22
Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) Dr. Matilde Campos Young

Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National

Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Skills (DIBELS)

Dr. Matilde Campos Young

Page 2: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Statement of the Problem

• Nation wide studies show that the achievement gap between ELL students and other students’ reading scores on nationally standardized assessments is wide, typically by 20% to 40% (Menken, 2006).

Page 3: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Introduction

• Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills: (DIBELS): Assessment system

http://dibels.uoregon.edu/

Page 4: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Introduction

• Response To Intervention: RTI– Educational approach includes

Ongoing student assessment

High quality instruction

Tiered intervention

http://www.aimsweb.com/?gclid=CP3K4Znnk5cCFQS7sgodYGa0_g

Page 5: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

DIBELS Reading Benchmark Achievement Goals

DIBELS Measure

Beginning of YearMonths 1-3

Middle of YearMonths 4-6

End of YearMonths 7-10

Scores Status Scores Status Scores Status

Initial Sound Fluency (ISF)

0 - 34 - 78 +

At riskSome riskLow risk

0 - 910 - 2425 +

DeficitEmergingEstablished

Not administered during this

assessment period

LetterNamingFluency (LNF)

0 – 12 – 78 +

At riskSome riskLow risk

0 - 1415 - 2627 +

At riskSome riskLow risk

0 – 2829 – 3940 +

At riskSome riskLow risk

PhonemeSegmentationFluency (PSF)

Not administered during this assessment

period

0 – 67 -1718 +

At riskSome riskLow risk

0 – 910 – 3435 +

DeficitEmergingEstablished

Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF)

Not administered during this assessment

period

0 -45 – 1213 +

At riskSome riskLow risk

0 -1415 – 2425 +

At riskSome riskLow risk

http://dibels.uoregon.edu/

Page 6: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Purpose of the study

• To compare the reading scores of ELL and non ELL students in a small suburban Delaware school district to the national reading scores during the 2007-2008 school year.

• To determine if there is an achievement gap in reading scores and if so, if early interventions affected the outcome scores.

• To determine if there is a direct correlation between early reading interventions and student achievement.

Page 7: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Need for the study

• Various studies indicate that the achievement ratio for ELL student is about the same across the nation in any given standardized reading test; a 20% to 40% deficit.

• Data shows that this achievement gap is approximately 25% deficit in Delaware for the year 2007 (http://dstp.doe.k12.de.us/DSTPMart9/GapAnalysisState.aspx).

Page 8: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Research Question 1

• Was there a significant difference between kindergarten ELL students and non-ELL kindergarten students in reading achievement scores (of 306 students) in a small Delaware suburban school district?

Page 9: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Research Question 2

• Did the implementation of an early intervention program affect ELL student reading achievement scores in the small Delaware suburban school district?

Page 10: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Research Question 3

• Did the implementation of an early intervention program affect non-ELL student reading achievement scores in the small Delaware suburban school district?

Page 11: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Small suburban Delaware School District Profile

2007-2008 Student Enrolment by Race

African American 

American Indian 

Asian American 

Hispanic 

White 

(http://www.doe.k12.de.us/reports_data/enrollment/files/Sept30Enrollment.xls

21.6%

0.4%

3.6%

4.3%

70.1%

Page 12: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

National Achievement Reading Scores K-12

http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_2007/r0015.asp

Page 13: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Delaware Achievement Reading Scores K-12

Difference in Percentage Compared to the Reference Group

Group NameSpring 2004 Spring 2005 Spring 2006 Spring 2007 Spring 2008

LEP -52.68 -46.89 -35.46 -39.33 -25.34

http://dstp.doe.k12.de.us/DSTPmart9/GapAnalysisState.aspx?c=R8

Page 14: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Findings and Results: Data Analysis

Between-Subjects Factors

17

34

255

149

157

274

32

1

2

3

Intervention

F

M

Gender

n

Y

ELL

N

Number of subjects in each category

Page 15: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Findings and Results: Data Analysis

(I) Race (J) RaceMean

Difference (I-J)

Std. Error Sig.

2 5

-13.0011* 4.29481 0.027

5 2 13.0011 4.29481 0.027

Comparison between DIBELS scores and Race

Page 16: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Findings and Results: Data Analysis

Source F Sig.

RaceELLInterventionIntervention * RacenELLrisk

3.4086.014

76.9133.3894.869

.010

.015

.000

.005

.028

Multiple comparison utilizing DIBELS scores as a dependent variable

Page 17: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Findings and Results: Data Analysis

• QUESTION 1 restated: Was there a significant difference between ELL kindergarten students and non-ELL kindergarten students in students’ reading achievement scores of 306 students in a small Delaware suburban district? – The results of the data suggest that there was a

statistically significant difference between ELL kindergarten students and non-ELL kindergarten students in students’ reading achievement scores of 306 students in a small suburban district in Delaware.

Page 18: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Findings and Results: Data Analysis

• QUESTION 2 restated: Did the implementation of an early intervention program affects ELL student reading achievement scores in the small Delaware suburban school district?– The data suggest that the implementation of an early

intervention program affects ELL student reading achievement scores in the small Delaware suburban school district.

Page 19: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Findings and Results: Data Analysis

• QUESTION THREE: Did the implementation of an early intervention program affect non-ELL student reading achievement scores in the small suburban district in Delaware?– The data showed that there is an statistically significant

difference between the DIBELS reading scores of ELL and non ELL students. The data suggests that the implementation of an early intervention program had no impact on African American students’ reading achievement scores in the small Delaware suburban school district.

Page 20: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Explanation of Findings

• Contrary to the National achievement reading scores, ELL kindergarten students’ reading test scores for the 2007-2008 school year in a small suburban Delaware school district achieve at similar rates as non-ELL peers.

• 97% of the ELL Kindergarten students in the small Delaware suburban school district meet the benchmarks after a brief amount of intensive intervention.

• The findings from this study suggest that early reading intervention focusing on DIBELS reading scores alone is a good indicator of benchmark achievement.

Page 21: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Future Directions

• The researcher proposes:– Longitudinal studies be conducted with a larger ELL

population of students. – Studies implementing RTI protocol and DIBELS reading

data scores should follow the students in this study from kindergarten through third grade.

– Careful analysis of any teacher related variables such as training, time spent on each skill, whole-group instruction vs. individual or small group instruction, classroom environment etc.

– Investigate how to target all student populations so that early intervention programs have successful impact on all kindergarten students.

Page 22: Comparative Study of ELL and Non-ELL Student Performance in National Standardized Achievement Reading Test: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Conclusion

• The results of this study indicated that the implementation of reading interventions (RTI) helped ELL students meet the prescribed benchmarks and close the academic achievement gap between ELL students and non ELL students’ reading scores for the 2007-2008 school year in the small suburban Delaware school district.