EFFECTIVE READING STRATEGIES FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

(ELL) WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES: PEER ASSISTED

LEARNING STRATEGY (PALS)

___________________

A Thesis

presented

to the faculty of

California State University Dominguez Hills

___________________

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Masters of Arts

in

Special Education

___________________

by

Angela A. Nadozie

Summer 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………………………………………………...iii

LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………………………...v

LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………………... vi

ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………………..vii

CHAPTER

1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………...1

Purpose of the study……………………………………………………………….2 Theoretical Basis and Organization……………………………………………….4 Limitations of the study………………………………………………………….. 4 Definition of terms………………………………………………………………...5

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE…………………………………………………………..7

3. METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………………………15

Design of the Investigation………………………………………………………15 Population………………………………………………………………………..16 Treatment………………………………………………………………………...17 Partner Reading with Story Retelling……………………………………………18 Materials…………………………………………………………………………20 Teacher Training………………………………………………………………... 20

Student Training………………………………………………………………….20 Measures…………………………………………………………………………21 Data Analysis Procedures………………………………………………………..22

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………………………………24

5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS……………………...28

REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………..31

APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………………...35

ii

A: SAMPLE PRETEST WORKSHEET ……………………………………......37 B: SAMPLE POSTTEST WORKSHEET ………………………………………39 C: SAMPLE WEEKLY COMPREHENSION QUIZ (FRONT)...........................41 D: SAMPLE WEEKLY COMPREHENSION QUIZ (BACK) …………………43 E: PARENTAL INFORMED CONSENT LETTER (ENGLISH)………………45 F: PARENTAL INFORMED CONSENT LETTER (SPANISH)……………….50

iii

LIST OF TABLES

PAGE

1. Student demography……………………………………………………………. 17

2. Record sheet for weekly quizzes scores (%age)………………………………... 22

3. Pre and Post test scores…………………………………………………………. 22

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

PAGE

1. Cue Card………………………………………………………………………....19

2. Bar graph of Pre and Post test scores…………………………………………… 25

3. Line graph for weekly quizzes scores (%age) showing trends…………………..26

v

ABSTRACT

This study sought to determine if Peer Assisted Learning Strategies (PALS), a

reciprocal class wide peer-tutoring strategy (Saenz, Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2005), benefited

fourth through fifth grade English Language Learner (ELL) students with Learning

Disabilities (LD) in a general education English only setting. The study was carried out in

a regular school setting. Five elementary students, assessed at far below grade level in

reading, were selected and paired with typical same grade peers with advanced reading

skills as measured by the California Standardized Test (CST) test scores. The students

were given 30 minutes of PALS instruction three times a week, for 10 weeks, with focus

on increasing reading comprehension. Reading Comprehension pre- and post-tests, in

addition to, weekly Reading Comprehension quizzes were given during the treatment.

The data was collected and analyzed for trends during the scope of the study. Results

showed that all five students improved in reading comprehension skills.

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

The number of students identified with learning disabilities who are also

identified as English Language Learners (ELL) continues to increase. The National

Center for Educational Statistics indicated that "the percentage of public school students

in the United States who were English language learners was higher in 2010-11 (10

percent, or an estimated 4.7 million students) than in 2002-03 (9 percent, or an estimated

4.1 million students)" (NCES, 2015, p.144); therefore, it is important to determine which

strategies will lead to increased students’ learning outcome. This study sought to

determine if participation in the Peer Assisted Learning Strategy (PALS) reading method

yielded increased reading comprehension scores for fourth through fifth grade English

Language Learner (ELL) students with learning disabilities (LD) in a general education

English only setting. The ELL students were paired with typical, same grade, peers who

were identified as advanced readers.

The study was conducted in a general education school setting. Five elementary

ELL students, with Learning Disabilities, who were assessed at far below grade level in

reading, as measured by California English Language Development Test (CELDT), were

selected and paired with typical peers who were advanced readers. The students were

given 30 minutes of PALS instruction three times a week, for 10 weeks. PALS is a

reciprocal class wide peer-tutoring strategy with different versions for the grade levels.

“The grade two-six version of PALS included three main activities: partner reading with

retelling, paragraph shrinking, and prediction relay activities aimed at increasing strategic

reading behavior, reading fluency, and comprehension.” (Saenz, Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2005,

p. 232). For the purpose of this study, the focus was on partner reading only, as a means

of increasing comprehension. The students were given both pre- and post-tests, and were

also assessed periodically throughout the treatment. The data that was collected weekly

included reading comprehension quizzes. The quizzes were analyzed for trends in

comprehension skills. All of the students in the classroom participated in PALS but the

focus of the data collection was on the five subjects who participated in the study.

Purpose of the Study

It is important to identify tools or strategies that inherently assist learners of all

diversities and enable them to achieve success. When students work together with peers

in collaborative settings, it allows them to boost each other’s learning and minimizes the

issue of diversity (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Burish, 2000). According to the Nation’s Report

Card: Reading 2011, fewer than 10% of ELLs comprehend what they read at or above

proficient levels (National Center for Education Statistics, 2011). The purpose of this

study was twofold. First to determine if participation in the PALS reading method yielded

increased reading comprehension scores for fourth through fifth grade ELL students with

LD in a general education English only setting. The second was to investigate the extent

to which the PALS reading strategies for elementary students benefitted ELL elementary

students with LD.

Some Researchers have suggested that individuals with cognitive disabilities can

learn isolated word reading skills with appropriate instructional interventions (Browder,

Wakeman, Spooner, Ahlgrim-Delzell, & Algozzine, 2006). These skills include sight

words recognition, and to a lesser extent, phonemic awareness and phonics (Browder et

al., 2006). Students with LD who are also ELL face additional learning challenges,

second language development, when compared with their monolingual peers with

learning disabilities. These challenges may lead to frustration. Hakuta, Butler, and Witt

estimated that ELLs without disabilities, require at least three to five years of instruction

and exposure to English language to become conversationally fluent in English as an

additional language, and four to seven years to become academically proficient in the

language (as cited by Liu, Watkins, Pompa, McLeod, Elliott, and Gaylord, 2013, p. 5).

This study sought to investigate reading strategies that may increase reading effectiveness

in ELL student with LD.

LD in reading skill can manifest in the form of a student having difficulties with

decoding due to inability to segment and blend sounds. This may be related to mastering

letter recognition and letter sound correspondence. “Students with reading-related LD

often struggle to decode text due to difficulties with letter recognition and letter-sound

correspondence, and demonstrate an overreliance on whole-word, phonological, and

contextual reading strategies” (Salend, 2008, p. 68). For example, the specific teaching of

sight words recognition to students with intent to improve fluency.

Hypothesis: Participation in PALS treatment will increase reading comprehension

abilities of fourth through fifth grade ELL students with LD, receiving RSP services.

Theoretical Basis and Organization

Researchers have found that PALS provides more frequent and extended

opportunities to practice language than do traditional methods (Coelho, 1994; Long &

Porter, 1985). During PALS peer-tutoring sessions, the pairs read from texts that are

matched to students’ reading ability which makes it individualized. PALS allow students

the freedom to process, analyze, and own their learning at individual comfort level, as

they receive feedback from familiar peers, without being intimidated (Gersten, Baker,

&Marks, 1998). Saenz, et al. (2005) suggested that because PALS provides opportunities

to practice reading strategies exhibited by strong readers, PALS should provide a method

for improving strategic reading and the overall reading performance of students with LD.

Limitations of the Study

There are several limitations to this study. The use of only one fourth grade

student and one fifth grade classroom for the study, as well as the lack of a control group,

limits the generalizability of the results. It cannot be assumed that the change in

demonstrated reading comprehension skills of the student subjects after the PALS

treatment provides an indication that the same would be true for all ELL students with

LD who receive PALS treatment. Another limitation is the factor of maturation. The

difference in pre and post-test results of students who received treatment could be the

effect of students’ maturation and learning that naturally occurred over the time frame of

the study. Also, Thanksgiving vacation occurred during the ten-week treatment period.

This resulted in a two weeks break in treatment during the study and may have affected

students’ outcome. In addition, teachers selected materials of choice to be used in the

PALS treatment. It is possible that material selection and student interest played a role in

the reading engagement and therefore the demonstrated improvement.

Definition of Terms

CELDT: California English Language Development Test

CST: California Standardized Test

ELL (English Language Learners): Students whose first language is not English and who

are in the process of learning English.

LD (Learning Disabilities): Disorders involved in understanding or using language,

manifested in imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, and spell.

LEP (Limited English Proficiency): Individuals who know English as a foreign language

but without sufficient proficiency to participate fully in an English-speaking society.

PALS: Peer Assisted Learning Strategies

RSP (Resource Specialist Program): A program to help children who qualify for special

education services.

SDAIE: Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English

STELLA: English Language and Literacy Acquisition

SLD: Specific Learning Disabilities

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

When ELL students struggle with reading, many teachers wonder if it is due to

language barrier, learning disability or both. According to IDEA (2004), a specific

learning disability is:

A disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in

understanding or in using language, spoken or written, which may manifest itself

in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do

mathematical calculations. (as cited by Garcia & Tyler, 2010, p.115).

Students with LD may encounter learning difficulties, but when the LD is combined with

the challenge of second language acquisition it becomes more complicated. The Census

2000 Brief (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2004b) indicated that English is not the

heritage language of approximately one in five Americans, and the number of Limited

English Proficient (LEP) students, also known as English language learners (ELLs), grew

about 50 percent in the last decade.

Recorded statistics, according to the U.S. Department of Education (2011), show

that during the 10-years period from 1999 to 2009, the ELL population increased by 51%,

while the general PK–12 student enrollment grew by only 7%. Much of this growth came

from the southern and western regions of the United States. It is estimated that nearly

400,000 ELL students in grades K-12 were identified as needing special education

services in the school year 2001-2002 (McCardle, McCarthy-Mele, Cutting, Leos, &

D’Emilio, 2005). When a student with ELL has difficulty learning, educators must assess

the extent to which academic deficits are the result of disability or limited knowledge of

the English Language. From a list of six language-processing deficits that are often

present in students with learning disabilities Levine (1992), found that four of them could

be attributed to the second-language learning process: lack of attention, difficulty

interpreting verbal messages, difficulty retrieving stored information, and difficulty

sequencing and organizing information. The dual effects of the second language learner

status and the disability appear to effect ELL students with LD when learning to read in

English. Such students face different challenges in mastering the elements of reading that

are critical to successful comprehension of the text for any student. Examples of these

elements include: fluency, automatic decoding, and a rich vocabulary (Klingner, Hoover

& Baca, 2008). According to some researchers, services provided to ELLs have not

always met their academic needs (Artiles & Ortiz, 2002; Orosco & Klingner, 2010).

When ELL students are placed in Special Education, providing appropriate instructional

strategies required to meet their learning needs, especially language, become even more

of a concern (Zehler, Fleischman, Hopstock, Stephenson, Pendzick & Sapru, 2003).

The rate at which ELLs are referred for Special Education continues to rise at an

alarming rate. Several studies have suggested that ELLs with LD benefit from

interventions known to benefit monolingual youngsters with learning disabilities.

(Gersten & Geva, 2003; Vaughn, Linan-Thompson, Mathes, Cirino, Carlson, & Pollard-

Durodola, 2006). These interventions include explicit phonemic awareness instruction,

structured and systematic phonics instruction, explicit instruction in comprehension

strategies, and peer-assisted learning (Spear-Swerling, 2006).

Although accurate decoding and fluency are necessary for successful text

comprehension, research has demonstrated that these skills are not sufficient on their own

for reading comprehension improvement, (Aarnoust, Leeuwe, Voeten, & Oud, 2001).

Reading skills can be divided into two classes: word-level (or decoding) skills and text-

level skills, which include reading connected text fluently and reading for comprehension

(August & Shanahan, 2006). According to reading theory and research (Chall, 1996;

Eldredge, 2005; Perfetti, 1985), these skills are cumulative, that is, “without mastery of

decoding, fluency is compromised; if decoding and fluency are not automatic, the

reader’s ability to extract and construct meaning from text effectively and efficiently is

compromised” (August & Shanahan, 2006, p. 57). Research findings, demonstrate that

that the reading level of ELLs with disabilities can be improved with effective

instruction.

Denton, Fletcher, Anthony, and Francis (2006) found that second grade students who

received intensive Tier III Response to Intervention (RTI) interventions decoding and

encoding instruction, either in a one-on-one, or one teacher to two students outperformed

their peers who received typical instruction in areas of decoding real and pseudo words,

spelling, comprehension, fluency, and writing. Sibold (2011) pointed out that according

to Beck, McKeown, and Kucan’s Three-Tier Model (2002), “language instruction

including the distinction between academic vocabulary words and content specific words,

has significant bearing on the language success of English language learners (ELLs)”

(p.24). The three-tier model suggested by Beck, McKeown, and Kucan (2002) placed

vocabulary words into three categories: Tier I consist of basic words such as sight words,

functional words and words that name objects. Tier II consist of general academic and

multiple meaning words that are important to understanding texts, used across the

curriculum, and with several meanings. Tier III consist of specific content words used

only in specific field, technical vocabulary, and are not part of everyday use. Saenz et al.

(2005) found that the Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies (PALS) was another effective

reading strategy for ELL students with learning disabilities. The PALS method engaged

students in reciprocal class wide peer-tutoring strategy instruction with different versions

available for each grade level. The grade two-six grade level version of PALS includes

three main activities: partner reading with retelling, paragraph shrinking, and prediction

relay which increases strategic reading behavior, reading fluency, and comprehension.

Cruz de Quiros, Lara-Alecio, Tong, and Irby (2012) found that Spanish-speaking ELL

students who received structured story reading intervention, story retelling and higher

order thinking for English Language and Literacy Acquisition (STELLA) over a period

of two years, from first to second grade, outperformed their comparison peers in all five

story elements, both in English and Spanish. STELLA is a systematically developed

amalgam of story reading, retelling, instructional strategies, vocabulary instruction, story

grammar, listening and use of higher-level questions and question generation (Irby, Lara-

Alecio, Quiros, Mathes & Rodriguez 2004; Irby, Quiros, Lara-Alecio, Rodrigue &

Mathes, 2009). Christensen and Bowey (2005) demonstrated that first grade students

who were given explicit instruction to decode phoneme–grapheme patterns and words

developed from these patterns made stronger gains on spelling measures of unique words

with vowel combinations than those who were not directly taught. Gains were also noted

in phonemic awareness, alphabetic understanding, decoding and spelling when compared

with other similar students receiving alternate onset–rhyme or implicit phonics

instruction. Nguyen (2012) suggested the use of sheltered instruction, also referred to as

Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE) is another approach that

emphasized the development of grade-level academic competencies (Echevarria &

Graves, 2007).

Based on the strategies mentioned above, both Cruz de Quiros, Lara-Alecio, Tong,

and Irby’s STELLA (2012) and Beck, McKeown, and Kucan’s Three-Tier Model (2002)

appear to agree that explicit academic vocabulary is essential or central to effective

reading and have outlined various strategies for teaching academic vocabulary to

elementary students. Some of these strategies include signal word of the day, in which

teacher had selected a word-of-the-day from readings and used the word throughout the

day to signal the beginning or ending of activities. As another aspect of the strategy, the

teacher first pronounced the word, students repeated the word in unison, and were asked,

at random, to use word in sentences throughout the day. According to Sibold (2011),

“through this method the use of repetition and the multiple exposures to the word

throughout the day increases the student’s retention of new words” (p.26). The talk-

through strategy with read aloud occurs when the teacher and the parents are encouraged

to talk through the definitions of words with students and give examples during read

aloud. The purpose is to allow students to hear the word in context (Sibold, 2011). The

use of an Academic Vocabulary Journal is a strategy that involves the student in writing

the definition of new words in a journal, and then using the word in a sentence. In the

final step the student is required to draw a picture to illustrate the word. Graphic

organizers are visual representations that show arrangements of concepts and/or

vocabulary words. Because graphic organizers use visual images, they are particularly

appropriate for ELL students (Sibold, 2011). Graphic organizers also help to link

definitions to examples (Colorado, 2007). The power of the game is also a noted strategy

where games, such as Bingo, Scrabble etc, are used to reinforce vocabulary words.

(Sibold, 2011).

Saenz et al. (2005) and Cruz de Quiros et al. (2012) agreed that structured story

retelling and fluency reading such as employed in the PALS and STELLA methods are

additional effective strategies. Oral language is among the most important skills a child

needs to acquire literacy (Slavin & Cheung, 2005). When a child is competent in one

language, these skills transfer to the new language. Therefore, it has been recommended

that oral language development be emphasized in early grades by English learning

programs until the student achieves a minimum level of proficiency (Saunders &

O’Brien, 2006). According to a researcher, vocabulary can be developed during story

reading in form of interactive, text-related dialogue (Calderon et al., 2005). Researchers

agree that another learning strategy used to facilitate listening comprehension is a post-

listening activity, such as story retelling, used to assess story comprehension (Cruz de

Quiros et al., 2012). For many students, story retelling has been found to offer students

the opportunity to orally reconstruct the story (Snow, 2002).

According to researchers, PALS provides more frequent and extended

opportunities to practice language than do traditional methods such as teacher-directed

guided reading. (Coelho, 1994; Long & Porter, 1985). During instruction implementing

the PALS method, peer-tutoring pairs read from texts that are matched to students’

reading ability, thus individualizing the approach. Because students receive feedback

from their peers, PALS affords students the opportunity to engage in self-talk strategies

without the need for accuracy in their responses (Gersten, Baker, & Marks, 1998). Saenz

et al. (2005) suggested that PALS provided opportunities to practice reading strategies

exhibited by strong readers. PALS should also provide a method for improving strategic

reading and the overall reading performance of students with LD. Fuchs and Fuchs

(2000), believes that in addition to traditional instruction, the use of collaborative

groupings and peer-assisted settings where students work together to boost each other’s

learning is one way of dealing with diversity issues in our education system.

Research evidence indicates that PALS is a strategy that is closely aligned with

theories of second language learning and second language proficiency, and appears to

provide contextual cues for teaching the cognitively demanding task of reading to ELL.

These factors seem to demonstrate that the PALS strategy is effective when used by ELL

students with LD (Baca & de Valenzuela, 1998; Coelho, 1994; Long & Porter, 1985).

Previous PALS studies also appear to indicate that as an intervention with grades three to

six, PALS improved the reading comprehension performance of ELL students with LD in

transitional bilingual education classrooms (Saenz, et al., 2005), but further research is

needed to determine the effectiveness of PALS on ELL with LD in an English only

education classroom.

It should be noted that some recent studies indicated that perhaps because of the

lack of attention to specific word reading skills, PALS may not be the optimal strategy to

use to improve the oral reading fluency of ELL but research showed that at grades three

to six, PALS improves the reading comprehension performance of ELL with LD, and

enhances students’ reading development. This was attributed to the fact that the focus of

grades two-six PALS procedures is not on how to decode unfamiliar or difficult to read

words in text. Teachers would need to depend on the Grade 1 or the modified version of

grade two PALS, which includes a detailed strategy targeted on the development of

word-level skill (Fuchs et al., 2001).

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

Design of the Investigation

The participants were selected from an English only emersion program. The

classrooms selected for this study were determined to have a minimum of two or more

English Language Learners (ELL) students who were also identified with Severe

Learning Disabilities. To be eligible to participate, all students were enrolled in English

only emersion classes and each classroom had at least two ELL students identified as

having LD with Resource Specialist Program (RSP) services. All students in each

classroom participated in the Peer Assisted Learning Strategies (PALS). Two General

Education teachers in a fourth and fifth grade English only classroom and one RSP

teacher from one school site of one school district in Southern California agreed to

conduct study in their classrooms. These teachers are colleagues of co-investigator. Each

general education teacher taught all subjects including reading while the RSP teacher saw

the students, at various times each week, for an hour and reinforced areas of weakness

which included reading. Thus, the amount of time devoted to reading instruction was

controlled by the school schedule. Each participating teacher taught only one class

included in the study.

Population

Five elementary students were purposively selected to participate in this study as

the treatment group. Teachers were asked to provide demographic data regarding students

in their classrooms. Based on the data obtained; the ELL students were identified and

grouped. Then from the ELL student lists, those with Learning Disabilities were selected.

All students were identified by their school district as ELL with SLD, and were assessed

to be at “below basic” or “far below basic” grade level in reading, as determined by

California state eligibility criteria. These criteria include California English Language

Development Test (CELDT) and California Standardized Test (CST) test scores.

Students CELDT levels range from EI to I, in grades fourth and fifth, ages nine years old

through eleven years old. For the treatment group three are males and two are females.

All student subjects came from low income to middle class income households, and had

Sp. Ed eligibility with placements in RSP (see Table 1)

Table 1 Student Demography Students Actual/

Reading placement Grade

Age (yrs)

Sex(M/F) CELT level

ELA CST score

disability Socio- economic

Sp. Ed placement

Ethnicity

A 05/02 10 M I BB SLD/OHI MC RSP Hispanic

B 05/02 11 F I BB SLD LI RSP Hispanic

C 04/02 9 F I BB SLD LI RSP Hispanic

D 05/02 11 M EI BB SLD LI RSP Hispanic

E 04/02 10 M I BB SLD LI RSP Hispanic

CELDT- California English Language Development Test (I- Intermediate, EI- Early Intermediate) ELA- English Language Arts CST- California Standardized Test Results (FBB- Far Below Basic, BB- Below Basic) SLD- Specific Learning Disability OHI- Other Health Impairments MC-Middle Class LI- Low Income

Treatment

For this study, training materials, classroom materials, teacher and student

training materials, and reading activities were part of the district curriculum. "The

Imagine It” by Mcgraw Hills (Bereiter, 2009).) Reading curriculum materials were used

together with online created reading passage worksheets that included reading passage

and follow up comprehension questions (see appendix). Training of teachers occurred at

regular staff development meetings. PALS sessions were conducted during regularly

scheduled reading instruction, three times a week, for thirty minutes each session. The

duration of PALS treatment was 10 weeks; this did not include the one-week pretest

period, or the week-long post-test phase. Teacher training time also occurred prior to the

10-week treatment. Teachers paired students based on their reading levels. Students with

advanced scores were paired with those with scores at far below or below basic. Pairs

were rotated every three weeks. Within each pair, during each lesson, both students

served in the role of tutor and tutee. For this study, during PALS, students engaged in the

reading activity described below.

Partner Reading with Story Retelling

During Partner Reading, each student read aloud for five minutes. For the first

five minutes of partner reading, the higher level score reader read while the lower level

score reader serve as tutor. As a tutor, students were taught to listen for different kinds of

errors. Errors included: saying the wrong word, adding a word, leaving out a word, or

taking longer than four seconds to read a word. When a student made one of these errors,

the tutor responded by saying, “Stop. You missed that word. Can you figure it out?” If

the tutee was able to read the word within four seconds, the tutor said, “Good. Read that

sentence again.” If the tutee did not figure out the word within 4 seconds, the tutor said,

“That word is______. What is the word?” then, the tutee repeated the word and the tutor

said, “Good. Read that sentence again.” When neither student knew the word, the tutor

circled the word and raised his or her hand to signal the teacher for help. During the Story

Retelling segment of Partner Reading, the lower level score reader of the pair retold in

sequence what was read in the previous ten minutes. Tutors prompted their partners by

using the phrases, “What happened first?” and “What happened next?” and continued the

process for five minutes. Students were provided a cue card as a guide. (See fig. 1)

CUE CARD

Word-Reading Error

SAY

“Stop. You missed that word. Can you figure it out?” Count to 4. If

your partner does not answer or answers incorrectly,

SAY

“That word is______. What word?” Your partner says the word.

SAY

“Good. Read the sentence again.”

Mark one point on your score card if you followed the correction

procedure.

Mark one point on your score card if your partner

corrected the sentence.

Figure 1: Cue Card

Materials

In this study, teachers selected materials of choice to be used with the PALs

reading strategy. Some examples of materials that teachers selected were basal text,

passages from the “Read Naturally program, library books, and content area books.

Teachers selected books or reading materials appropriate for the lower level score student

of the pair. Thus, across a given classroom, pairs read from different books or passages.

Teacher Training

Teachers received professional development training surrounding the PALS

strategy, at staff meetings. The trainings were conducted by a colleague who was (the

co- investigator for this study). Teachers were first given an overview of PALS

procedures. Then, teachers were given the opportunity to practice the PALS activities

with colleagues, to gain a better understanding of the intervention. The emphasis of the

trainings was on implementing the PALS technique with their students.

Student Training

The set-up procedures (e.g., student roles, student materials, and rules), Partner Reading

and Story Retelling were taught by the participating teachers to the students in the study,1

week prior to the beginning of the ten weeks of PALS implementation. This training

required three 45 minutes training sessions. During the three training sessions, teachers

modeled key procedures and allowed students to role-play. The Co- investigator was

present each day of the trainings to provide assistance to the classroom teacher as

necessary. This assistance consisted of helping the teacher set up and organize materials

prior to training lessons, modeling peer-tutoring strategies with the teacher, and

monitoring students to identify pairs demonstrating difficulty.

Measures

This study, focused on partner reading with story retelling aimed at increasing

comprehension. All students of focus for the PALS treatment were given a reading

comprehension pre-test and post-test using the Comprehension Reading (CORE) Reading

Maze Comprehension Test appropriate for their reading placement grade level (see

Appendix A and B) to determine their reading comprehension level before and after

treatment (See table 3). During the timed Maze administration, the reader silently read

the Maze passage; whenever he or she encountered a response item, the reader circled the

word from the three choices that best restored the meaning of that segment of the

passage. The reader continued until time expired. A good description of the CORE

Reading Maze Test passages and administration techniques is available in using

Curriculum- Based Measurement (CBM) manual (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2007). Student

subjects were, also, given weekly reading comprehension quizzes. Scores were collected

and analyzed. (See table 2 below). The weekly quizzes consisted of a reading passage

with follow-up questions (see Appendix C and D). Quizzes were administered by the

RSP teacher during the students’ RSP service hours. The goal target score for all students

was a minimum of 80%.

Table 2 Record Sheet for Weekly Quizzes Scores (%age) Students

Week 1

Week 2

Week 3

Week 4

Week 5

Week 6

Week 7

Week 8

Week 9

Week 10

A 20 20 60 20 40 80 40 60 60 60

B 0 40 80 40 40 40 60 80 80 80 C 0 0 60 40 40 40 40 60 60 60 D 20 0 20 20 20 60 60 60 40 40 E 0 40 80 60 20 80 60 80 80 80

Table 3 Pre and Post Test Scores

Students Pre test Post test

A 2 9

B 3 11

C 2 10

D 1 6

E 4 10

Benchmark 4 10

Data Analysis Procedures

All student subjects who participated in the PALS treatment were given the

CORE reading maze comprehension pre-test (Appendix A) a week prior to treatment and

post-test (Appendix B) a week after treatment. Testing was accomplished individually

during the RSP schedule. The pre-tests and post-tests were graphed and compared to

determine growth in reading comprehension skills.

All students were, also, given a weekly comprehension passage quiz from the

“Read Naturally” reading program. (See Appendices C and D). Each quiz was

administered by the RSP teacher. Passages and questions were read by the students and

the students were required to choose the correct answers and write the correct response

with a goal target of at least 80%. The weekly quiz results were recorded and graphed to

determine trends.

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The CORE reading maze comprehension test A was administered as pre-test, to

all five student subjects, a week prior to the beginning of PALS treatment, according to

their various reading placement grade levels, to determine reading comprehension level.

According to the CORE reading maze comprehension assessment guidelines, by fall the

benchmark for grade two is four correct answers. Of the five study subjects only student

E, attained the benchmark score. This was viewed as an indication that subjects were

experiencing reading comprehension difficulties. A week after the treatment, all Student

subjects were given the CORE reading maze comprehension test B, as posttest. The

winter benchmark, according to The CORE guidelines, is ten correct answers. Student B

was one point over the benchmark, students C and E were at the benchmark score, and

students A and D, at scores of nine and six respectively. It should be noted that subjects

A and D demonstrated progress but did reach the desired benchmark score. (See fig. 2)

Figure 2: Bar graph of pre and post test scores Analysis of the data collected from the weekly quizzes revealed that student A

scored 20% on week one and two quizzes, but had an increased score of 60% by week

three, a decreased score of 20% on week four, 40% on week five, another increased score

of 80% on week six, a decreased score of 40% on week seven, and increased scores of

60% on weeks eight, nine, ten. Student B scored 0% on week one, an increased score of

40% on week two and 80% on week three, a decreased score of 40% on week four-six,

another increased scores of 60% on week seven and 80% on week eight-10. Student C

scored 0% the first two weeks, an increased score of 60% on week three, a decreased

score of 40% on week four-seven, and increased scores of 60% on week eight-10.

Student D scored 20% on week one, a decreased score of 0% on week two, an increased

score of 20% on week three-five, an increased score of 60% on week six-eight, and a

decreased score of 40% on weeks nine and 10. Student E scored 0% on week one, an

increased score of 40% on week two, an increased score of 80% on week three, a

decreased score of 60% on week four, a decreased score of 20% on week five, an

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Student A Student B Student C Student D Student E Benchmark

Pre test

Post test

increased score of 80% on week six, a decreased score of 60% on week seven, and an

increased score of 80% on weeks eight, nine, and 10. (See fig. 3)

Figure 3: Line graph for weekly quizzes scores (%age) showing trends.

Discussion

This study investigated the effects of PALS on the reading comprehension

performance of ELL students with LD. The focus on ELL is primarily because previous

studies indicate low educational attainment of ELL in addition to their increasing

presence in our public school systems (ED, 2002).

Five ELL with LD students participated in PALS. Results from pre to post

treatment evidenced improvement in the reading comprehension level of all students of

focus. Three of these students went from not attaining the benchmark score on the pretest

to exceeding or attaining the benchmark score on posttest. The other two students

improved but not enough to attain benchmark. There was also evidence from the weekly

reading comprehension quizzes showing scores from administration of weekly reading

comprehension quizzes demonstrated increases, thus suggesting that students’ reading

comprehension improved. Three of the student subjects attained the targeted score goal

(80%) at least once. All five students reading performance was estimated to be below

50% percentile when compared to that of like aged peers in week one and scored above

50% at least once through PALS treatment. The graph trends revealed that all five

students’ scores dropped the fourth week and four out of five students’ scores dropped or

remained the same on week seven. There seemed to be a steadily increasing trend during

the last two weeks of data collection. The decrease noted on week four, in the reading

comprehension scores of all five student subjects, may be attributed to the excitement of

Halloween celebration since that was the week of October 30th. Another possible reason

for the decrease noted may have been related to the effect of the switching of partners for

the first time, which occurred during week four. Another week in which a drop was

observed was week seven which was the week in which partners were switched for the

second time, and similarly the last week before Thanksgiving break.

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

It should be noted that this research was conducted in General Education setting

with instructions delivered in English only. The hours of treatment were controlled by the

school schedule. Observations during PALS activities showed that students were engaged

at all times and all five student subjects seemed willing to participate in the PALS

treatment. PALS provided opportunities for students to tutor each other on a one-on-one

basis, which increased the time spent academically engaged in reading and provided

increased opportunities for responding. Dequadri et al., (1986), noted that receiving

feedback from peers resulted in ongoing performance monitoring (Greenwood, Carta, &

Hall, 1988).

Based on the observations of this researcher and the classroom teachers’ reports,

week one appeared challenging for all students. Some students reported that their partner

(student subject) did not respond to prompt initially but after subsequent teacher

intervention the subjects became engaged. There was an incident whereby the advanced

reader of the paired partners decided to communicate PALS instructions in Spanish

language to the low level reader who has very limited English language. Initially, most of

the students in the treatment classrooms wanted to be partnered with their friends but the

students were reminded that partnerships were alternated every three weeks.

Conclusion

The results of this study support the conclusion drawn by previous researchers

(Saenz et al., 2000) that the implementation of the PALS method lead to increased

reading comprehension scores for fourth through fifth grade ELL students with LD in a

general education setting with instructions delivered in English only. Also, the PALS

reading method allowed ELL students with LD the opportunity to actively engage in

reading activities. There was a significant increase in reading comprehension abilities of

fourth through fifth grade ELL students with learning disabilities, receiving RSP, who

received reading instructions using PALS. When interpreting the findings, however, it is

important to note the limitations previously mentioned above. One limitation pertains to

internal validity. The increase in reading comprehension scores of ELL with LD in this

study could be the result of maturation. The students may have gained increased reading

comprehension knowledge over time regardless of their participation in the study. This

natural development may have resulted in the increased scores and therefore may not be

due to the implementation of the PALS treatment. The other limitations concern external

validity. The fact that teachers selected materials of choice to be used in the PALS

treatment, may have contributed to the possibility that material selection and student

interest play a role in reading engagement and therefore result in the improvement of test

scores. Finally, the small size of the sample population makes it difficult to draw

conclusions and demands further study with a larger sample size.

Recommendations

The literature has identified a variety of different strategies that when

implemented with fidelity, have been empirically demonstrated to positively influence

reading scores for ELL students with Learning Disabilities, one was the PALS reading

strategy. Studies have shown that PALS improves the reading comprehension of ELLs

with LD in transitional bilingual education classroom and in a general education English

only classroom setting and ELL students were paired heterogeneously on a small-scale

research. This study appears to confirm previous findings. In light of study limitations,

further study with a larger subject pool is required to investigate its effectiveness in a

general education English only classroom setting and ELL students are paired

heterogeneously on a larger scale. Also, further study is needed on how to combine the

PALS Grade one or modified version of Grade two with the Grade two -six version so

that focus is not only on reading comprehension versus vocabulary and fluency but rather

on all areas of reading in other to effectively teach reading to all ELL students with LD

successfully.

REFERENCES

31

REFERENCES

Artiles, A. J., & Ortiz, A. A. (Eds.). (2002). English language learners with special

education needs: Identification, assessment and instruction. McHenry, IL: Center

for Applied Linguistics.

August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language

learners: Report of the national literacy panel on language-minority children and

youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Baca, L, & de Valenzuek, J. S. (1998). Background and rationale for bilingual special

education. In L. Baca & Cervantes (Eds.) The bilingual special education

interface (pp. 4-25). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Simon & Schuster.

Bereiter, C. (2009). SRA imagine it. English language development: Blackline masters.

Columbus, OH: SRA/McGraw-Hill.

California Department of Education. (2012). California English Language Development

Test (CELDT): Released Test Questions—Updated. Retrieved from

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/el/documents/celdtrtqs9-2012.pdf 4.

Cruz de Quiros, A. M., Lara-Alecio, R., Tong, F. & Irby, B. J. (2012). The effect of a

structured story reading intervention, story retelling and higher order thinking for

English language and literacy acquisition. Journal of Research in Reading, 35(1),

87-113.

Delquadri, J., Greenwood, C. R., Whorton, D., Carta, J. J., & Hall, R. V. (1986).

Classwide peer tutoring. Exceptional Children, 52, 535-542

Denton, C. A., Fletcher, J. M., Anthony, J. L., & Francis, D. J. (2006). An evaluation of

intensive intervention for students with persistent reading difficulties. Journal of

Learning Disabilities, 39, 447–466.

Echevarria, J., & Graves, A. (2007). Sheltered content instruction: Teaching English

language learners with diverse abilities (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Burish, P. (2000). Peer-Assisted learning strategies: An

evidence based practice to promote reading achievement. Learning Disabilities

Research & Practice (Lawrence Erlbaum), 15(2), 85-91.

Fuchs, D. Fuchs, L. S., Al Otaiba, S., Thompson, A., Yen, L., McMaster, K. N. …Yang,

N. J. (2001). K-PALS: Helping kindergartners with reading readiness: Teachers

and researchers in partnerships. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33{4), 76-80

Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L., Yen, L., McMaster, K., Svenson, E., Yang, N. . . . King, S. (2001).

Developing first-grade reading fluency through peer mediation. Teaching

Exceptional Children, 34(2), 90–93.

Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (n.d.). Using CBM for progress monitoring. Washington, DC:

National Center on Student Progress Monitoring, American Institutes for

Research. Retrieved from

http://www.studentprogress.org/library/Training/CBM%20Reading/

UsingCBMReading.pdf

Garcia, S. B., & Tyler, B. (2010). Meeting the needs of English language learners with

learning disabilities in the general curriculum. Theory Into Practice, 49(2), 113-

120.

Gersten, R., & Geva, E. (2003, April). Teaching reading to early language learners.

Educational Leadership, 60, 44-49.

Greenwood, C. R., Carta, J. J., & Hall, R. V. (1988). The use of peer tutoring strategies in

classroom management and educational instruction. School Psychology Review,

17, 258-275.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, H.R. 1350.

Klingner, J. K., Hoover, J. J., & Baca, L. M. (Eds.). (2008). Why do English language

learners struggle with reading? Distinguishing language acquisition from

learning disabilities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Liu, K., Watkins, E., Pompa, D., McLeod, P., Elliott, J. & Gaylord, V. (Eds).

(Winter/Spring 2013). Impact: Feature issue on educating K-12 English language

learners with disabilities, 26(1).

McCardle, P., McCarthy-Mele, J , Cutting, L., Leos, K., & D’Emilio, T. (2005).Learning

disabilities in English language learners: Identifying the issues. Learning

Disabilities Research and Practice, 20(1), 1-5.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). Nation’s report card: Reading 2011

(NCES 2012–457). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of

Education Sciences.

Nguyen, H. (2012). General education and special education teachers collaborate to

support English language learners with learning disabilities. Issues in Teacher

Education, 21(1), 127-152.

Orosco, M, J., & Klingner, J. (2010). One school’s implementation of RTI with English

language learners: “Referring into RTI”. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43,

269–288. Doi: 10.1177/0022219409355474

Saenz, L. M., Fuchs, L. S. & Fuchs, D. (2005). Peer-assisted learning strategies for

English language learners with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71(3),

231- 247

Sibold, C. (2011). Building English language learners’ academic vocabulary: Strategies

and tips. Multicultural Education, 18(2), 24-28

U.S. Department of Education. (2011).The growing numbers of english learner students

1998/99– 2008/09. Retrieved from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). The

Condition of Education 2015 (NCES 2015-144), Retrieved April 17, 2016 from

the National Center for Education Statistics Web site:

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=96

Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., Mathes, P. G., Cirino, P. T, Carlson, C. D., &

Pollard-Durodola, S. D. … Francis, D. J. (2006). Effectiveness of Spanish

intervention for first-grade English language learners at risk for reading

difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 56-73.

Zehler, A. M., Fleischman, H. L., Hopstock, P. J., Stephenson, T. G., Pendzick, M. L.,

& Sapru, S. (2003). Descriptive study of services to LEP students and LEP

students with disabilities. Policy Report: Summary of Findings Related to LEP

and SPED-LEP Students. Arlington, VA: Development Associates, Inc.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A:

SAMPLE PRE-TEST WORKSHEET

PRE-TEST WORKSHEET

APPENDIX B:

SAMPLE POST-TEST WORKSHEET

SAMPLE POST-TEST WORKSHEET APPENDIX B

APPENDIX C:

SAMPLE WEEKLY COMPREHENSION QUIZ WORKSHEET (FRONT)

WEEKLY COMPREHENTION QUIZ WORKSHEET (FRONT)

APPENDIX D:

SAMPLE WEEKLY COMPREHENSION QUIZ WORKSHEET (BACK)

WEEKLY COMPREHENSION QUIZ WORKSHEET (BACK)

APPENDIX E:

SAMPLE PARENTAL INFORMED CONSENT FORM (ENGLISH)

PARENTAL INFORMED CONSENT FORM (ENGLISH)

California State University, Dominguez Hills

Parental Permission/Informed Consent to Participate in Research

Effectiveness Reading Strategies for English Language Learners (ELL) Students with Learning Disabilities (LD)

You are being asked to allow your child to participate in a research study. Before you give your permission, it is important that you read the following information and ask as many questions as necessary to be sure you understand what your child will be asked to do. Investigators: Angela Nadozie, BS in Geography, Multiple Subject Teaching Credential, Special Education Teaching Credential (M/S). I am, currently, a student in the Special Education Master’s program and I am conducting research on a project that will help me complete my coursework as well as expand knowledge base in the field of Special Education with specific emphasis on Reading strategies for ELL students with LD. Caron Mellblom-Nishioka, Ed.D. is the faculty mentor for this research. Dr. Mellblom holds a Bachelors and a Masters degree in Speech Language Pathology and a Clear Speech Language Services Educational Authorization. She also holds a Doctorate in Special Education with and emphasis in Learning Disabilities and University Teaching. Dr. Mellblom is full professor and has been with CSU Dominguez Hills for 20 years. Purpose of the Study: The purpose of this study is to determine if Peer Assisted Learning Strategy (PALS) reading strategies benefit third through fifth grade English Language Learners (ELL) students with learning disabilities in a regular English only classroom setting. In this research study, we are evaluating whether the reading intervention strategy would improve students reading comprehension skills. All students in the classroom will participate in PALS and research will take place during regular school hours. For the purpose of this study, data will be collected and reported only on study participants. These are selected students who have been identified as ELL by their school district as determined by California state eligibility criteria, tested at “Far below” or “Below” in previous California Standardized Test (CST) reading test and diagnosed with Learning Disabilities (LD).

Description of the Study: This research study, attempts to evaluate the effectiveness of the reading intervention strategy to improve students’ reading comprehension skills. PALS are class wide peer-tutoring strategy with different grade level versions. The grade 2-6 version of PALS includes three main activities: partner reading with retelling, paragraph shrinking, and prediction relay activities aimed at increasing strategic reading behavior, reading fluency, and comprehension skills. For this study focus will be on reading comprehension.

I. The first step in this study requires your child to complete a fluency reading assessment to determine his/her reading level using the “Read Naturally” reading comprehension assessment tools.

II. The second step involves your child’s participation in a 30 minutes of PALS instruction three times a week, for 10 weeks where he/she will be paired with a peer who tested advanced in reading and together they read level appropriate texts from various content areas in the “Imagine It” program by Mcgraw Hills, and using given guidelines check for comprehension, then tested on weekly for reading comprehension growth trend. Study participants will be tested on reading.

III. The final step in this study includes a final reading comprehension assessment that evaluates if the PALS intervention strategy was beneficial.

Risks or Discomforts: Risks involved in this study will be minimal. Subjects may become aware of their reading level as compared with typical peers and begin to show signs of discomfort. To help minimize the situation students will alternate peer partners every 3 weeks and points given for efforts. Benefits of the Study: It is reasonable to expect the following benefits from this research: improved reading skills and higher student achievement on reading assessments. But, I cannot guarantee that you or your child will receive any benefits from this study. This study can improve the special education institute by providing an evidence-based effective reading strategy for ELL students with LD. Confidentiality: Your child’s name will not be used if data from this study become published. Every effort will be made to keep assessment records, research records, and other personal information confidential.

Incentives to Participate: No compensation or incentive will be offered to students. Voluntary Nature of Participation: Participation in this study is voluntary. Your decision of whether or not to allow your child to participate will not influence your future relations with Clyde Woodworth Elementary School, Inglewood and California State University, Dominguez Hills If you decide to allow your child to participate, you are free to withdraw your consent and to discontinue his/her participation at any time without penalty or loss of any benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. Questions about the Study: If you have questions regarding this study or your child’s rights as a human subject and participant in this study, you may call the investigator (Dr. Caron Mellblom-Nishioka, 310-243-2713), or the Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects at CSUDH, 310-243-3756. You may also write to the Office of Research and Funded Projects, California State University, Dominguez Hills, 1000 E. Victoria Street, Carson, CA 90747. Your signature below indicates that you have read the information in this document and have had a chance to ask any questions you may have about the study. Your signature also indicates that you agree to allow your child to be in the study and have been told that you can change your mind and withdraw your consent at any time. You have been given a copy of this consent form. *You have also been given a copy of “The Research Participant’s Bill of Rights.” You have been told that by signing this consent form you are not giving up any of your legal rights. Name of Participant (please print) Signature of Parent or Guardian Date Signature of Investigator Date

APPENDIX F:

SAMPLE PARENTAL INFORMED CONSENT FORM (SPANISH)

PARENTAL INFORMED CONSENT FORM (SPANISH)

California State University, Dominguez Hills Permiso/Consentimiento Informado de los Padres para Participar en La Investigación

Eficacia Estrategias de Lectura para Los Estudiantes Aprendedores de Inglés (ELL) con

Discapacidad en El Apredizaje (LD) Se le pide a permitir que su hijo participe en un estudio de investigación. Antes de dar su consentimiento, es importante que lea la siguiente información y formular las preguntas necesarias para obtener una clara comprensión de lo que su hijo estará participando. Investigadores: Angela Nadozie, Licenciada en Geografía, Múltiple Asunto Credencial de Maestro, Educación Especial Credencial de Maestro(M/S) . Estoy, actualmente, un estudiante en el programa de la Maestría de Educación Especial y estoy llevando a cabo la investigación en un proyecto que ayudará a completar mi curso, así como ampliar la base de conocimientos en el campo de la Educación Especial con énfasis específico en Estrategias de lectura para aprendedores de inglés (ELL) con discapacidad en el apredizaje (LD). Caron Mellblom-Nishioka, Ed.D. es el mentor de la facultad para esta investigación. Dr. Mellblom ostenta una licenciatura y una maestría en patología de la lengua y un Claro Speech Language Services Autorización para la Educación. También tiene un Doctorado en Educación Especial con un énfasis en Problemas de Aprendizaje y Docencia Universitaria. Dr. Mellblom es profesora con CSU Domínguez Hills durante 20 años. Propósito del Estudio: El propósito de este estudio es determinar si Peer Assisted Learning Strategy (PALS) estrategias de lectura se benefician de tercero a quinto grado Estudiantes que son aprendedores de inglés (ELL) con discapacidad en el apredizaje en una aula regular de

solamente inglés. En este estudio de investigación, estamos evaluando si la estrategia de intervención de lectura mejoraría los estudiantes' habilidades de comprensión de la lectura. Todos los estudiantes en las aulas participarán en PALS y la investigación se llevará a cabo durante las horas de escuela. A los efectos de este estudio, datos sólo se recopilarán e informó de los participantes del estudio. Los estudiantes seleccionados son identificados como ELL por su distrito escolar ques se determina por criterios de elegibilidad del Estado de California, que han probado “Far below” or “Below” (abajo) en los examenes de lectura estandarizada de California y que son diagnosticados con discapacidad en el apredizaje (LD). Descripción del estudio: Este estudio de investigación, trata de evaluar la eficacia de la estrategia de intervención de lectura para mejorar las habilidades de comprensión de lectura de los estudiantes. PALS están estrategia amplia peer-tutoría clase con diferentes versiones de nivel de grado. La versión de grado 2-6 de PALS incluye tres actividades principales: Compañero lectura con volver a contar , párrafo contracción , y las actividades de retransmisión de predicción destinadas a aumentar el comportamiento de lectura estratégica, fluidez en la lectura y las habilidades de comprensión. El enfoque de este estudio será en la comprensión de lectura. I. El primer paso en este estudio requiere su hijo para completar una evaluación de la fluidez de lectura para determinar su nivel de lectura utilizando los "Read Naturally" (leer natuaralmente) herramientas de evaluación de comprensión de lectura . II. El segundo paso consiste en la participación de su hijo en unos 30 minutos de instrucción PALS, tres veces a la semana , durante 10 semanas , donde él/ella será emparejado con un compañero que probaron avanzado en lectura, y juntos van a leer textos apropiados a nivel de diferentes áreas de contenido en el programa "Imagine It " (imagina que) por Mcgraw Hills, y el uso de las directrices dadas comprobar la comprensión , entonces probado semanalmente para leer tendencia de crecimiento comprensión. Los participantes del estudio se pondrá a prueba en la lectura .

III . El último paso en este estudio incluye una evaluación final de comprensión de lectura que evalúa si la estrategia de intervención PALS era beneficioso. Riesgos o molestias: Los riesgos involucrados en este estudio serán mínimos . Los sujetos pueden llegar a ser conscientes de su nivel de lectura en comparación con sus compañeros típicos y comienzan a mostrar signos de malestar. Para ayudar a minimizar esta situación, los estudiantes se alternarán socios pares cada 3 semanas y los puntos serán otorgados por el esfuerzo. Beneficios del Estudio: Es razonable esperar los siguientes beneficios de esta investigación : mejorar las habilidades de lectura y un mayor rendimiento de los estudiantes en las evaluaciones de lectura, pero también no puedo garantizar que usted o su hijo recibirá ningún beneficio de este estudio. Este estudio puede mejorar el instituto de educación especial en la prestación de una estrategia eficaz de la lectura basada en la evidencia para los estudiantes que están aprendiendo inglés con discapacidad en el apredizaje. Confidencialidad: El nombre de su hijo no va a ser utilizado si los datos de este estudio se vuelven publicados. Se hará todo lo posible para mantener los registros de evaluación, expedientes de investigación, y otra información personal confidencial. Incentivos para participar: Ningún compensación o incentivo se ofrecerá a los estudiantes. Carácter voluntario de la participación: La participación en este estudio es voluntaria. Su decisión de a permitir o no permitir que su hijo participe no influirá en sus relaciones futuras con la escuela Clyde Woodworth Elementary, Inglewood y California State University, Dominguez Hills. Si decide permitir que su hijo participe, usted es libre de retirar su consentimiento y suspender su participación en cualquier momento sin penalidad o pérdida de beneficios a los que tiene derecho de otra manera.

Preguntas sobre el Estudio: Si usted tiene preguntas acerca de este estudio o de los derechos de su hijo como un sujeto humano y participante en este estudio, puede llamar al investigador (Dr. Caron Mellblom - Nishioka, número de teléfono 310-243-2713 ), o el Junta de Revisión Institucional para la Protección de Sujetos Humanos en CSUDH, número de teléfono 310-243-3756. También puede escribir a la Oficina de Investigación y proyectos financiados,California State University, Dominguez Hills, 1000 E. Victoria Street, Carson , CA 90747. Su firma indica que usted ha leído la información de este documento y ha tenido la oportunidad de formular todas las preguntas que pueda tener sobre el estudio. Su firma también indica que usted se compromete a permitir que su hijo participe en el estudio y se les ha dicho que se puede cambiar de opinión y retirar su consentimiento en cualquier momento. Se le ha dado una copia de este formulario de consentimiento. * También se le ha dado una copia de "The Research Participant’s Bill of Rights" (Los derechos del particpantes en la invenstigación), y se les ha dicho que al firmar este formulario de consentimiento usted no renuncia a ninguno de sus derechos legales. Nombre del participante (en letra de imprenta) Fima del Padre o Tutor Legal Fecha Firma del Investigador Fecha