Inference-making is integral to reading comprehension, defined as information ‘retrieved or generated during reading to fill in information left implicit in a text’. However, there are few studies regarding the inferencing of young emergent multilinguals that account for multilingualism and culture, attend to the learning processes influenced by classroom instruction and interaction, and utilize qualitative methods to explore the multifaceted process of inferencing. This study explores classroom instances in which two second-grade emergent multilinguals encountered difficulties with inference-making, specifically when their first language or background knowledge was not accessed to support inference-making. Framing their difficulties as missed opportunities for learning, this study considers first language integration and multilingual pedagogies as ways to enrich learning. Findings revealed that inference-making was highly contextual, differing from text-to-text. Learners were able to infer in many instances, but difficulties arose when learners desired to articulate their inferences with specific words. Additionally, students encountered difficulties with the content language and background knowledge necessary to access an expository text. Implications of this study include supporting inference-making with students’ first language and culturally sustaining pedagogies in order to provide meaningful opportunities to engage in higher-order thinking surrounding texts.
ArmstrongDGoslingAWeinmanJMarteauT, et al.(1997) The place of inter-rater reliability in qualitative research: An empirical study. Sociology31(3): 597–606.
2.
AugustDCarloMDresslerC, et al.(2005) The critical role of vocabulary development for English language learners. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice20(1): 50–57.
3.
AugustDShanahanT (2006) Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language Minority Children and Youth, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4.
AukermanM (2013) Rereading comprehension pedagogies: Toward a dialogic teaching ethic that honors student sensemaking. Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal1DOI: 10.5195/dpj.2013.9.
5.
AukermanMSchuldtLAielloL, et al.(2017) What meaning-making means among us: The intercomprehending of emergent bilinguals in small-group text discussions. Harvard Educational Review87(4): 482–511.
6.
AvalosMAPlasenciaAChavezC, et al.(2007) Modified guided reading: Gateway to English as a second language and literacy learning. The Reading Teacher61(4): 318–329.
7.
BestRMFloydRGMcnamaraDS (2008) Differential competencies contributing to children's comprehension of narrative and expository texts. Reading Psychology29(2): 137–164.
8.
BoalsTCastroMWillnerLS (2018) Moving beyond assumptions of cultural neutrality to improve accessibility and opportunity to learn for English language learners. In:. Handbook of Accessible Instruction and Testing Practices, Berlin: Springer, pp. 119–134.
9.
Bowyer-CraneCSnowlingMJ (2005) Assessing children's inference generation: What do tests of reading comprehension measure?. British Journal of Educational Psychology75(2): 189–201.
10.
BrownAL (1977) Knowing When, Where, and How to Remember: A Problem of Metacognition, Arlington, TX: Eric Reports.
11.
BunchGC (2014) The language of ideas and the language of display: Reconceptualizing “academic language” in linguistically diverse classrooms. International Multilingual Research Journal8(1): 70–86.
12.
BunchGWalquiAPearsonP (2014) Complex text and new common standards in the United States: Pedagogical implications for English learners. TESOL Quarterly48(3): 533–559.
13.
CainKOakhillJV (1999) Inference making ability and its relation to comprehension failure in young children. Reading and Writing11(5–6): 489–503.
14.
CainKOakhillJVBarnesMA, et al.(2001) Comprehension skill, inference-making ability, and their relation to knowledge. Memory & Cognition29(6): 850–859.
15.
CarloMSAugustDMclaughlinB, et al.(2004) Closing the gap: Addressing the vocabulary needs of English-language learners in bilingual and mainstream classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly39(2): 188–215.
16.
CarrellPL (1983) Some issues in studying the role of schemata, or background knowledge, in second language comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language1(2): 81–92.
17.
CumminsJ (2015) Intercultural education and academic achievement: A framework for school-based policies in multilingual schools. Intercultural Education26(6): 455–468.
18.
De JongEJHarperCA (2005) Preparing mainstream teachers for English-language learners: Is being a good teacher good enough?. Teacher Education Quarterly32(2): 101–124.
19.
DörnyeiZScottML (1997) Communication strategies in a second language: Definitions and taxonomies. Language Learning47(1): 173–210.
20.
EbeAE (2010) Culturally relevant texts and reading assessment for English language learners. Reading Horizons50(3): 193–210.
21.
EbeAE (2012) Supporting the reading development of middle school English language learners through culturally relevant texts. Reading & Writing Quarterly28(2): 179–198.
22.
ElbroCBuch-IversenI (2013) Activation of background knowledge for inference making: Effects on reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading17(6): 435–452.
23.
EricksonF (2006) Definition and analysis of data from videotape: Some research procedures and their rationales. In: GreenJLCamilliGElmorePB (eds) Handbook of Complementary Methods in Education Research, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 177–192.
24.
EscamillaK (2015) Schooling begins before adolescence: The case of Manuel and limited opportunities to learn. In: MolleDSatoEBoalsT (eds) Multilingual Learners and Academic Literacies: Sociocultural Contexts of Literacy Development in Adolescents, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 210–227.
25.
FairbanksCMCooperJEWebbSM, et al.(2017) Reading comprehension research and the shift toward culturally sustaining pedagogy. In: IsraelSEDuffyGG (eds) Handbook of Research on Reading Comprehension, New York, NY: Guilford Press, pp. 459–478.
26.
FountasICPinnellGS (1996) Guided Reading: Good First Teaching for All Children, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
27.
GarcíaO (2009) Emergent bilinguals and TESOL: What's in a name?. TESOL Quarterly43(2): 322–326.
28.
García GE (1991) Factors influencing the English reading test performance of Spanish-speaking Hispanic children. Reading Research Quarterly 26(4): 371–392.
29.
GarcíaOWeiL (2014) Translanguaging and education. In: GarcíaOWeiL (eds) Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 63–77.
30.
GoldenbergC (2013) Unlocking the research on English learners: What we know-and don't yet know-about effective instruction. American Educator37(2): 4–38.
31.
Graesser AC, Singer M, and Trabasso T (1994) Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review 101(3): 371–395.
32.
HelmanLStaiC (2017) Public policy in an era of changing literacies: A focus on reading comprehension. In: IsraelS (ed) Handbook of Research on Reading Comprehension, New York, NY: The Guilford Press, pp. 626–648.
33.
JimenezRTGamezA (1996) Literature-based cognitive strategy instruction for middle school Latina/o students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy40(2): 84–91.
34.
KendeouP (2015) A general inference skill. In: O'BrienEJCookAELorchRF (eds) Inferences during Reading, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, pp. 160–181.
35.
KendeouPBohn-GettlerCWhiteMJ, et al.(2008) Children's inference generation across different media. Journal of Research in Reading31(3): 259–272.
36.
KendeouPMcMasterKLChristTJ (2016) Reading comprehension: Core components and processes. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences3(1): 62–69.
37.
KendeouPVan BroekPWhiteMJ, et al.(2007) Comprehension in preschool and early elementary children: Skill development and strategy interventions. In: McNamaraD (ed) Reading Comprehension Strategies: Theories, Interventions, and Technologies, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 27–45.
38.
KendeouPVan den BroekP (2005) The effects of readers' misconceptions on comprehension of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology97(2): 235–245.
39.
KendeouPVan den BroekPHelderA, et al.(2014) A cognitive view of reading comprehension: Implications for reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice29(1): 10–16.
40.
KendeouPVan den BroekPWhiteMJ, et al.(2009) Predicting reading comprehension in early elementary school: The independent contributions of oral language and decoding skills. Journal of Educational Psychology101(4): 765–778.
41.
Kispal A (2008) Effective teaching of inference skills for reading. Cheshire, UK: National Foundation for Educational Research, Department of Education (Division of Children, School and Families).
42.
LeeYJ (2016) Letting the story out: Drawing on children's life stories and identities to help them read beyond and enhance their comprehension. Journal of Language, Identity & Education15(6): 389–403.
43.
LukeAWoodsADooleyK (2011) Comprehension as social and intellectual practice: Rebuilding curriculum in low socioeconomic and cultural minority schools. Theory into Practice50(2): 157–164.
44.
MachadoE (2017) Fostering and sustaining diverse literacy practices in the early childhood classroom: Reviewing the literature in three areas. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice66(1): 309–324.
45.
McKoonGRatcliffR (1992) Inference during reading. Psychological Review99(3): 440–466.
MantzicopoulosPPatrickH (2011) Reading picture books and learning science: Engaging young children with informational text. Theory into Practice50(4): 269–276.
48.
Martin-BeltránM (2014) “What do you want to say?” How adolescents use translanguaging to expand learning opportunities. International Multilingual Research Journal8(3): 208–230.
49.
Martin-BeltránMDanielSPeercyM, et al.(2017) Developing a zone of relevance: Emergent bilinguals' use of social, linguistic, and cognitive support in peer-led literacy discussions. International Multilingual Research Journal11(3): 152–166.
50.
Melby-LervågMLervågA (2014) Reading comprehension and its underlying components in second-language learners: A meta-analysis of studies comparing first and second-language learners. Psychological Bulletin140(2): 409–433.
51.
MilesMBHubermanAMSaldanaJ (2013) Qualitative Data Analysis, London: SAGE.
52.
MorseJM (1997) “Perfectly Healthy, but Dead”: The myth of inter-rater reliability. Qualitative Health Research7(4): 445–447.
53.
OakhillJVCainK (2007) Issues of causality in children's reading comprehension. In: McNamaraD (ed) Reading Comprehension Strategies: Theories, Interventions and Technologies, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 47–71.
54.
OakhillJVCainK (2012) The precursors of reading ability in young readers: Evidence from a four-year longitudinal study. Scientific Studies of Reading16(2): 91–121.
55.
ParisD (2012) Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher41(3): 93–97.
56.
ParisDAlimHS (2014) What are we seeking to sustain through culturally sustaining pedagogy? A loving critique forward. Harvard Educational Review84(1): 85–100.
57.
PeregoySFBoyleOF (2000) English learners reading English: What we know, what we need to know. Theory into Practice39(4): 237–247.
58.
PerfettiCALandiNOakhillJ (2005) The acquisition of reading comprehension skill. In: SnowlingMHulmeC (eds) The Science of Reading: A Handbook, Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 227–247.
59.
ProctorCPCarloMAugustD, et al.(2005) Native Spanish-speaking children reading in English: Toward a model of comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology97(2): 246.
60.
Purcell-GatesV (2007) Complicating the complex. In: Purcell-GatesV (ed) Cultural Practices of Literacy: Case Studies of Language, Literacy, Social Practice, and Power, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 1–22.
61.
RexLAGreenJL (2008) Classroom discourse and interaction: Reading across the traditions. In: SpolskyBHultF (eds) The Handbook of Educational Linguistics, Malden MA: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 571–584.
62.
SaldañaJ (2015) The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
63.
SipeLR (2000) The construction of literary understanding by first and second graders in oral response to picture storybook read-alouds. Reading Research Quarterly35(2): 252–275.
64.
SnowCE (2002) Reading for Understanding: Toward an R&D Program in Reading Comprehension, Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
65.
SnowCEBurnsMSGriffinP (1998) Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children, Washington, DC: National Research Council, National Academy Press.
66.
Soto HuertaME (2012) Guiding biliteracy development: Appropriating cross-linguistic and conceptual knowledge to sustain second-language reading comprehension. Bilingual Research Journal35(2): 179–196.
67.
StreetBV (1993) Cross-Cultural Approaches to Literacy. Vol. 23, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
68.
SwainMBrooksLTocalli-BellerA (2002) Peer-peer dialogue as a means of second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics22: 171–185.
69.
TrabassoTBouchardE (2002) Teaching readers how to comprehend text strategically. In: BlockCPressleyM (eds) Comprehension Instruction: Research-based Best Practices, New York, NY: Guilford Press, pp. 176–200.
70.
ValenzuelaA (2010) Subtractive Schooling: US-Mexican Youth and the Politics of Caring, Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
71.
Van den BroekP (1997) Discovering the cement of the universe: The development of event comprehension from childhood to adulthood. In: Van den BroekPBauerPBourgT (eds) Developmental Spans in Event Comprehension and Representation: Bridging Fictional and Actual Events, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 321–342.
72.
VygotskyLS (1978) Mind and Society: The Development of Higher Mental Processes, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press.
73.
YoppRHYoppHK (2006) Informational texts as read-alouds at school and home. Journal of Literacy Research38(1): 37–51.
74.
YuillNOakhillJ (1991) Children's Problems in Text Comprehension: An Experimental Investigation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
