OrRTI ELL SymposiumApril 27, 2012

Top Ten StatesBottom Ten States (with ties)Middle StatesNo Data

Source: National Assessment of Educational Progress

NAEP Percentage of Hispanic Students At or Above Proficient in 4th Grade Reading: 2009

WA

OR

CA

AZ NM

NVUT

ID

MT

WY

CO

TX

OK

KS

NE

SD

ND

MN

IA

MO

WI

IL IN

MI

OH

KY

TN NC

SC

FL

GAALMS

AR

LA

AK

HI

VAWV

PA

NY

ME

DC

MD

DE NJ

CT RI

MA

VT

NH

3

HOW WELL ARE STUDENTS DOING?

Top Ten States (with ties)Bottom Ten States (with ties)Middle StatesNo Data

Source: National Assessment of Educational Progress

NAEP Percentage of Hispanic Students At or Above Proficient in 4th Grade Mathematics: 2009

WA

OR

CA

AZ NM

NVUT

ID

MT

WY

CO

TX

OK

KS

NE

SD

ND

MN

IA

MO

WI

IL IN

MI

OH

KY

TN NC

SC

FL

GAALMS

AR

LA

AK

HI

VAWV

PA

NY

ME

DC

MD

DE NJ

CT RI

MA

VT

NH

4

HOW WELL ARE STUDENTS DOING?

Top Ten States (with ties)Bottom Ten States (with ties)Middle StatesNo Data

Source: National Assessment of Educational Progress

NAEP Percentage of Hispanic Students At or Above Proficient in 8th Grade Reading: 2009

WA

OR

CA

AZ NM

NVUT

ID

MT

WY

CO

TX

OK

KS

NE

SD

ND

MN

IA

MO

WI

IL IN

MI

OH

KY

TN NC

SC

FL

GAALMS

AR

LA

AK

HI

VAWV

PA

NY

ME

DC

MD

DE NJ

CT RI

MA

VT

NH

5

HOW WELL ARE STUDENTS DOING?

Top Ten States (with ties)Bottom Ten StatesMiddle StatesNo Data

Source: National Assessment of Educational Progress

NAEP Percentage of Hispanic Students At or Above Proficient in 8th Grade Mathematics: 2009

WA

OR

CA

AZ NM

NVUT

ID

MT

WY

CO

TX

OK

KS

NE

SD

ND

MN

IA

MO

WI

IL IN

MI

OH

KY

TN NC

SC

FL

GAALMS

AR

LA

AK

HI

VAWV

PA

NY

ME

DC

MD

DE NJ

CT RI

MA

VT

NH

6

HOW WELL ARE STUDENTS DOING?

Challenges: A day in the life…

• Quality of core instruction low• Good intentions poorly executed• Academic English was too advanced

for Els• Limited opportunities to respond/use

language• Complicated schedule, many

transitions• Instruction not connected across

classes

Challenges: District issues…

• Scheduling & addressing many needs– Language, literacy, core, interventions

• Curriculum integration/vs curricular chaos

• Over & under identification of ELL students

• Quality EL Core instruction• Language progress monitoring data• Cohort data to analyze language

acquisition and literacy based on language level

Relation Between Language and Literacy

DevelopmentDoris Luft Baker

dbaker@uoregon.eduOregonRTI Symposium

April 27, 2012

Domains• Listening: easier to

acquire• Speaking: BICS* can

be acquired through interactions with others/ CALP** through school

• Reading: challenging• Writing: most

challenging

Elements• Phonology• Syntax• Morphology• Semantics• Pragmatics

Domains and Elements of Language Acquisition

*BICS = Basic Intercommunicative Skills**CALP = Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency Doris Luft Baker, April 27, 2012

EnglishSpanish

22-24 phonemes 42-44 phonemes

7 conditional rules 27 letter combinations + conditional rules

All words are decodable Irregular words

27 letters + 3 digraphs (rr, ll, ch)

Orthographic System

26 letters

Differences and Similarities in the Orthographic Systems

Baker, D. L. 2010

Phonemic Awareness

Alphabetic Principle Fluency Vocabulary Comprehension

K 1 2 3

A Conceptual Framework for Reading/Literacy Instruction

Coyne, M., 2011

Doris Luft Baker, April 27, 2012

A Conceptual Framework for Reading/Literacy/Language

Instruction

Code Based Instruction

K 1 2 3

Meaning Based Instruction

Language Proficiency Instruction

Adapted from Coyne, M., 2011 Doris Luft Baker, April 27, 2012

Meaning Based Instruction

Understanding academic language• Vocabulary Knowledge• Complex Sentence Structures / Syntax– Sentences with passive voice, prepositions,

double negative, & ambiguous phrases, etc. (It was not true that she disliked the party decorations.)

• Discourse Patterns– Units of language more than one sentence in

length that can allow for the organization of speech and writing and convey meaning and coherence across sentences.

• Rec.: Have EL Students Talk More!

Vocabulary Knowledge• Limited vocabulary knowledge is the most

common source of reading comprehension difficulties among ELs (e.g., Droop & Verhoeven, 2003; Garcia, 1991; Proctor, Carlo, August & Snow, 2005; Umbel, Pearson, Fernandez & Oller, 1992)– Knowing Tier 1 words (e.g., can, tip; Beck &

McKeown, 2002)– Defining and using Tier 2 words (e.g., ancient,

pursue, admire, practice)– Learning content area vocabulary or Tier 3

words (e.g., ratio, peninsula, pentagram)• Rec.: Teach ELs More Words

Complex Sentence Structures/Syntax

• Can be taught in the context of the language arts curriculum and content area classes

• EL teachers can focus on students understanding sentences• “In an attempt to explain the immense power and

unpredictable behavior of volcanoes, our ancient ancestors created myths about evil gods that lived within volcanoes.”

• Rec.: Teach Els to understand and use complex sentences Doris Luft Baker, April 27, 2012

Discourse Patterns• ….. Ramírez (1992) concluded that students are

limited in their opportunities to produce language and in their opportunities to produce more complex language. Direct observations reveal that teachers do most of the talking in classrooms, making about twice as many utterances as do students. Students produce language only when they are working directly with a teacher, and then only in response to teacher initiations. . . . Of major concern is that in over half of the interactions that teachers have with students, students do not produce any language as they are only listening or responding with non-verbal gestures or actions. (pp. 9–10)

Doris Luft Baker, April 27, 2012

Time in minutes spent on Core Components of Reading Instruction by Condition

SETRM (SD)

ControlM (SD)

t-statistic(df = 35) p-value Hedges’ g

Phonological awareness 7.9 (6.2) 3.9 (5.7) 2.01 .052 0.67

Alphabetic principle

27.5 (11.0)

22.4 (11.6) 1.36 .183 0.45

Fluency 23.9 (12.3)

26.3 (15.9) -0.51 .613 -0.17

Vocabulary 5.3 (3.9) 7.8 (5.9) -1.56 .127 -0.50

Comprehension 19.8 (11.4)

21.6 (10.8) -0.50 .618 0.16

Total 84.3 (31.2)

82.1 (34.1) 0.20 .839 0.07

Note. Analyses were conducted at the school level (18 SETR schools, 19 Control schools). Time was measured in minutes. M = Mean, SD = Standard Deviation.

Review of Research1. National Literacy Panel: Developing

Literacy in Second Language Learners -Executive Summary (2006)

2. Teaching English Language Learners: What the Research Does and Does Not Say (Claude Goldenberg, 2008)

3. IES Practice Guide: Effective Literacy and English Language Instruction (2007)

4. English Language Learners and RTI (Baker & Baker, 2007)

Meta Analysis of Meta Analyses

Language• Teaching students to read in their first language (L1)

promotes higher levels of reading in English (transfer) • Oral proficiency in English is critical– ELs have remarkably little language engagement;

teachers talk and students listen– Need active engagement in language rich, higher

order tasks– Vocabulary, comprehension, and academic English

are critical as students advance

Summary of Summaries

Instruction• What we know about good instruction in general holds

true for EL’s (for both English and L1 instruction): – Teach the big 5, – Explicit, systematic, frequent opportunities to

respond• Provide intensive small-group reading intervention• Screen for reading problems and monitor progress (i.e.,

ORF)• Progress monitoring-ORF sensitive to growth and

viable for dual discrepancy

Next Steps• Develop cohort guidelines and data• Protocol for evaluation of LD• Protocol for assessment and Tiered

Support of Els• Decision rules for progress

monitoring with respect to language levels

• Assessment instruction matrix on the 4 parts of language and types of assessment

TIER I Support & Cohort Analysis

Core Instruction for English Language LearnersTIER 2

ELL Support ProtocolDraft Protocol from TTSD

Assessment MatrixAssessment Matrix

Progress Monitoring Language

CWS

Questions???