The cross-linguistic transfer of early literacy skills: the role of initial L1 and L2 skills and language of instruction.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of initial first and second language proficiencies as well as the language of instruction that a student receives on the relationship between native language ability of students who are English language learners (ELLs) and their development of early literacy skills and the second language. METHOD: This study investigated the development of early language and literacy skills among Spanish-speaking students in 2 large urban school districts, 1 middle-size urban district, and 1 border district. A total of 1,016 ELLs in kindergarten participated in the study. Students were administered a comprehensive battery of tests in English and Spanish, and classroom observations provided information regarding the Spanish or English language use of the teacher. RESULTS: Findings from this study suggest that Spanish-speaking students with high Spanish letter name and sound knowledge tend to show high levels of English letter name and sound knowledge. ELLs with low Spanish and English letter name and sound knowledge tend to show high levels of English letter name and sound knowledge when they are instructed in English. Letter name and sound identification skills are fairly highly positively correlated across languages in the beginning of the kindergarten year. In addition, phonological awareness skills appear to be the area with the most significant and direct transfer of knowledge, and language skills do not appear to be a factor in the development of phonological awareness. Finally, the relationship between oral language skills across languages was low, suggesting little relationship between oral language skills across languages at the beginning of the kindergarten year. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Results from this study suggest that pedagogical decisions for ELLs should not only consider effective instructional literacy strategies but also acknowledge that the language of instruction for Spanish-speaking ELLs may produce varying results for different students.

Teaching struggling readers who are native Spanish speakers: what do we know?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to share what we have learned from a series of 4 scientific studies about preventing reading failure through early intervention with native Spanish-speaking students who are struggling readers. The goal is to provide guidance to practitioners about effective practices for working with native Spanish-speaking children who are struggling to become readers using evidence rather than conjecture and opinion. METHOD: First, the method and findings are summarized from each of 4 scientific studies (2 English, 2 Spanish) examining supplemental reading intervention that was provided in addition to core reading instruction in first grade. Second, the supplemental interventions are detailed. Next, aspects of instruction that appear to generalize from what we know about preventing reading failure among native English speakers are discussed. Last, the types of adjustments made to this instruction in order to accommodate the needs of English language learners are examined. IMPLICATIONS: Outcomes confirm that native Spanish-speaking children benefited from explicit, systematic instruction that shared many of the same elements that have been proven to be effective with native English speakers. Further, English as a second language teaching techniques (i.e., use of concrete gestures and visual aids, consistent and repeated routines, and use of repeated phrases and consistent language) benefited native Spanish speakers who were struggling to learn to read in English. However, little transfer of knowledge from one language to another was detected.

Effectiveness of Spanish intervention for first-grade English language learners at risk for reading difficulties.

The effectiveness of an explicit, systematic reading intervention for first-grade students whose home language was Spanish and who were at risk for reading difficulties was examined. Participants were 69 students in 20 classrooms in 7 schools from 3 districts who initially did not pass the screening in Spanish and were randomly assigned within schools to a treatment or comparison group; after 7 months, 64 students remained in the study. The intervention matched the language of instruction of their core reading program (Spanish). Treatment groups of 3 to 5 students met daily for 50 min and were provided systematic and explicit instruction in oral language and reading by trained bilingual intervention teachers. Comparison students received the school's standard intervention for struggling readers. Observations during core reading instruction provided information about the reading instruction and language use of the teachers. There were no differences between the treatment and comparison groups in either Spanish or English on any measures at pretest, but there were significant posttest differences in favor of the treatment group for the following outcomes in Spanish: Letter-Sound Identification (d = 0.72), Phonological Awareness composite (d = 0.73), Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery-Revised Oral Language composite (d = 0.35), Word Attack (d = 0.85), Passage Comprehension (d = 0.55), and two measures of reading fluency (d = 0.58-0.75).