1. S E R E N A U T Z R E D 6 7 4 8 ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS AND READING INSTRUCTION

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ELLs are at a higher risk for experiencing difficulty in the upper elementary grades as text complexity increases (Silverman, Proctor, Harring, Doyle, Mitchell, & Meyer, 2013). Many ELLs have had limited exposure to academic English (Silverman et al., 2013). It takes between five and nine years to develop the academic language skills necessary to become proficient in English (Suits, 2003). 3. MY GOAL To better understand the language acquisition process for ELLs To understand how reading comprehension and oral reading fluency are intertwined To better meet the needs of my ELLs when it comes to reading, thus transferring into other content areas To find specific activities and strategies that work to improve ELLs reading comprehension and oral reading fluency 4. PURPOSE 6 of my 23 students are classified as ELL Over 70% of my school is categorized as Hispanic 14 of my 23 students speak Spanish as the primary language at home 1 is on Tier II for reading, 1 on Tier III All 6 students struggle with reading comprehension and are many of my lowest readers 5. RESEARCH QUESTIONS How will small group activities with struggling ELLs contribute to their success with oral reading fluency and reading comprehension, and how will this affect their success with the Accelerated Reader (AR) program? What activities and strategies will be most beneficial for my ELLs who are struggling in reading? 6. WHO AND WHERE? 5 ELL students Struggles lie in reading comprehension and oral reading fluency My classroom the floor 15-30 minutes each day Small-group setting 7. THE PLAN We will meet every day for 15-30 minutes Activities are designed to increase students oral reading fluency and reading comprehension abilities We will use the Journeys leveled readers, alternating each week between fictional and nonfictional text Small-group setting combined with guided reading Focus primarily on repeated readings and choral readings, alongside the use of graphic organizers 8. DATA COLLECTION Daily observations/field notes Student artifacts (folders) Recordings of students reading aloud Pre- and post-test results for reading attitude surveys, STAR Reading tests, and oral reading fluency tests Weekly scores on AR tests for the leveled readers 9. MONDAY Look through the on-level text and make predictions I read and students read along silently Sticky-note graphic organizer Focus on monitoring comprehension Students reread once more independently Take the ELL leveled reader home 10. TUESDAY Students look back over Mondays graphic organizer Choral read the text together whole-group Fictional text: Sum it Up graphic organizer Nonfictional text: Main idea/details graphic organizer Students reread once more independently Take the ELL leveled reader home 11. WEDNESDAY Students look back over Tuesdays graphic organizer Choral read the text together whole- group Activity from back of the leveled reader Main idea/details graphic organizer Students reread once more independently Take the ELL leveled reader home 12. THURSDAY Focus is on oral reading fluency Reading with expression Choral read text together whole-group Stop every few pages to practice reading selected text aloud; I do, We do, You do Fictional text: dialogue Nonfictional text: vocabulary words or content-area vocabulary Students reread once more independently Take the ELL leveled reader home 13. FRIDAY Focus is on review Choral read the text whole-group Students look back through their graphic organizers Reread the text once more independently Record the students reading aloud Students take the AR test on the leveled reader and report their grade back to me Students write short response on the leveled reader for that week 14. RESULTS 3/5 students showed an increase in their WCPM (words correct per minute) in regards to ORF 3/5 students showed a decrease in raw scale scores for their reading attitude surveys All students passed all AR tests at an 80% or higher, with the exception of one student, who only failed one test. Little to no improvement with students expression when reading aloud Most of the students were active participants 15. RESULTS (CONT) 3/5 students showed decreases in STAR Reading scores Discrepancy among STAR Reading scores: Jackson est. ORF 91 to 80 WCPM; actual WCPM increased from 105 to 148. Todd est. ORF 103 to 97 WCPM; actual WCPM decreased from 60 to 50. Camerons est. ORF 54 to 83 WCPM; actual WCPM increased from 74 to 90. GE (grade-equivalent scores) seem questionable 16. DISCUSSION 3/5 decreased in reading attitude survey results, but were the only 3 who continued to take AR tests outside of our small group Exceptions: Todd and Sonya STAR Reading results may be more of a suggestion What is next for fluency and expression? The amount of time is crucial! 17. LIMITATIONS Sample size Time Interruption of schedule Post-testing environment 18. CONCLUSION Repeated readings Choral readings ELL and on-level text Graphic organizers Small-groups Multiple testing measures Future research: What can be done to further increase ORF abilities in ELLs? What can be done to further increase and maintain expression while reading aloud? Reliability of the STAR Reading test? 19. REFERENCES Albers, C.A., & Hoffman, A. (2012). Using Flashcard Drill Methods and Self-Graphing Procedures to Improve the Reading Performance of English Language Learners. Journal of Applied Psychology, 28, 367-388. Bunten, B.A. (2010). Preservice Teachers Discourse Focus on Native Russian-Speaking Students. Multicultural Education, 17, 2-9. Dresser, R. (2012). The Impact of Scripted Literacy Instruction on Teachers and Students. Issues in Teacher Education, 21(1), 71-87. Helman, L.A., & Burns, M.K. (2008). What Does Oral Language Have to Do With It? Helping Young English- Language Learners Acquire a Sight Word Vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 62, 14-19. Kamps, D., Abbott, M., Greenwood, C., Arreaga-Mayer, C., Wills, H., Longstaff, J., Walton, C. (2007). Use of Evidence-Based, Small-Group Reading Instruction for English Language Learners in Elementary Grades: Secondary-Tier Intervention. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 153-168. Linan-Thompson, S., Vaughn, S., Hickman-Davis, P., & Kouzekanani, K. (2003). Effectiveness of Supplemental Reading Instruction for Second-Grade English Language Learners with Reading Difficulties. The Elementary School Journal, 103, 221-238. McIntosh, A.S., Graves, A., & Gersten, R. (2007). The Effects of Response to Intervention on Literacy Development in Multiple-Language Settings. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 197-212. 20. REFERENCES (CONT) Muyskens, P., Betts, J., Lau, M.Y., & Marston, D. (2009). Predictive Validity of Curriculum-Based Measures in the Reading Assessment of Students who are English Language Learners. The California School Psychologist, 14, 11-21. Palmer, B.C., Zhang, N., Taylor, S.H., & Leclere, J.T. (2010). Language Proficiency, Reading, and the Chinese-Speaking English Language Learner. Multicultural Education, 14, 44-51. Silverman, R.D., Proctor, C.P., Harring, J.R., Doyle, B., Mitchell, M.A., & Meyer, A.G. (2013). Teachers Instruction and Students Vocabulary and Comprehension: An Exploratory Study with English Monolingual and Spanish-English Bilingual Students in Grades 3-5. Reading Research Quarterly, 49, 31-60. Suits, B. (2003). Guided Reading and Second-Language Learners. Multicultural Education, 11(2), 27-34. Taffe, S.W., Blachowicz, C.L.Z., & Fisher, P.J. (2009). Vocabulary Instruction for Diverse Students. In L.M. Morrow (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Literacy and Diversity (pp. 320-336). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Tam, K.Y., Heward, W.L., & Heng, M.A. (2006). A Reading Instruction Intervention Program for English-Language Learners Who Are Struggling Readers. The Journal of Special Education, 40(2), 79-93.