This article first appeared in TESOL Journal, early view, e718. Subscribers can access issues here. Only TESOL members may subscribe. To become a member of TESOL, please click here, and to purchase articles, please visit Wiley-Blackwell. © TESOL International Association.
|
Scripted literacy programs are frequently used with designated English learners (ELs) as an intervention to address below–grade-level reading comprehension. Most literacy programs lack an explicit focus on oral language, vocabulary in use, and immersive writing, needed areas to improve reading comprehension and English proficiency among designated ELs. Literacy interventions often work in tandem with English as a second language (ESL) instructional delivery or as a substitute and are staffed with personnel trained in reading interventions, but do not necessarily involve the principles of English language development or multilingualism. In this case study, the researchers examine a literacy intervention and how it is interpreted and implemented by elementary reading specialists. Findings demonstrate that reading teachers following the literacy intervention protocol fostered oral language and vocabulary, yet the emphasis was on reading, with very little time focused on writing. Implications point to the need for reading programs to conceptualize their teaching within a framework of English language development and multilingualism, instead of defaulting to reading interventions alone. A mapping in collaboration with general education, ESL, and reading teachers is needed to foster congruence across literacy and language learning. The authors call upon stakeholders implementing literacy programs to conceptualize multilingual language and literacy resources that encompass oral language, vocabulary, and immersive writing. |
1. Introduction
As the lead author of this study, I began this team inquiry thinking about literacy being foregrounded with greater utility, priority, and value over English language development instruction and any type of bilingual instruction. These experiences were drawn from my background as a former bilingual administrator when general education elementary teachers would defer identified English learner (EL) students to a reading specialist. I found few studies examining how reading specialists work with ELs and what content and instructional approaches were most commonplace (Plaisance et al., 2018; Roessingh, 2020). I journaled:
Literacy ate language. The battle between English as a second language (ESL) and literacy intervention teachers is real! Principals are always emphatic that a literacy/reading intervention supersedes any English language development (ELD) instruction and classroom teachers tell me that literacy interventions and ELD instruction are the same. The ESL teachers usually give in to the higher valued literacy curriculum, passing their ELs to the reading specialist. [Journal entry, July 1, 2011].
This vignette illustrates the power disequilibrium between different types of teachers and varying content foci. For teachers, there is an ongoing debate on who is best suited to meet the literacy and/or ELD needs of ELs, including the general education teacher, the ESL teacher, and the reading specialist. For the content, there is tension around ELD or literacy being the primary focus, or the misconception that they are the same versus interrelated (Plaisance et al., 2018). Yet in settings throughout the world where language learners attend, the likelihood of a reading specialist serving multilingual students is high. This study intends to address this gap by taking a deeper look into the instructional practices of reading specialists who implemented a literacy program called the Leveled Literacy Intervention (LLI) (Fountas & Pinnell, 2009, 2013) with and among elementary-aged ELs, a program heavily used in the United States and some other parts of the world. Further, LLI has been translated into Spanish for use in bilingual and dual language programs within the United States and in countries where the dominant language is Spanish. Internationally, classroom teachers and specialists support the literacy and language pursuits of its learners.
In this study, we leverage the already employed literacy program of LLI at an elementary school with designated ELs to understand how various components of the program align or not with research in relation to English language development instruction. Research in literacy instruction for designated ELs posits that the English language development components of oral language, vocabulary-in-use, and immersive writing must be purposefully integrated to augment access, engagement, and progress in language and literacy development (Baker et al., 2014; Morita-Mullaney et al., 2020b).
We examine a group of second- and sixth-grade designated EL students and their reading specialists to observe the degree to which essential English language development (ELD) components of oral language, vocabulary-in-use, and immersive writing are employed during small group literacy interventions. We discuss the teachers' understanding of literacy and language and forward implications for improving literacy practices within elementary schools for designated ELs. Given the advancing policies for the science of reading, which exclude key components of literacy and can omit the mitigating role of language learning, this study is timely. We pose this research question:
"How do elementary reading teachers implement a literacy intervention with designated ELs identified as struggling readers?"
2. Literature Review and Conceptual Framework
Literacy is defined as “being able to interpret text and to write,” but newer definitions are expanding as we learn more about the interrelationships with reading and writing and all the different ways students in this generation are negotiating their relationships with various forms of text and what constitutes text (National Council of Teachers of English, 2020, p. 1). A subset of literacy is reading, the capacity to interpret printed text to ascertain meaning (Fountas & Pinnell, 2009, 2013). Oftentimes the terms literacy and reading suffer from the same conflation of English language development and literacy. The distinction between literacy and reading is important as it informs the duties and the content focus of a reading specialist: Are they teaching reading and writing (literacy) or just reading? Importantly, many programs that schools adopt have the naming convention of a “literacy program,” but in content and practice the focus is reading.
The National Reading Panel (NRP)'s (1997) study influenced the literacy landscape as it asserted the need for a science of reading focused on phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. In contestation of the exclusion of designated ELs in the studies, the National Literacy Panel (NLP) (2002) articulated how literacy is different for ELs. Baker et al. (2014) later conducted a comprehensive review of reading development specifically for designated ELs and asserts that any English literacy instruction for ELs should include three intersecting English language development constructs—oral language development (Morita-Mullaney et al., 2020b; Renn & Morita-Mullaney, 2018; Solari & Gerber, 2008); academic vocabulary-in-use (word study) (Carlo et al., 2004; Nelson et al., 2011); and regularly structured times to develop second language reading and writing skills through immersive writing opportunities (Lesaux et al., 2014). These three components nested within a larger aim of literacy (as described in Figure 1) is what ELs need to improve their English language and English literacy development (Morita-Mullaney & Renn, 2017).
|
This article is open access. |
For educational use only; not for reproduction.
This article first appeared in TESOL Journal, early view, e718. For permission to use text from this article, please go to Wiley-Blackwell and click on "Request Permission" under "Article Tools."
Next Article |
