards for English Language Learners K–12. Retrieved March 15, 2006, from http://education.state.mn.us/mde/static/002193.pdf.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching students to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
32.
No Child Left Behind Act, Pub. L. No. 107–110, 115 Stat. 1425, 2002 U.S.C. (2002).
33.
Psychological Corporation. (1992). Wechsler individual Achievement Test. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
34.
SlavinR. E.CheungA. (2005). A synthesis of research on language of reading instruction for English language learners. Review of Educational Research, 75, 247–284.
35.
SnowC. E.BurnsS.GriffinP. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
36.
SpeeceD. L.CaseL. P. (2001). Classification in context: An alternative approach to identifying early reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 735–749.
37.
TorgesenJ. K.AlexanderA. W.WagnerR. K.RashotteC. A.VoellerK. K. S.ConwayT. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 33–58, 78.
38.
TorgesenJ. K.WagnerR. K.RashotteC. A. (1997). Prevention and remediation of severe reading disabilities: Keeping the end in mind. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 217–234.
VaughnS.CirinoP. T.Linan-ThompsonS.MathesP. G.CarlsonC. D.HaganE. C. (2006). Effectiveness of a Spanish intervention and an English intervention for English-language learners at risk for reading problems. American Educational Research Journal, 43, 449–487.
41.
VaughnS.Linan-ThompsonS. (2003). Group size and time allotted to intervention: Effects for students with reading difficulties. In FoormanB. (Ed.), Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale (pp. 229–324). Baltimore: York Press.
42.
VaughnS.Linan-ThompsonS.MathesP. G.CirinoP. T.CarlsonC. D.Pollard-DurodolaS. D. (2006). Effectiveness of Spanish intervention for first-grade English language learners at risk for reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 56–73.
43.
VaughnS.Linan-ThompsonS.Pollard-DurodolaS. D.MathesP. G.HaganE. C. (2006). Effective interventions for English language learners (Spanish—English) at risk for reading difficulties. In DickinsonD. K.NeumanS. B. (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research, Vol. 2. (pp. 185–197). New York: Guilford Press.
44.
VaughnS.MathesP. G.Linan-ThompsonS.CirinoP. T.CarlsonC. D.Pollard-DurodolaS. D. (2006). First-grade English language learners at-risk for reading problems: Effectiveness of an English intervention. Elementary School Journal, 107, 153–180.
45.
VaughnS.MathesP. G.Linan-ThompsonS.FrancisD. J. (2005). Teaching English language learners at risk for reading disabilities to read: Putting research into practice. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20, 58–67.
46.
VellutinoF. R.ScanlonD. M.SipayE. R.SmallS.ChenR.PrattA. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated 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.
47.
VygotskyL. S. (1987). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. New York: Plenum.
48.
WagnerR. K.FrancisD. J.MorrisR. D. (2005). Identifying English language learners with learning disabilities: Key challenges and possible approaches. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20, 6–15.
