UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Early identification and intervention for children at-risk for reading failure from both English-speaking.. Lesaux, Nonie Kathleen 2001

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
ubc_2001-0234.pdf [ 2.93MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0053884.json
JSON-LD: 1.0053884+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0053884.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0053884+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0053884+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0053884+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0053884 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0053884.txt
Citation
1.0053884.ris

Full Text

E A R L Y I D E N T I F I C A T I O N A N D I N T E R V E N T I O N F O R C H I L D R E N A T - R I S K F O R R E A D I N G F A I L U R E F R O M B O T H E N G L I S H - S P E A K I N G A N D E N G L I S H A S A S E C O N D - L A N G U A G E ( E S L ) S P E A K I N G B A C K G R O U N D S . by N O N I E K A T H L E E N L E S A U X B.A. (Hons), Mount Al l ison University, 1999 A T H E S I S S U B M I T T E D IN P A R T I A L F U L F I L L M E N T O F T H E R E Q U I R E M E N T S F O R T H E D E G R E E O F M A S T E R O F A R T S in F A C U L T Y O F G R A D U A T E S T U D I E S (Department of Educat iona l and Counse l l ing Psycho logy and Spec ia l Educat ion) W e accept this thesis as conforming )9 the required staryqTard T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A Apri l 2001 © Nonie Kath leen Lesaux , 2001 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada DE-6 (2/88) 11 Abstract Th is study examined the early reading deve lopment of native Engl ish speak ing (L1) and chi ldren who speak Engl ish a s a s e c o n d language ( E S L ) who are receiving instruction in Eng l i sh . The study add ressed whether there are original d i f ferences in pre- reading and language ski l ls between L1 and E S L - s p e a k i n g chi ldren, and whether similar patterns of reading deve lopment in Engl ish from kindergarten to grade 2 exist ac ross language groups. A s wel l , the study examined which skil ls in k indergarten identify those chi ldren at-risk for reading failure from all language backgrounds. T h e part icipants of the study were 978 grade 2 chi ldren who were s e e n as part of a longitudinal s tudy that began in their k indergarten year . Within the samp le , there were 790 chi ldren who are L1 speakers and 188 chi ldren who have a first language other than Eng l ish and who spoke little or no Eng l ish upon entry to kindergarten ( E S L ) . In k indergarten, part icipants were adminis tered s tandard ized tasks of reading and memory as wel l as exper imenta l tasks of language, phonologica l a w a r e n e s s , letter identif ication, rapid naming, and phonological memory . At the end of grade 2, chi ldren were adminis tered var ious tasks of reading, spel l ing, language, ari thmetic, and memory. Al l chi ldren rece ived phonological a w a r e n e s s instruction in kindergarten and sys temat ic phonics instruction in grade 1 in the context of a ba lanced early l i teracy program. In k indergarten, 2 3 . 8 % of L1 speakers were identified a s at-risk for reading failure and 3 7 . 2 % of E S L speake rs were identified as at-risk for reading fai lure. In grade 2, 4 . 2 % of L1 speake rs were identified as reading d isab led and 3 .72% of E S L speake rs were identified as reading d isab led . By the end of grade 2, the majority of the E S L speake rs had attained reading skil ls that were similar to the L1 group. A l though there were di f ferences on each of the measu res of reading, reading comprehens ion , spel l ing, phonological p rocess ing and ari thmetic between ave rage and d isab led readers in g rade 2 , the E S L and L1 speake rs had simi lar s co res on all these tasks . Abst ract T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S Tab le of Con ten ts i List of Tab les List of F igures Acknow ledgemen ts Dedicat ion v Introduction Method - 1 Results • 1 Discussion 3 R e f e r e n c e s 3 Append ix A 4 Append ix B • 5 Append ix C 6 Append ix D 6 Append ix E 7 Append ix F 7 iv L IST O F T A B L E S Tab le 1. M e a n S c o r e s on M e a s u r e s of Ear ly Li teracy 19 Tab le 2. M e a n S c o r e s on M e a s u r e s of Phono log ica l P rocess ing 20 Tab le 3. M e a n S c o r e s on M e a s u r e s of Syntact ic A w a r e n e s s , Memory , and Lex ica l A c c e s s 21 Tab le 4. M e a n S c o r e s on M e a s u r e s of Read ing 23 Tab le 5. M e a n S c o r e s on M e a s u r e s of Syntact ic A w a r e n e s s , Phono log ica l P rocess ing and Lex ica l A c c e s s 25 Tab le 6. M e a n S c o r e s on M e a s u r e s of Work ing M e m o r y and Ar i thmet ic 26 Tab le 7. M e a n S c o r e s on M e a s u r e s of Spel l ing 27 Tab le 8. R e g r e s s i o n Ana l ys i s Predict ing Ch i ld ren 's W R A T - 3 Read ing Pe r fo rmance in G r a d e 2 28 V L IST O F F I G U R E S Figure 1. F requency of reader type by native language - Kindergar ten vs . G r a d e 2 29 A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S I would like to thank Dr. L inda S iege l , my advisor , for her insight and help throughout the planning and writing of this research , as wel l as for her cont inued support and gu idance. S tan A u e r b a c h , my second reader, provided very va luable suggest ions for organizat ion and writing at var ious s tages of the paper. Thanks a lso to Dr. Mon ique Bournot-Tr i tes for helpful adv ice in the final s tages. My thanks extend to Rob in Brayne , J a y Mer i lees , the schoo l psycholog is ts , pr incipals, teachers , and chi ldren of the North V a n c o u v e r Schoo l District for their cooperat ion and participation in this project. I a m a lso grateful to K im Kozuk i , L iz Bredberg , and S a r a h Kontopou los for their ass is tance with coordinat ion and data col lect ion. Final ly, my spec ia l thanks go to my parents for their uncondit ional support and encouragement in my a c a d e m i c endeavours . This thesis is ded icated to the memory of my grandmother, Sy lv ia L .V. P a r d e e , who w a s pass ionate about the pursuit of knowledge. 1 There is strong ev idence to support the finding that many of the difficulties encountered by Eng l ish speak ing dys lex ic chi ldren are related to difficulties in var ious a reas of phonological p rocess ing (e.g. Brad ley & Bryant, 1983; S tanov ich , 1992). Within the ski l ls s u b s u m e d under phonological p rocess ing , phonologica l awa reness is most clearly related to early reading ach ievement . A strong relat ionship exists between chi ldren's ability to categor ize sounds and their eventual s u c c e s s in reading (e.g. Bradley & Bryant, 1983) . ' Phono log ica l awa reness refers to an individual 's consc ious understanding of the individual sounds of the language, and al lows them to segmen t and manipulate those sounds . T a s k s which d e m a n d explicit phonological awa reness , s u c h a s identifying the first sound in a word, blending p h o n e m e s into a word, or analyz ing the const i tuent sounds in a word have emerged as effective predictors of reading deve lopment (e.g. B rady & Shankwei le r , 1991). Fo r examp le , Bryant , Brad ley , M a c l e a n and C r o s s l a n d (1989) found a strong correlat ion between nursery rhyme knowledge at age 3, deve lopment of phonologica l sensit ivity during the preschool yea rs , and s u c c e s s in learning to read. Th is relat ionship prevai led even after controll ing for d i f ferences in vocabulary , soc ia l background , and initial phonological sensit ivity. Phono log ica l a w a r e n e s s is a powerful predictor of the s p e e d and eff ic iency of reading acquis i t ion, and a better predictor than other more genera l m e a s u r e s s u c h as IQ or oral language prof ic iency (Share , J o r m , M a c l e a n , & Mat thews, 1984). Ear ly Identification of Read ing Fai lure T h e early identif ication of dys lex ia is necessa ry in order to provide timely intervention before chi ldren have exper ienced consistent and repeated failure in schoo l , and while their difficulties remain limited to the act of reading. The exper iences of fai lure during the initial s tages of reading acquisi t ion have a variety of negat ive c o n s e q u e n c e s on the subsequent deve lopment of the young chi ld, speci f ical ly in reading and related activit ies. Ear ly reading difficulties that are not identified and add ressed through intervention and remediat ion have a signif icant and lifelong impact on the d isab led reader. With t ime, the d isab led reader b e c o m e s less and less ab le to read age-appropr ia te mater ial . Consequent ly , the reading d isab led child reads less and is less likely to enjoy reading as compared to success fu l readers (B lachman, 1996). L e s s pract ice in reading inc reases the gap between the good reader and the d isabled reader in terms of vocabu lary deve lopment and acquisi t ion of knowledge. Th is has a negative impact on ach ievement in all a c a d e m i c a reas as wel l as extra-curr icular activity and peer relations (Stanov ich , 1986). T h e negat ive impact of a reading disabil i ty ex tends well beyond schoo l failure and c a n have tragic c o n s e q u e n c e s on the life of an individual. A high preva lence of reading disabi l i t ies has been identified a m o n g ado lescent home less youth and ado lescents who have commit ted su ic ide (Barwick & S iege l , 1996; McBr ide & S iege l , 1997). T h e difficulties assoc ia ted with reading reflect a persistent deficit, rather than a deve lopmenta l lag in l inguistic (phonological) ski l ls and bas ic reading ski l ls (e.g. Bruck, 1992). Longitudinal s tud ies have demonst ra ted the pers is tence of a reading disabil i ty. F letcher et a l . (1994) found that of those chi ldren d iagnosed as reading d isab led in 3rd grade, 7 4 % remain d isab led in 9th grade. Chi ldren who fall behind in kindergarten and grade 1 fall further and further behind over t ime (Lyon, 1995). R e s e a r c h has shown that for a sma l l number of chi ldren (i.e. 1 5 % - 20%) , phonemic awareness does not deve lop or improve with t ime (e.g. F letcher et a l . , 1994; F ranc is , D., Shaywi tz , S . , S tueb ing , K., Shaywi tz , B. & Fletcher, J . , 1996). Ca l fee , L indamood & L indamood (1973) examined the deve lopment of phonologica l awa reness in 660 students between Kindergar ten and G r a d e 12. They found that a plateau effect occurred in 3 0 % of the s tudents , whereby phonologica l awa reness deve lopment w a s limited to very minimal levels. The phonolog ica l awa reness deve lopment of the individuals w a s strongly related (.73) to their per formance on the W R A T reading and spel l ing subtests . Consequen t l y , within the samp le , poor readers at the high schoo l level had phonological a w a r e n e s s ski l ls inferior to those good readers and spel lers at the pr imary level. Chi ldren with phonological awa reness difficulties require explicit instruction in phonemic awareness at the pre-reading and early reading s tages (i.e. k indergarten and grade 1). Ear ly identif ication is crit ical in order to provide 3 intervention and to mediate the impact that a reading disabil i ty has on many aspec ts of a chi ld's life. Deve lopmenta l ly appropr iate intervention for reading is important in the early primary yea rs , a s the chi ld cont inues to fail to learn to read with f luency. It has b e c o m e c lear that there is a persistent deficit in phonologica l process ing, ' ra ther than a deve lopmenta l lag, which impedes success fu l reading acquis i t ion. It is poss ib le to identify which kindergarten chi ldren will be at the 1 0 t h percent i le or below on word recognit ion measu res at the grade 3 level (Lyon, 1995). T h e implementat ion of intervention is less effective once a chi ld has fai led consistent ly for 2 to 3 years . Af ter this per iod of t ime, there is typically a d e c r e a s e d motivat ion to read as wel l as signif icant de lay in the deve lopment of reading and related ski l ls (Fletcher, 1992). It is poss ib le to teach phonological awa reness to young chi ldren in the pre-reading s tage, before reading failure takes p lace (e.g. Lundberg , Frost & Pe te rson , 1988). R e s e a r c h has shown that developmenta l ly appropriate intervention and instruction for pre- readers invo lves phonemic a w a r e n e s s and sound-spel l ing activit ies in k indergarten as part of early formal l i teracy training (e.g. Bal l & B l a c h m a n , 1991; Foo rman et a l . , 1997). Bal l and B l a c h m a n (1991) found that 7 w e e k s of explicit instruction in phonemic awareness combined with explicit instruction in sound-spel l ing co r respondences for k indergarten chi ldren w a s more powerful than instruction in sound-spel l ing co r respondences a lone and more powerful than language activit ies in improving reading ski l ls. T h e s e studies reflect the ev idence that lends support to the pract ices of ear ly prevent ion and early identif ication of those chi ldren at-risk for reading fai lure. Foo rman et a l . (1997) conducted a study with three groups of kindergarten and grade 1 chi ldren to examine the most effective method of instruction for reducing reading failure in young chi ldren. Three different condit ions of instruction were examined . The first condit ion w a s a who le language method of instruction based on the premise that when children are immersed in a print-rich envi ronment with interesting text the sound-spe l l ing codes are p icked up through context. T h e s e c o n d type of instruction w a s an e m b e d d e d phon ics method, a structured app roach to phon ics , still within a print-rich environment. T h e third condit ion was a systemat ic , explicit phonic approach that included phonemic awa reness instruction, explicit instruction in sound-spe l l ing relat ionships, and extens ive pract ice in decodab le text. T h e group for w h o m instruction in sound-spel l ing relat ionships occur red concurrent ly with phonemic a w a r e n e s s instruct ion m a d e the greatest ga ins . T h e authors found that at the g rade 1 level , explicit, sys temat ic instruction in sound-spel l ing relat ionships w a s more effective in reducing reading disabi l i t ies than a print-rich envi ronment, even for those chi ldren who had received instruction in phonemic a w a r e n e s s . Th is study demonst ra ted the ef fect iveness o f .phonemic awa reness instruction comb ined with explicit, sys temat ic instruction in c o m m o n sound-spel l ing co r respondences . T h e most success fu l prevent ive programs to reduce the occur rence of reading difficulties involve explicit phonemic awa reness instruction at the c l ass room level (for a review s e e A d a m s , 1990). Phono log ica l A w a r e n e s s & E S L - s p e a k i n g Chi ldren A l though a great dea l is known about the pre-reading skil ls n e c e s s a r y for early reading acquisi t ion in Eng l i sh , the quest ion remains as to whether the s a m e patterns exist in those chi ldren who are des ignated as learning Engl ish as a second language ( E S L ) . Little is known about the deve lopment of phonological ski l ls, as wel l as other important precursors of reading for chi ldren with E S L backgrounds . It is important to cons ider the extent to wh ich their different l inguistic background affects the p rocess of learning to read Eng l i sh . Speci f ica l ly , it is unknown the extent to wh ich the lack of f luency in the language of instruction has an impact on the reading acquis i t ion for the child who s p e a k s E S L as compared to the native Engl ish speaker . R e s e a r c h that has focused on the c ross - language transfer of phonolog ica l awareness from the native language to the second language indicates that phonologica l awa reness skill t ransfers f rom the first to the s e c o n d language (e.g. C h i a p p e & S iege l , 1999; C i s e r o & Royer , 1995; Durgunog lu , Nagy & Hancin-Bhat t , 1993). Durgunog lu , N a g y & Hanc in-Bhat t (1993) examined whether phonemic awa reness exper ience at h o m e and schoo l in the chi ld 's first language is related to word recognit ion in 5 another language. T h e samp le cons is ted of 31 Span ish -speak ing students in the first grade who were beginn ing, non-f luent readers receiv ing Engl ish instruction a longs ide their native Eng l i sh -speak ing peers . T h e results of the study indicated that S p a n i s h word recognit ion and Span i sh phonolog ica l awa reness were better predictors of per formance on Eng l ish pseudoword and word reading tests than were Eng l ish or S p a n i s h oral prof ic iency or Eng l ish word recognit ion. O n the transfer tests, the chi ldren who had better phonologica l awa reness and Span i sh word recognit ion ski l ls performed much better than did chi ldren who could read s o m e Span i sh words but had weak phonological awa reness ski l ls. Thus , phonologica l awareness w a s a signif icant predictor of per formance on word recognit ion tests both within and ac ross S p a n i s h and Eng l i sh . T h e authors reported that oral prof ic iency w a s not as good a predictor of reading per fo rmance in Eng l ish and Span i sh as compared to phonologica l awa reness . C i s e r o & R o y e r (1995) examined the deve lopment of phonologica l ski l ls, as well as the transfer to Eng l ish of phonologica l ski l ls acqui red in S p a n i s h . In one of the exper iments within the study, the authors examined how the deve lopment of phonologica l awa reness in native language is related to phonological awa reness in another language. T h e samp le cons is ted of native Span i sh -speak ing and native Eng l i sh -speak ing grade 1 chi ldren. T h e first grade native Span i sh -speak ing chi ldren were adminis tered tasks of rhyme detect ion, initial and final p h o n e m e detect ion in Eng l ish and S p a n i s h , on two different occas ions . T h e authors examined whether native language compe tence with phonological awa reness at t ime 1 can predict the gain in s e c o n d language phonological awa reness ski l ls f rom time 1 to t ime 2. C i se ro & Roye r (1995) conf i rmed that in their samp le of native Span ish -speak ing chi ldren with little or no exper ience with Eng l i sh , they chi ldren were able to transfer their phonologica l awa reness skil ls f rom S p a n i s h to the Eng l ish task of initial phoneme detect ion. A c c u r a c y on the Span i sh task w a s a signif icant predictor of Eng l ish per formance in the native S p a n i s h speake rs at time 2, even after the va r iance assoc ia ted with Eng l i sh per formance at t ime 1 w a s accounted for. T h e results of the study suppor ted the f indings of Durgunoglu, N a c y & Hanc in-Bhat t (1993) whereby 6 c ross - language transfer of phonological awa reness may take p lace, even in phonological skil ls that are still deve lop ing . In the study conducted by Durgunoglu, Nagy & Hancin-Bhat t (1993), it is important to note that oral language prof ic iency w a s not as good a predictor of reading per formance in Engl ish and S p a n i s h a s w a s phonological awa reness . Th is supports other research that has outl ined that re l iance on oral language prof ic iency is often the c a u s e of unde rassessmen t of chi ldren's reading ability in the s e c o n d language that the child is acquir ing (e.g. Mol l & D iaz , 1985). It is important to cont inue to examine the role of phonologica l a w a r e n e s s as a predictor of reading deve lopment g iven that it may be a stronger, better predictor of reading per formance for chi ldren who s p e a k Eng l ish as a s e c o n d language than oral language ski l ls. Syntact ic A w a r e n e s s Simi lar to phonolog ica l a w a r e n e s s , syntact ic awa reness is a skill that is related to beginning reading ach ievement . Syntac t ic a w a r e n e s s refers to an understanding of the grammat ica l structure of the language, speci f ical ly within sen tences (Tunmer & Hoover , 1992). G i v e n that syntact ic a w a r e n e s s ski l ls require prof ic iency with the language, it is a critical e lement in reading acquis i t ion in a s e c o n d language. The ability to p rocess syntax has been identified as an important component of word learning (Ehri & Wi l ce , 1980). R e a d e r s with good syntact ic a w a r e n e s s ski l ls are ab le to use the sen tence and context c lues that lend themse lves to the ability to m a k e predict ions about the words that c o m e next in text. A s wel l , good syntact ic skil ls al low the reader to monitor their reading comprehens ion p r o c e s s e s in an effective manner. Th is monitor ing may take p lace in two different forms: to correct word recognit ion difficulties within a p a s s a g e , and to der ive the mean ing of a difficult word in a p a s s a g e (Tunmer & Hoover, 1992). Syntac t ic a w a r e n e s s is often measu red using an oral c loze task whereby the child must provide a word to comple te a sen tence . Seve ra l s tudies have focused on the relat ionship between syntact ic ski l ls and reading ability. Wi l lows & R y a n (1986) reported a predictive relat ionship be tween syntact ic p rocess ing and early reading ach ievement . Tunmer et a l . (1987) 7 found that poor readers were deficient in syntact ic awa reness even when compared to a sample of read ing-matched controls. S iege l and R y a n (1988) found that reading d isab led 7 to 13 year- old chi ldren per formed signif icantly more poorly on measu res of syntact ic a w a r e n e s s than age - matched normal readers . Prev ious studies have shown a deficit in syntact ic awa reness skil ls for chi ldren with E S L (e.g. D a Fontoura & S iege l , 1995). D a Fontoura & S iege l (1995) conducted a study with 9-12 year old chi ldren for whom instruction w a s in Eng l i sh , and the language in the home w a s Por tuguese . T h e chi ldren were adminis tered tasks of word and pseudoword reading, language, and work ing memory in Por tuguese and Eng l i sh . T h e per formance of the bil ingual group w a s compared with the per formance of an age -ma tched monol ingual Eng l ish group. The only measu re on which the monol ingual and bi l ingual normally ach iev ing readers differed signif icantly w a s the measure of Eng l ish syntact ic a w a r e n e s s . S c o r e s on the Engl ish oral c loze task were signif icantly lower for the bil ingual group a s compared to the monol ingual group. T h e s a m e pattern w a s evident for the reading d isab led groups; in addit ion, the bil ingual chi ldren had signif icantly more difficulty with the Eng l ish syntact ic awa reness task. Memory S o m e research has focused on the relat ionship between work ing memory p rocesses and reading ability. Work ing memory refers to the temporary s torage and/or manipulat ion of information whi le performing a variety of cognit ive tasks , including the retrieval of information from long-term memory (Baddeley , 1986). S u c h tasks may involve comprehens ion , learning and reason ing . Spec i f i c to reading, working memory is vital as the reader must s imul taneously decode words and remember what has been read. In the early reading acquisi t ion s tage, working memory is critical as the g rapheme-phoneme convers ion rules for each segment of the word are reca l led and held in memory a s the reader d e c o d e s e a c h part of the word (S iege l , 1993). 8 In a longitudinal study, M a n n & L iberman (1984) examined the relat ionship of phonolog ica l a w a r e n e s s and verba l short- term memory to reading ability. In k indergarten, the chi ldren were admin is tered tasks of verbal short-term memory and phonologica l awareness . In grade 1, chi ldren were admin is tered tasks of reading, phonological a w a r e n e s s , and verbal short-term memory . T h e study showed that phonological awa reness ski l ls and verbal short- term memory ability in k indergarten were signif icantly correlated with grade 1 reading ach ievement . S iege l and R y a n (1989) studied working memory in 7 to 13 year-o ld normally achiev ing and reading d isab led chi ldren. T h e two working memory tasks adminis tered involved working memory for language and work ing memory for numer ica l information. The reading d isabled chi ldren had signif icantly lower s c o r e s on both types of work ing memory tasks a s compared to normal readers . T h e results of the study indicated the s igni f icance of work ing memory for the deve lopment of read ing and computat ional ar i thmetic ski l ls. M c D o u g a l l , Hu lme, Ell is & Monk (1994) found a signif icant relat ionship between reading ability and memory for verbal material in chi ldren ages 7 to 9. S iege l (1994) found that deficits in work ing memory are character ist ic of reading d isab led individuals throughout ch i ldhood, a d o l e s c e n c e , and adul thood. Ch iappe , Hashe r & S iege l (2000) examined working memory in Eng l i sh -speak ing normal and d isab led readers of var ious ages . The results of the study are consistent with the f indings of S iege l (1994) that working memory is a l ifelong deficit for d isabled readers , with difficulties extending beyond chi ldhood through a d o l e s c e n c e and adul thood. A few studies have examined work ing memory and s e c o n d language reading acquis i t ion. G e v a and S iege l (2000) reported signif icant correlat ions a m o n g reading and memory tasks in both Eng l ish and Hebrew for Eng l ish speak ing chi ldren learning to read Hebrew. T h e authors a lso reported that verbal memory w a s a signif icant predictor of bas ic reading ski l ls in both Eng l ish and Hebrew. Cons is tent with the f indings for Eng l ish normal and d isab led readers , D a Fontoura & S iege l (1995) reported that those Po r tuguese -Canad ian 9 chi ldren c lass i f ied a s reading d isab led in Eng l i sh s h o w e d signif icantly poor per formance on tasks of work ing memory in both Eng l ish and Por tuguese . The deficits in work ing memory for reading d isab led chi ldren sugges t a genera l ized difficulty with work ing memory for those chi ldren with reading disabi l i t ies. E S L s p e a k e r s receiv ing instruction in their non-nat ive language A number of s tudies have been conducted to examine the early reading and spel l ing deve lopment of chi ldren w h o receive c lass room instruction in a language other than the language they s p e a k in the home. Fo r examp le , V e r h o e v e n (1990) conduc ted a study to examine the d i f ferences in reading acquisi t ion between chi ldren learning to read in their native language a s compared to chi ldren learning to read in a second language. T h e longitudinal study w a s des igned to examine the reading acquisi t ion during the first two years of school ing for monol ingual Dutch chi ldren and bil ingual Turk ish chi ldren. After 20 months of l iteracy instruct ion, the overal l per formance of the two groups on word reading eff ic iency w a s not statistically different. In reading comprehens ion , however , the Turk ish chi ldren performed at signif icantly lower levels throughout grade 1 and grade 2 as compared to the Dutch chi ldren. The results of the study indicated that the reading comprehens ion of the Turk ish chi ldren w a s more strongly correlated with oral prof ic iency in the second language than word recognit ion ski l ls. W a d e - W o o l l e y and S iege l (1997) compared native Eng l i sh -speak ing and E S L Grade 2 chi ldren on their ability to attain accura te spel l ings of Eng l i sh words and pseudowords . T h e samp le w a s div ided by language status a s wel l as by reading per formance. T h e spel l ing per formance within the samp le w a s reflective of reader group; the poor readers had significantly lower spel l ing s c o r e s than the normal reader group. However , the language status of the chi ldren w a s not a signif icant factor in spel l ing per formance. Spel l ing per formance w a s more highly correlated with reading ski l ls than with first language. The f indings f rom this study sugges t that the acquisi t ion of a s e c o n d language does not have an impact on the ability of E S L 10 chi ldren to b e c o m e proficient in Engl ish spel l ing. Th is study suppor ts previous research that demonst ra ted that even if d i f ferences in the orthographic complexi ty of the chi ld 's first and second language exist, emergent spel l ing patterns in both languages of the child are similar ( G e v a , W a d e - W o o l l e y & Shany , 1993). On ly one study to date has examined the profile of both native and non-nat ive speakers of Eng l i sh and their Eng l i sh reading acquis i t ion. C h i a p p e and S iege l (1999) examined the grade 1 per formance of a group of 38 Punjab i -speak ing C a n a d i a n chi ldren ( E S L ) and a group of 50 native Eng l i sh speake rs on tasks a s s e s s i n g reading ski l l , phonologica l p rocess ing and syntact ic a w a r e n e s s . Al l chi ldren were attending schoo ls in C a n a d a , and receiv ing instruction in Eng l ish . M e a s u r e s of word recognit ion and phonological p rocess ing success fu l l y discr iminated between the g rade 1 average and poor readers , however they did not d iscr iminate between the two language groups. It is critical to note that the E S L chi ldren had ski l ls in phonological awa reness and reading comparab le to their native Eng l i sh-speak ing peers despi te lower scores on a measu re of oral language that tapped syntact ic awa reness ski l ls. F rom this study, it appears that difficulties in reading acquisi t ion result f rom a deficit in phonologica l p rocess ing independent of the language of instruction. A m o n g both the native Eng l i sh -speak ing and E S L chi ldren, the authors identif ied a link be tween phonologica l p rocess ing difficulties and reading difficulties. It is important to conduct further research to val idate the relat ionship between phonologica l ability and the deve lopment of reading in E S L - s p e a k i n g chi ldren receiving instruction in Eng l i sh . Presen t Study T h e purpose of the present study w a s to examine the early reading deve lopment of native Eng l ish speak ing (L1) and Engl ish a s a s e c o n d language-speak ing ( E S L ) chi ldren who are receiv ing instruction in Eng l i sh . By examin ing the reading, spel l ing, language, arithmetic, and memory ski l ls in a large cohort of chi ldren from linguistically d iverse backgrounds ac ross t ime, three quest ions in the a rea of early reading deve lopment are examined . The first quest ion 11 a d d r e s s e s whether there are di f ferences in pre-reading and language ski l ls between L1 and E S L speake rs in the beginning of k indergarten. T h e second quest ion a d d r e s s e s whether similar patterns exist in E S L - s p e a k i n g and L1 speake rs who are normal readers or who are exper ienc ing read ing fai lure in the spr ing of g rade 2. T h e third quest ion a d d r e s s e s which ski l ls at the beginning of k indergarten are the most effective predictors of subsequen t reading failure in chi ldren f rom E S L and L1 backgrounds . M e a s u r e s a s s e s s i n g both phonological and syntact ic skil ls were adminis tered in order to add ress the ambiguity surrounding the relat ionship between such factors as oral proficiency and phonolog ica l a w a r e n e s s and the reading deve lopment of the chi ld in the target language. Method Des ign Al l chi ldren were tested in the fall of k indergarten, and c lassi f ied as at-risk for reading failure or not at-risk based on their per formance on the reading subtest of the W ide R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t -3 ( W R A T 3 ; Wi l k inson , 1993) reading subtest . Ch i ld ren were c lassi f ied as at- risk for reading failure if their per formance on the W R A T reading subtest w a s at or below the 2 5 t h percent i le. In k indergarten, chi ldren were c lassi f ied a s not at-risk if their per formance on the W R A T reading subtest w a s at or above the 3 0 t h percenti le. Two hundred and ninety-six chi ldren (236 L1 speake rs and 60 E S L - s p e a k i n g chi ldren) had a sco re below the 2 6 t h percenti le on the W R A T reading subtest and thus were c lassi f ied as at-risk for reading failure. Eight hundred and sixty-six (766 L1 speake rs and 100 E S L - s p e a k i n g chi ldren) had a score above the 2 9 t h percent i le on the W R A T reading subtest and thus were c lassi f ied as not at-risk for reading failure. O f the 1238 chi ldren in the full k indergarten samp le , there were 610 fema les and 628 ma les . T h e m e a n age of the samp le in kindergarten w a s 64.39 months with a standard deviat ion of 3.45 months. 12 Chi ld ren were tested in the spr ing of grade 2, and c lassi f ied as average readers or reading d isab led b a s e d on their per formance on the reading subtest of the W ide R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t -3 ( W R A T 3 ; Wi lk inson, 1993) reading subtest. In grade 2, forty chi ldren (33 L1 speake rs and 7 E S L speak ing chi ldren) were reading below the 2 6 t h percenti le and were c lassi f ied as reading d isab led . Nine hundred and thirty eight chi ldren (757 L1 speake rs and 181 E S L speak ing chi ldren) were reading above the 2 9 t h percenti le and thus were c lassi f ied as average readers . O f the chi ldren in the full g rade 2 samp le , 469 were fema les , and 509 males . The m e a n age of the samp le w a s 93.72 months with a s tandard deviat ion of 3.66 months. Part ic ipants T h e chi ldren are part of a longitudinal study that began in their k indergarten year. T h e s e chi ldren represent all of the chi ldren f rom all of the 30 schoo ls in the schoo l district. Within the full samp le in k indergarten there were 1041 L1 speake rs and 197 E S L speake rs . In grade 2, due to attrition, the full samp le included 790 L1 speake rs , and 188 E S L speake rs . Chi ldren were c lass i f ied as E S L in kindergarten if they spoke a language other than Eng l ish at home to parents, s ib l ings, and grandparents . Most of the E S L speake rs were immigrants to C a n a d a , a l though s o m e had been born in C a n a d a . In the e lementary schoo ls in this schoo l district, chi ldren with E S L backgrounds receive the s a m e early c l ass room instruction in Engl ish as their n o n - E S L peers . In the c a s e of many E S L chi ldren who are born in C a n a d a or who arrive from their native country as young chi ldren, they begin the s a m e school ing in Eng l ish at the s a m e time as their n o n - E S L peers , despi te very limited oral prof iciency. T h e full samp le represented a wide range of soc i oeconom ic status. The E S L chi ldren c a m e from a variety of l inguistic backgrounds ; the full samp le included a total of 38 different native languages . For the E S L chi ldren, the predominant native languages were Can tonese , Mandar in and Fars i . 13 Kindergar ten M e a s u r e s 1 Literacy M e a s u r e s W i d e R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t - 3 (Wi lk inson, 1993): Read ing subtest (blue form). E a c h child w a s a s k e d to name capital letters and to read s o m e s imple words . Letter Identification. E a c h child w a s asked to name lower-case letters. Phono log ica l P r o c e s s i n g M e a s u r e s S o u n d Mimicry. T h e chi ldren's skill at recogniz ing and reproducing s o u n d s in oral language w a s a s s e s s e d using the S o u n d Mimicry subtest of the G o l d m a n , Fr is toe, and W o o d c o c k (1974) In this task, chi ldren repeated pseudowords of increasing difficulty that had been read to them by the exper imenter (e.g. ab , dod , bafmotbem). R h y m e Detect ion T a s k from the Phono log ica l A w a r e n e s s Test (Muter, Hu lme & Snowl ing, 1997). In this task, the chi ldren were shown four pictures. A picture of the target word appeared above three pictures. Chi ldren were asked which of the three words rhyme with the target word . A n examp le f rom the task is: "What rhymes with ca t? F i sh , sun or hat?" P h o n e m e Delet ion T a s k f rom the Phono log ica l A w a r e n e s s Test (Muter, Hu lme & Snowl ing , 1997). For this task, the examiner would present the child with a picture of the word and then ask them to delete a phoneme (initial or final) f rom the word. For examp le , when the children deleted initial p h o n e m e s from the words , the examiner would say " B u s without /b / says ", and when the chi ldren deleted final phonemes from the words , " B a g without / g / says ." Sy l lab le Identification and P h o n e m e Identification tasks f rom the Phono log ica l A w a r e n e s s Tes t (Muter, Hu lme & Snowl ing , 1997) were admin is tered. In these tasks , chi ldren were required to comple te words . In the syl lable identif ication task, the examiner presented a picture (i.e. rabbit) to the chi ld. T h e examiner sa id the first part of the word (i.e. "ra") and asked the child to finish the word (i.e. "bit"). In the phoneme identif ication task, the examiner presented a picture (e.g. 1 S e e append ix A for a copy of non-s tandard ized tasks adminis tered in k indergarten. 14 watch). T h e examiner sa id the first part of the word (i.e. "wa") and asked the child to finish the word (i.e. "tch"). Rap id Au tomat ized Naming (RAN) . Phono log ica l recoding in lexical a c c e s s , or word retrieval, w a s a s s e s s e d us ing a variat ion of the Rap id Automat ized Naming task ( R A N ; Denck la & Rude l , 1976). In this task, the chi ld n a m e d 40 i tems on a page consist ing of line drawings of 5 different i tems (tree, chair, bird, pear, car) repeated 8 t imes. T o ensure that all chi ldren knew the target words , a pract ice page of the 5 i tems w a s presented immediately before the presentat ion of the 40 i tems. T h e sco re w a s the time taken (number of seconds ) to comple te the chart of 40 i tems. M e a s u r e s of O ra l L a n g u a g e Syntact ic A w a r e n e s s . Chi ldren 's syntact ic awa reness w a s a s s e s s e d using an oral c loze task (Wil lows and R y a n , 1981 ; S iege l & R y a n , 1989). In the oral c loze task, 12 sen tences were read to the chi ldren, and then chi ldren at tempted to provide the miss ing word in e a c h sen tence. A n examp le of this task inc ludes "The moon shines bright in the ." Memory Stanford Binet (Thorndike, H a g e n , & Satt ler, 1986) Memory for S e n t e n c e s subtest. In this task chi ldren are a s k e d to repeat sen tences from s imple two word sen tences (e.g. Drink milk) to comp lex s e n t e n c e s (e.g. Ruth fell in a puddle and got her c lothes all muddy. ) Spel l ing. In order to exam ine chi ldren's spel l ing ability in k indergarten, chi ldren we re a s k e d to print their n a m e s , and five s imple words (i.e. m o m , no, I, cat, dad). G r a d e 2 M e a s u r e s 2 Read ing M e a s u r e s W i d e R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t - 3 (Wi lk inson, 1993): Read ing subtest (blue form). Th is test involves a reading list of words of increasing difficulty. E a c h child w a s required to read as many 2 S e e append ix B for a copy of all non-s tandard ized tasks adminis tered in grade 2. !5 words as poss ib le f rom the list. The task administrat ion w a s d iscont inued when ten consecut ive words were read incorrectly. S a m p l e words f rom the list include in, cat, stretch, tr iumph. W o o d c o c k J o h n s o n Read ing Mastery Tes t (Form G) (Woodcock , 1973): W o r d Identification. Th is subtest is made up of a word-reading list of increasing difficulty. E a c h child w a s required to read as many words as poss ib le from the list. T h e task administrat ion w a s d iscont inued when all i tems in a g iven level were fai led. S a m p l e words from the list include: is, f ind, mathemat ic ian. W o o d c o c k J o h n s o n Read ing Maste ry Tes t (Form G ) (Woodcock , 1973): W o r d Attack. In order to measu re decod ing ski l ls, the subtest is made up of a list of pseudowords of increasing difficulty. T h e chi ld is required to d e c o d e as many words as poss ib le from the list. T h e task administrat ion w a s d iscont inued when all i tems in a level were fai led. S a m p l e words from the list inc lude: dee , ap , s t raced. Read ing C o m p r e h e n s i o n . T h e Stanford Diagnost ic Read ing Test (Kar lsen & Gardner , 1994) Read ing C o m p r e h e n s i o n w a s adminis tered in g roups in e a c h of the G r a d e 2 c lass rooms . E a c h child rece ived a booklet and w a s required to read the short p a s s a g e s within the booklet and provide r e s p o n s e s to mul t ip le-choice quest ions in a prescr ibed t ime limit. O n e minute word reading ( W R A T 3 reading; Wi lk inson, 1993 (tan form). In this task the child w a s presented with a list of real words of increas ing difficulty and a s k e d to read a s many words as poss ib le within a one-minute t ime per iod. S a m p l e words include: as , b e c a u s e . O n e minute pseudoword reading: (Word At tack alternate form list; W o o d c o c k ; 1973). In this task the child w a s presented with a list of pseudowords and asked to read as many words as poss ib le within a one-minute t ime per iod. S a m p l e words inc lude: y e e , dreek. Memory Work ing M e m o r y for W o r d s (Siegel & R y a n , 1989). T h e chi ldren we re presented orally with sen tences that were miss ing the final word. The chi ldren were required to provide the miss ing word and then repeat all the miss ing words f rom e a c h set. The re we re three trials within e a c h set of increas ing sen tences (2, 3, 4 , 5). To minimize word-f inding prob lems, the sen tences were 16 c h o s e n s o that the word w a s virtually predetermined. T h e chi ldren did not exper ience any difficulty in supply ing the miss ing word . E x a m p l e s of sen tences : S n o w is white, g rass is ;. The task administrat ion w a s d iscont inued when the child fai led all the i tems at one level. Work ing M e m o r y for Numbers (S iegel & R y a n , 1989). Th is task involved count ing yel low dots f rom a field of blue and yel low dots ar ranged in a randomly determined irregular pattern on a 5 x 8 inch index ca rd , for sets ( levels) of 2, 3, 4 , or 5 cards and then recal l ing the counts for each set in the correct order. There were three sets at each level . The task administrat ion was d iscont inued when the chi ld fai led all the i tems at one level. Phono log ica l P r o c e s s i n g . Phono log ica l p rocess ing w a s a s s e s s e d us ing R o s n e r ' s Auditory Ana lys i s Tes t (Rosne r & S i m o n , 1971) which inc ludes both syl lable and phoneme delet ion. The chi ld w a s a s k e d to s a y a word and then a s k e d to s a y the word aga in hav ing taken part of the sound off the word (e.g. " S a y smel l , " "Now s a y smel l without the / m / sound) . " Two practice i tems and 4 0 test i tems were admin is tered. Part ic ipants were a s k e d to delete sy l lables or single phonemes f rom both the initial and final posi t ions in each word , and a lso s ingle phonemes from blends. T h e 40 i tems were ar ranged in approx imate order of difficulty and administrat ion of the test i tems w a s d iscont inued after 5 consecut ive error responses . Lex ica l A c c e s s . A Rap id Automat ized Naming ( R A N ) task w a s used to test the eff iciency of lexical retr ieval. In this task, chi ldren were required to n a m e individual numbers (1-9) presented in a random order in a 5 X 5 array. E a c h chi ld 's per formance w a s t imed in s e c o n d s . Syntact ic A w a r e n e s s . A n oral c loze task (S iegel & R y a n , 1988) w a s admin is tered to each child. In this task, chi ldren were a s k e d to supply the miss ing word for e a c h of the 12 sen tences read to them. S a m p l e i tem: "The moon sh ines bright in the .." Spel l ing- W ide R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t - 3 (Wi lk inson, 1993): Spel l ing (blue form). Th is test is made up of oral ly p resented words of increas ing difficulty of wh ich the chi ld w a s required to generate the correct spel l ing. S a m p l e i tems: must, enter. 17 R e a l word spel l ing. A task of word spel l ing to dictation w a s admin is tered. T h e chi ldren had to generate the correct spel l ing for 10 different words . S a m p l e i tems: love, toy. Nonword spel l ing. A task of nonword spel l ing to dictation whereby the chi ld had to generate a plausible letter representat ion of the word w a s admin is tered. S a m p l e i tems: g e d , taye. Ar i thmet ic W ide R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t - 3 (Wi lk inson, 1993): Ar i thmetic (blue form). This test is made up of a page of computat ional written mathemat ics prob lems that the child is required to solve to the best of their ability. S a m p l e i tems: 2+7 = , 33-17 = . District W i d e Read ing P rog ram T h e schoo l district to which the chi ldren belong is one that has made a commitment to a ba lanced reading acquis i t ion program that inc ludes phonological awa reness instruction. Fol lowing the k indergarten a s s e s s m e n t , e a c h schoo l rece ived feedback on the per formance of the chi ldren w h o took part in the study. T h e c lass room teachers and resource personnel rece ived f eedback o n the individual per formance on every task of e a c h chi ld who part icipated in the study. Speci f ica l ly , those chi ldren who were c lassi f ied as at-risk for reading failure were identified within the feedback . T h e phonological awa reness training took the form of c lass room- b a s e d , smal l group activit ies led by teachers and w a s universal for all chi ldren in kindergarten. T h e kindergarten phonologica l awa reness training for all chi ldren w a s in the context of a variety of l iteracy activi t ies, wh ich included a combinat ion of activit ies with an explicit emphas is on the sound-symbo l relat ionship a s wel l a s independent activit ies s u c h as cooperat ive story writing and journal writing us ing invented spel l ing. G i ven the district's commi tment to early identif ication and intervention for chi ldren at-risk for reading fai lure, for s o m e chi ldren in the study, the phono log ica l a w a r e n e s s intervention cont inued into grade 1 and took the form of more targeted smal l group activit ies. 18 Procedure T ra ined graduate students conducted individual a s s e s s m e n t s in the schoo ls . E a c h child w a s a s s e s s e d individually in a quiet room. T h e spel l ing, reading comprehens ion and arithmetic tasks were admin is tered in a group sett ing in the c l ass rooms . S o m e chi ldren were not admin is tered every task due to a b s e n c e from the c lass room on the day of test ing. Resu l ts K indergar ten Resu l t s T h e results of a 2 x 2 A N O V A revealed a signif icant main effect (p<.001) for native language on k indergarten per formance (effect s i zes ac ross measu res ranging from .000 to .059). A signif icant main effect for c lassi f icat ion in k indergarten (p<.001) w a s detected (effect s i z e s ac ross m e a s u r e s ranging from .008 to .577). A 2 x2 A N O V A revea led that native language and classi f icat ion did not interact to create a signif icant interaction effect for kindergarten per formance (effect s i z e s ac ross measu res ranging f rom .000 to .007). S e e appendix C for a table of F-va lues and effect s i z e s for each kindergarten task. There were signif icant language effects on all individual measu res except W R A T reading, letter identif ication, P h o n e m e Identification, Sy l lab le Identification and P h o n e m e Delet ion tasks . There were signif icant effects for the at-risk c lassi f icat ion on all tasks within the L1 group, and for the E S L group on all tasks except S o u n d Mimicry and Memory for S e n t e n c e s . S e e append ix E for a summary of mean sco res and F-va lues by reader c lassi f icat ion groups. Li teracy M e a s u r e s . Tab le 1 summar i zes the chi ldren's per formance on the early literacy measu res in k indergarten. 1 9 Tab le 1. M e a n S c o r e s on M e a s u r e s of Ear ly Li teracy. K indergar ten M e a s u r e Not at-risk At-r isk L1 E S L L1 E S L W R A T 3 reading percent i le M 68 .18 72 .28 12.85 10.50 S D 18.02 18.58 7.19 7.25 Letter Identification (max. 26) M S D 18.34 5.67 19.99 5.88 6.25 4 .70 4.67 4 .75 Spel l ing (max. 6) M S D 3.05 1.81 2.72 1.87 1.18 .98 .96 .87 W R A T 3 = W i d e R a n g e Ach ievemen t Test ( 3 r d Ed. ) There were no signif icant d i f ferences between the E S L and L1 groups on the W R A T reading subtest , F (1 , 1088) = 1.98, ns, and on the Letter Identification task, F (1, 1088) = 1.99, ns. However , within the two language groups, there were signif icant d i f ferences between the at-risk and not at-risk chi ldren on all l i teracy measu res . T h e E S L at-risk group performed significantly more poorly than the E S L not at-risk group on the W R A T reading subtest , F (1 , 140) = 486.82, p<.001, as wel l a s on the Letter Identification task, F(1 , 140)=239.63, p < 0 0 1 . By definition, the L1 at-risk group per formed signif icantly more poorly than the L1 not at-risk group on the W R A T reading subtest , F (1 , 929)=2012.69, p<.001. T h e at-risk group a lso performed significantly more poorly on the Letter Identification task, F (1 , 929)=856.32, p_<001. A s a group, the L1 group per formance w a s signif icantly higher than the E S L - s p e a k i n g group on the measure of S imp le Spe l l ing , F (1 , 1088)=9.20, p<.01. Within the E S L group, the at-risk chi ldren performed signif icantly more poorly than the not at-risk chi ldren on S imp le Spe l l ing , F (1 , 140) = 42.436, p<.001, Within the L1 group, the not at-risk chi ldren's sco res were signif icantly higher than the at-risk chi ldren on S imp le Spe l l ing , F (1 , 929) = 225.56 , p<.001. 20 Phono log ica l P r o c e s s i n g M e a s u r e s . Tab le 2 summar i zes the results of the kindergarten measu res of phonologica l p rocess ing . Tab le 2. M e a n S c o r e s on M e a s u r e s of Phono log ica l P r o c e s s i n g . K indergar ten M e a s u r e Not at-risk L1 E S L L1 At-r isk E S L G F W S o u n d Mimicry percenti le M S D 82.51 19.49 76.01 25.56 73.64 25 .33 69.28 28.80 R h y m e Detect ion (max. 10) M S D 7.24 2.91 5.64 3.23 5.71 3.37 4 .03 3.05 Syl lable Identification (max.8) M S D 5.03 2.38 4.72 2.19 3.53 2.81 3.07 2.67 P h o n e m e Identification (max.8) M S D 3.23 3.01 3.51 2.99 1.44 2.33 1.42 1.99 P h o n e m e Delet ion (max. 16) M S D 3.93 4.74 3.48 4.89 2.04 3.25 1.56 2.95 G F W = G o l d m a n Fr istoe W o o d c o c k A s a group, the E S L group performed signif icantly more poorly than the L1 group on Sound Mimicry , F ( 1 , 1088) =7.096, p_<.001, and R h y m e Detect ion, F(1,1088) = 40 .38 , p < 0 1 . There were no signif icant d i f ferences between the language groups on the measu res of Syl lable Identification, F (1 , 1088)= 1.67, ns, P h o n e m e Identification, F (1 , 1088)=0.002, ns and P h o n e m e Delet ion, F(1,1088)= 3.02, ns. Within the E S L group, there were no signif icant di f ferences between at-risk and not at-risk chi ldren on S o u n d Mimicry, F(1 , 140) = .720, ns. Within the E S L group, the at-risk group performed signif icantly more poorly than the not at-risk group on the R h y m e Detect ion task, F (1 , 140)= 7.68, p_<.001, the Syl lable Identification task, F(1, 140)=13.97, p_<.01, the P h o n e m e Identification task, F(1, 140)=17.88, p<.001, and P h o n e m e Delet ion task, F (1 , 140)=6.59, p_<.001. Within the L1 chi ldren, the not at-risk group 21 sco res were signif icantly higher than the at-risk group on all m e a s u r e s of phonolog ica l p rocess ing including S o u n d Mimicry, F (1 , 929)=27.56, p<.001, R h y m e Detect ion, F (1 , 929)=37.51, p<.001, Sy l lab le Identification, F (1 , 929)=49.38, p<.001, P h o n e m e Identification, F (1 , 929)=59.26, p_<.001, and P h o n e m e Delet ion, F (1 , 929)=29.56, p<.001. Table 3 s u m m a r i z e s the results k indergarten measu res of oral language, memory , and lexical a c c e s s . Tab le 3. M e a n S c o r e s on M e a s u r e s of Syntact ic A w a r e n e s s , Memory , and Lex ica l A c c e s s Kindergar ten M e a s u r e Not at-risk At -risk L1 E S L L1 E S L Ora l C l o z e (max. 12) M 2.63 1.68 1.55 .56 S D 2.84 2.55 2.12 1.25 Memory for S e n t e n c e s (max. 37) M 17.26 14.21 15.36 13.53 S D 3.70 4.12 3.47 4.41 Rap id Naming (sec. )* M 66.46 73.86 76 .73 91.13 S D 2.87 26 .55 24.72 33.32 *sca le is reversed whereby longer t ime indicates s lower naming. A s a group, the E S L chi ldren per formed signif icantly more poorly than the L1 group on the Ora l C l o z e measu re of syntact ic a w a r e n e s s , F (1 , 1088)=20.48, p<.001. Within the E S L group, the not at-risk group sco res were signif icantly higher than the at-risk group, F (1 , 140) = 7.69, p<.001. Simi lar ly, within the L1 group, the not at-risk group sco res were signif icantly higher than the at-risk group, F (1 , 929) = 29.17, p<.001. Memory . A s shown in Tab le 3, the E S L chi ldren, as a group, per formed signif icantly more poorly than the L1 group on the Memory for S e n t e n c e s , F (1 , 1088) = 68 .01 , p<.001. Within the E S L group, there were no di f ferences between the not at-risk chi ldren and the at-risk chi ldren, F ( 1 , 1 4 0 ) = 1.44, ns . With in the L1 group, the not at-risk group s c o r e s we re signif icantly h igher . than the at-risk group, F (1 , 929) = 47 .91 , p<.001. 22 Lex ica l A c c e s s . A s s h o w n in Tab le 3, the E S L chi ldren, a s a group, per formed more poorly than the L1 group on the Rap id Naming task, F(1,1088) =32.02, p<.001. Within the E S L group, the not at-risk group sco res were signif icantly higher than the at-risk group, F (1 , 140)=15.07, p<.001. Simi lar ly, within the L1 group, the not-at risk group sco res were signif icantly higher than the at-risk group, F (1 , 929)=12.57, p_<001. G r a d e 2 T h e results of a 2 x 2 A N O V A revealed no signif icant interaction effect of native language group and reader group on grade 2 measu res (effect s i zes ac ross measu res ranging f rom .001 to .002). T h e results of a 2 X 2 A N O V A revea led that there w a s a signif icant main effect (p<.001) for reader group on grade 2 per formance (effect s i zes ac ross measures ranging from .002 to .152). A 2 X 2 A N O V A revealed that there w a s no signif icant main effect for native language on g rade 2 per formance (effect s i zes ac ross measu res ranging from .001 to .003). S e e append ix D for a table of effect s i zes for e a c h task in grade 2. S e e append ix F for a summary of m e a n sco res and F-values by reader groups in grade 2. Read ing M e a s u r e s . T h e per formance of the reader and language groups on the reading measu res is shown in Tab le 4. 23 Tab le 4. M e a n S c o r e s on M e a s u r e s of Read ing G r a d e 2 M e a s u r e A v e r a g e R e a d e r s Read ing Disab led L1 E S L L1 E S L W R A T 3 reading percent i le M S D 73.97 4 .12 75.71 3.83 11.30 2.67 10.57 3:55 W - J Word Identification percenti le M S D 76.42 11.95 80.29 10.26 19.55 13.89 13.00 14.97 W - J W o r d At tack percent i le M S D 74.50 7.61 77.25 6.80 23.58 5.29 16.00 5.38 S D R T C o m p r e h e n s i o n percent i le M S D 55.51 3.62 54.14 3.32 14.06 8.22 14.83 7.91 One-minute word read ing* (max.44) M S D 22.68 5.46 24.24 4.51 10.17 4 .25 10.67 6.02 One-minute pseudoword reading* (max.45) M S D 24.18 8.74 26.28 7.49 6.28 4.70 8.33 3.20 * = number correct W R A T 3 = W i d e R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t (3 r d Ed.) W - J = W o o d c o c k J o h n s o n Read ing Mastery Tes ts S D R T = Stanford Diagnost ic Read ing Test T h e d isab led readers performed signif icantly more poorly than the average readers for the W R A T 3 reading, F (1 , 869) = 120.80, p_<001. The d isab led readers recogn ized significantly fewer words than the ave rage readers for the W - J W o r d Identification, F (1 , 869) = 105.28, p<.001. O n the W - J Word Attack, the d isab led readers decoded signif icantly fewer pseudowords than the average readers , F (1,869) = 92.27, p<.001. O n the Stanford D iagnost ic Read ing Comprehens ion Test ( S D R T ) , the d isab led readers performed 24 signif icantly more poorly than the average readers , F (1 , 869) = 130.57, p < 0 0 1 . The d isabled readers read signif icantly fewer words than the average readers on the one-minute word reading test, F (1 , 869) = 98 .61 , p<.001, and the one-minute pseudoword reading task, F(1 , 869) = 73.48, p_.<001. Within the L1 chi ldren the average readers scored signif icantly higher than the reading d isab led chi ldren on the W R A T 3 reading, F (1 , 832) = 250.87, p<.001, the W - J Word Attack, F (1 , 833) = 162.82, p<.001, the W - J W o r d Identification, F (1 , 833)=161.32, p<.001, and the Stanford D iagnost ic Read ing Comprehens ion Test , F(1 , 809) =101.29, p<.001. The L1 average readers read signif icantly more words than the reading d isabled group on the one-minute word reading test, F (1 , 759) = 124.89, p<.001, as wel l as on the one-minute pseudoword reading test, F (1 , 829) = 113.83, p<.001. Within the E S L chi ldren, there w a s no over lap between the sco res for two reader groups on the W R A T 3 reading by definit ion, F (1 , 195) = 66 .32 , p<.001. T h e E S L ave rage reader sco res were signif icantly higher than the E S L reading d isab led group on the W - J Word Identification, F (1 ,194)=55 .94 , p<.001, the W - J W o r d Attack, F (1 , 195)=52.02, p<.001, and the Stanford Read ing C o m p r e h e n s i o n , F (1 , 191)=15.75, p<.001. The E S L average readers read signif icantly more words than E S L d isab led readers on the one-minute word reading test, F(1 , 179) = 42 .35 , p<.001, and the one-minute pseudoword reading test, F (1 , 194) = 29.69, £ < 0 0 1 . Within the ave rage reader populat ion, the E S L chi ldren read signif icantly more pseudowords on the W - J Word At tack than L1 chi ldren, F(1 , 937) = 4 .06, p<.001. The effect s i zes for the reading measu res ranged from .12 to .22. Syntact ic A w a r e n e s s , Phono log ica l P rocess ing and Lex ica l A c c e s s . Tab le 5 shows the per formance on m e a s u r e s of syntact ic awareness , phonological p rocess ing , and lexical a c c e s s . 25 Tab le 5. M e a n S c o r e s of Syntact ic A w a r e n e s s , Phono log ica l P rocess ing and Lex ica l A c c e s s G r a d e 2 M e a s u r e \ A v e r a g e R e a d e r s Read ing D isab led L1 E S L L1 E S L Ora l C l o z e * (max.11) M 7.63 6.68 5.18 4.71 S D 1.66 2.10 1.69 2.69 R o s n e r Audi tory Ana l ys i s * (max.30) M 22.02 22.60 12.82 17.50 S D 5.89 5.68 6.24 6.66 Rap id Naming (sec.) M 12.84 12.37 15.72 15.57 S D 2.99 2.69 3.53 4 .93 * = number correct T h e ave rage reader per formance w a s signif icantly better than the d isab led readers on the Oral C l o z e task, F (1 , 869) = 20 .61 , p<.001. Within the average reader populat ion, the per formance of the E S L group on Ora l C l o z e w a s signif icantly poorer than the L1 speake rs , F (1, 935) = 42 .65 , p<.001. The re were signif icant d i f ferences between the average readers and the d isab led readers on the R o s n e r Audi tory Ana lys i s Test , F (1, 869) = 22 .18 , p_ < .001. O n the rapid naming test, the ave rage reader per formance w a s signif icantly better than the d isabled readers , F(1,869)=7.88, p_<.001. Within the L1 chi ldren, the average reader sco res were signif icantly higher than the d isab led readers on the Ora l C l o z e , F (1 , 835) = 66.58, p<.001, the R o s n e r Audi tory Ana lys is Test , F (1 , 835) = 72 .65 , p<.001, and the Rap id Naming test, F (1 , 835) = 24.98, p < 0 0 1 . Within the E S L chi ldren, the average reader sco res were signif icantly higher than the d isabled readers on the Ora l C l o z e , F (1 , 192)=5.14, rj<.05, the R o s n e r Audi tory Ana lys i s Test , F (1 , 193)= 4 .35 , p<.05, and the Rap id Naming Test , F(1 , 194)= 8.74, p<.01. Work ing M e m o r y and Ari thmetic. T h e per formance of the reader and language groups on measu res of work ing memory and ari thmetic are shown in Tab le 6. 26 Tab le 6. M e a n S c o r e s on M e a s u r e s of Work ing Memory and Ar i thmet ic G r a d e 2 M e a s u r e A v e r a g e R e a d e r s Read ing D isab led L1 E S L L1 E S L Work ing M e m o r y W o r d s * (max. 12) M 3.52 3.34 2.61 2.86 S D 1.56 1.76 1.39 1.46 Work ing M e m o r y N u m b e r s * (max. 12) M 6.16 6.22 5.36 4.14 S D 2.36 2.46 2.26 1.07 W R A T 3 ari thmetic percent i le M 52.46 59.26 31.64 38.50 S D 22 .32 2.89 17.51 13.35 W R A T 3 = W i d e R a n g e Tes t of Ach ievemen t (3 r a Ed. ) Work ing Memory . There were no signif icant di f ferences between the ave rage readers and the d isab led readers on the Work ing Memory for W o r d s task, F (1 , 869) = 1.56, ns. The average reader per formance w a s signif icantly better than the d isab led readers on the Work ing Memory for Numbers task, F (1 , 869) = 6 .11 , p_<.05. Within the L1 chi ldren, there were no significant d i f ferences between the ave rage readers and the d isab led readers on the Work ing Memory for Numbers task, F (1 , 835)=3.26, ns. O n the Work ing Memory for W o r d s task, the L1 average readers per formed signif icantly better than the L1 d isab led readers , F (1 , 834)=10.38, p<.001. Within the E S L chi ldren, there were no signif icant di f ferences between the average readers and the d isab led readers on the Work ing M e m o r y for W o r d s task, F (1 , 193)=.47, ns. O n the Work ing M e m o r y for Numbe rs task the E S L average readers performed signif icantly better than the E S L d isab led readers , F (1 , 194)=4.55, p_<.05. Ari thmetic. A s a group, the average readers performed signif icantly better than the d isabled readers on the W R A T 3 arithmetic, F (1 , 869)=12.34, p<.001. Within the average reader group, ar i thmetic per fo rmance of the E S L group w a s signif icantly h igher than the L1 average readers, F(1 , 908)=25.89, p_<.001. Within the L1 group, the average readers performed signif icantly 27 better than the d isab led readers , F (1 , 804)=29.20, p<.001. Within the E S L group the average readers per formed signif icantly better than the d isab led readers , F (1 , 191)=4.82, p<.05. Spel l ing. Tab le 7 s h o w s the per formance of the reader and language groups on the spel l ing measu res . Tab le 7. M e a n S c o r e s on M e a s u r e s of Spel l ing. G r a d e 2 M e a s u r e Ave rage R e a d e r s Read ing Disab led L1 E S L L1 E S L W R A T 3 Spel l ing percenti le M 62.96 70.01 20.61 16.83 S D 2.96 3.28 2.19 1.94 R e a l W o r d Spe l l i ng* (max. 10) M 8.88 9.29 5.12 5.17 S D 1.42 1.07 2.32 2.20 Nonword Spe l l ing* (max. 10) M 8.40 8.84 5.52 5.67 S D 1.54 1.86 2.73 1.97 W R A T 3 = W i d e R a n g e Tes t of Ach ievemen t (3 r a Ed. ) A s a group, the ave rage reader per formance w a s signif icantly higher than the d isabled reader per formance on the W R A T 3 spel l ing, F (1 , 869)=66.84, p<.001. A s wel l , the average readers spe l led more words correct ly than the d isab led readers on both the R e a l W o r d Spel l ing, F(1,869)=124.73, p_<001, and the Nonword Spe l l ing , F (1 , 869) = 37 .10, p_,.001. Within the average reader populat ion, the E S L chi ldren's per formance w a s signif icantly higher than the L1 readers on the W R A T 3 Spel l ing , F (1 , 903) = 20.97, p_ <.001, the R e a l W o r d Spel l ing, F(1, 834) =12.23, p<.001, and Nonword Spel l ing, F (1 , 833) = 16.32, p < 0 0 1 . Within the L1 group, the average reader per formance w a s signif icantly higher than the d isab led readers on the W R A T 3 Spel l ing , F (1 , 800) = 110.45, p_< 0 0 1 , the R e a l Word Spel l ing, F (1 , 737) = 136.76, p<.001, and the Nonword Spe l l ing , F (1 , 736) =70.29, p<.001. Within the E S L group, the ave rage reader per formance w a s signif icantly higher than the d isab led readers on the W R A T 3 Spe l l ing , F(1,190) = 35.49, p<.001, the R e a l W o r d Spe l l ing , F(1,178) =68.96, p<.001, and the Nonword Spe l l ing , F (1 , 177) = 5.97, p_<001. 28 Predict ion of Read ing Skil l S tepwise regress ion ana l yses were used to se lect the kindergarten var iab les that were the best predictors of W R A T - 3 reading per formance in grade 2 for both E S L and L1 speake rs . With the except ion of the chi ldren's k indergarten W R A T - 3 reading subtest, all of the kindergarten var iab les we re entered into the equat ion. T h e results a re summar i zed in Tab le 8. Tab le 8. R e g r e s s i o n Ana lys i s Predict ing Chi ldren 's W R A T - 3 Read ing Per fo rmance in G rade 2 Kindergar ten M e a s u r e R^ A R 2 Probabil i ty L1 Group 1. Letter Identification .094 .094 p<.001 2. P h o n e m e Delet ion .131 .037 p<001 3. Memory for S e n t e n c e s .154 .023 p<001 E S L Group 1. R h y m e Detect ion .118 .142 p<001 2. P h o n e m e Delet ion .214 .V72 p<001 A m o n g the L1 group, 3 var iab les exp la ined 15 .4% of the var iance in W R A T - 3 reading in grade 2: Letter Identification, P h o n e m e Delet ion, and Memory for S e n t e n c e s . A m o n g E S L chi ldren in k indergarten, 2 var iab les exp la ined 2 1 . 4 % of the va r iance in W R A T - 3 reading: R h y m e Detect ion and P h o n e m e Delet ion. Thus , phonological p rocess ing skil ls were important predictors of W R A T - 3 reading per formance at the end of k indergarten for chi ldren from both language groups. K indergar ten and G r a d e 2 Class i f icat ion Figure 1 s h o w s the results of the kindergarten and grade 2 a s s e s s m e n t s . A s shown in Figure 1, 2 3 . 8 0 % of the L1 group were identified a s at-risk for reading failure in k indergarten, while 29 7 6 . 2 0 % of the L1 group were identified a s not at risk for reading fai lure. In k indergarten, 3 7 . 2 0 % of the E S L group were identified as at-risk for reading failure, whi le 6 2 . 8 0 % were identified a s not at-risk for reading failure. In grade 2, 4 . 2 0 % of the L1 group were identified as reading d isab led , whi le 9 5 . 8 0 % of the L1 group were identified as normal readers . Of the grade 2 E S L group, 3 .72% of the chi ldren were identified as reading d isab led , whi le 9 6 . 2 8 % of the chi ldren were identified a s normal readers . Figure 1. F requency of reader type by native language - Kindergar ten vs . G r a d e 2. L1 S p e a k e r s - Kindergar ten E S L S p e a k e r s - Kindergar ten 76.20% 23.80% • At-risk • Not at-risk 62.80% 37.20% • At-risk • Not at-risk L1 S p e a k e r s - G r a d e 2 E S L S p e a k e r s - G r a d e 2 4.20% 95.80% • R e a d i n g d i s a b l e d • N o r m a l reader 3.72% 96.28% • Reading disabled • Normal reader 30 Discuss ion In k indergarten, the E S L - s p e a k i n g chi ldren performed more poorly than the L1 chi ldren on many tasks . In k indergarten, four distinct groups were evident fol lowing the pre-reading a s s e s s m e n t of both L1 and E S L chi ldren; there were overal l d i f ferences by language group and within those language groups there were distinct groups of at-risk and not at-risk chi ldren. Within the E S L - s p e a k i n g chi ldren, there were no signif icant d i f ferences between the at-risk and not at-risk chi ldren on the tasks of verbal auditory memory and the S o u n d Mimicry task. Both of these tasks require l inguistic prof ic iency in order to manipulate and remember Eng l i sh , and proved difficult for all E S L - s p e a k i n g chi ldren as compared to their native Eng l ish-speak ing peers . T h e per formance of E S L speak ing chi ldren on measu res of reading in grade 2 reflects a deve lopmenta l profile that is very s imi lar to the profile of their L1 peers . In k indergarten, there were overal l d i f ferences by language group and within those language groups there were distinct groups of at-risk and not at-risk chi ldren. By grade 2, the impact of language status had d i sappeared , and two distinct groups had emerged : normal and d isab led readers . The f requency with wh ich E S L chi ldren were c lassi f ied as reading d isab led occur red w a s approximate ly the s a m e a s the L1 chi ldren. B y G r a d e 2, the E S L group had acqui red the sound - symbo l relat ionships of the Engl ish language to the extent that they were reading and spel l ing at a level equivalent to their L1 peers . T h e results of the study provide substant ia l ev idence that phonological p rocess ing p lays an important role in reading deve lopment for both native and non-nat ive s p e a k e r s of Eng l i sh . W h e n examin ing the current results it is important to cons ider that the schoo l district to which the chi ldren in the current study belong is commit ted to ear ly identif ication and intervention for chi ldren at-risk for reading failure. A s wel l , the district is commit ted to providing a ba lanced ear ly reading program that inc ludes phonologica l a w a r e n e s s and explicit phonics instruction. Fo r the majority of chi ldren who exper ienced early reading difficulties in 31 kindergarten, their difficulties were likely mediated through a ba lanced early reading program that included phonolog ica l awa reness instruction. T h e c lass room teachers and resource personnel rece ived feedback on the individual per formance on every task of e a c h child who part icipated in the study. Speci f ica l ly , those chi ldren who were c lassi f ied as at-risk for reading failure were identif ied within the feedback . T h e kindergarten phonologica l awa reness training for all ch i ldren w a s in the context of a variety of l i teracy activi t ies, wh ich inc luded a combinat ion of activit ies with an explicit emphas i s on the sound-symbo l relat ionship as wel l as independent activit ies s u c h a s cooperat ive story writ ing and journal writing us ing invented spel l ing. For chi ldren who cont inued to have difficulty the phonological awa reness intervention cont inued into g rade 1 and took the form of more targeted smal l group activit ies. By G r a d e 2, a comparab le proportion of E S L chi ldren and L1 chi ldren were able to deve lop st rong phonolog ica l p rocess ing ski l ls and read at an ave rage level in Eng l i sh . Th is supports previous research that found that even if a young child is still deve lop ing phonological awa reness ski l ls in their native language, their develop ing skil ls will aid their reading acquisi t ion in Eng l ish (C isero & Royer , 1995). Ve rhoeven (1990) a lso found that word recognit ion skil ls were not different a c r o s s language groups after 20 months of c l ass room instruction. O n the pseudoword reading task, the E S L average reader group performed at a signif icantly higher level than the L1 group. Th is indicates the posit ive effect of bi l ingual ism with regard to the deve lopment of phonolog ica l ski l ls. For L1 chi ldren, letter identif ication, phoneme delet ion, and verbal work ing memory accounted for 1 5 % of the var iance in grade 2 reading per formance. Within the E S L - s p e a k i n g populat ion, rhyme detect ion and phoneme delet ion accounted for 2 1 % of the var iance in grade 2 reading performance. Although moderate, these predictions support that even in a large diverse samp le , with many factors contributing to deve lopment and variabil ity over 3 years , it is poss ib le to identify those ski l ls in kindergarten that lend themse lves to future reading s u c c e s s . For chi ldren f rom all l inguistic backgrounds , phonological p rocess ing ski l ls in kindergarten are 32 critical to future reading s u c c e s s . T h e relatively smal l effect s i zes of the f indings in the study may be ref lect ive of a large s a m p l e with large var iance. A s wel l , robust effect s i z e s are normally assoc ia ted with control led studies with sys temat ic exper imenta l manipulat ion. T h e effect s i zes , a l though sma l l , a l so suppor t the role of phonolog ica l p rocess ing ski l ls in the deve lopment of reading for chi ldren f rom varying l inguistic backgrounds. A l though a subgroup of E S L speak ing chi ldren did exper ience difficulty with reading acquisi t ion in Eng l i sh , their per formance profile is very similar to the L1 chi ldren with a reading disabil ity. R e a d i n g disabil i ty, in either the L1 speake rs or the E S L chi ldren, w a s character ized by low sco res on all m e a s u r e s of phonologica l p rocess ing , as wel l as syntax and working memory . T h e difficulties with phonologica l p rocess ing for the chi ldren with reading disability are reflected in the ext remely low sco res on the one-minute word reading task, arid even lower sco res on the one-minute pseudoword reading task. Both of the tasks , and particularly the pseudoword reading task d e m a n d effective, fluent decod ing . T h e L1 and E S L d isabled readers had difficulty with reading, spel l ing, and phonologica l p rocess ing tasks , including working memory . T h e simi lar difficulties for the d isab led readers ac ross both language groups is consis tent with previous research that demonst ra tes the role that phonolog ica l p rocess ing , syntact ical a w a r e n e s s and work ing memory play in the deve lopment of reading skil ls in Eng l ish , regard less of native language (e.g. C h i a p p e & S iege l , 1999; d a Fontoura & S iege l , 1995). O n e dif ference to cons ider between the L1 and E S L d isabled readers w a s in ari thmetic whereby the per formance of the E S L group w a s signif icantly higher than the per formance of L1 speak ing d isab led readers . Future years of study with this samp le warrants cont inual monitoring of the deve lopment of ar i thmetic in the d isab led reader to examine whether this di f ference persists between language groups. It is crit ical to note that within the average reader populat ion, the E S L chi ldren performed at a signif icantly lower level in the a rea of syntact ical ski l ls. The a b s e n c e of difficulty with word recognit ion tasks despi te lower sco res in syntact ic awa reness is consistent previous research in 33 the a rea of s e c o n d language reading acquis i t ion. D a Fontoura & S iege l (1995) found that G r a d e 4, 5 and 6 bil ingual Por tuguese-Eng l i sh chi ldren did not demonst ra te difficulty with word reading tasks despi te s c o r e s on the oral c loze task that were signif icantly lower than the monol ingual Eng l i sh -speak ing normal readers . Similar ly, C h i a p p e & S iege l (1999) found that despi te scores on the oral c loze task that were signif icantly lower than the monol ingual Eng l i sh -speak ing group, the average reader Pun jab i -speak ing chi ldren had no difficulties with word reading tasks. A l though the E S L chi ldren had native Engl ish speak ing peers and teachers as oral language mode ls f rom kindergarten through to grade 2, this exposure w a s not sufficient to deve lop their syntact ic ski l ls to the s a m e extent as their L1 peers . It is not known whether the syntact ic ski l ls of the E S L chi ldren are underdeve loped and lagged behind only at this young age , or whether the syntact ic ski l ls deve lop in a different manner and remain underdeve loped as compared to chi ldren w h o are native speake rs of Eng l ish . Further investigat ion and examinat ion of the deve lopment of syntact ic ski l ls of chi ldren who speak Engl ish as a second language is required in order to add ress this quest ion, and will be subject to future study in the context of this longitudinal study. W h e n examin ing spel l ing per formance, there is a c lear indication that the language status of the chi ldren w a s not a signif icant factor in spel l ing per formance. In the c a s e of spel l ing for the normal readers , the E S L average readers performed signif icantly better than the L1 average readers on a measu re of word spel l ing. Prev ious studies have found that spel l ing per formance in E S L chi ldren is more related to reading skill than to first language (e.g. W a d e Woo l ley & S iege l , 1997). T h e results of this study are consistent in that the average reader populat ion as a who le had simi lar p rocess ing profi les, and the poor readers from both language groups had phonolog ica l p rocess ing deficits and a distinct p rocess ing profile. The results of this study reflect a trend of higher sco res on measu res of phonological p rocess ing in E S L chi ldren, speci f ical ly spel l ing and pseudoword reading. Th is supports a theory of phonologica l 34 process ing and related task per formance as a function of reading skil l rather than language status. Simi lar ly, in the a rea of reading comprehens ion , the E S L chi ldren per formed at comparab le levels to the L1 ave rage readers. Th is f inding is inconsistent with previous f indings in second language reading acquis i t ion. V e r h o e v e n (1990) found that even after 20 months of l iteracy instruct ion, the per formance of the bil ingual Turk ish chi ldren, al though comparab le in word recognit ion, w a s inferior in the a rea of reading comprehens ion . V e r h o e v e n (1990) attributes this lower level of ach ievement to syntact ic ability and oral prof ic iency. The f indings from this study indicate that the early s tages of reading comprehens ion are similar for both L1 and E S L speake rs , and are unrelated to the native and target language of the E S L chi ld. It remains in quest ion as to whether E S L chi ldren in the present study will maintain a comparab le level of ach ievement a s compared to their L1 peers as the text b e c o m e s more complex with longer p a s s a g e s , and d e m a n d s that the reader m a k e in ferences, a s wel l a s unders tand metaphors and ana log ies . T h e signif icantly h igher per formance of the E S L average readers on many measures , including pseudoword reading, spel l ing and ari thmetic as compared to the L1 average readers must be further invest igated. In particular, in the c a s e of phonolog ica l recod ing and spel l ing, investigat ion needs to be carr ied out to determine if the learning p rocess of the E S L chi ldren is more sys temat ic than for their L1 peers . G i v e n that Eng l i sh is not s p o k e n in the home, early reading acquis i t ion and language deve lopment rel ies very heavi ly on c l ass room instruction. The super ior per fo rmance of the E S L ave rage readers on the pseudoword reading and word spel l ing measu res may reflect the direct, explicit phonological awa reness activit ies in their c lass rooms. O n the other h a n d , it m a y be exp la ined f rom a l inguistic perspect ive; a s E S L - s p e a k i n g chi ldren acquire Eng l i sh , their s e c o n d language, there is an increase in their metal inguist ic awareness and this may accoun t for their e levated per formance on tasks of phonolog ica l a w a r e n e s s . Campbe l l & S a i s (1995) reported acce lera ted phonological awa reness ability in a samp le of 3 5 bil ingual k indergarten chi ldren who were exposed to a second language during their preschool years . Th is s tudy is re levant for those individuals involved in both the educat ion and research of chi ldren at-risk for reading failure. In order to provide early intervention and remediat ion for all chi ldren who are at-risk for reading failure, it is critical that teachers and other profess ionals are aware of those ear ly reading ski l ls that identify chi ldren who speak Eng l ish as a second language and w h o may exper ience reading difficulties. T h e resul ts demonst ra te the ability for E S L chi ldren w h o enter k indergarten with little or no Engl ish to attain a level of ach ievement in the a reas of reading, spel l ing, and mathemat ics that is comparab le to their native Eng l i sh-speak ing peers by G r a d e 2. It is evident that the deve lopment of reading ski l ls in chi ldren who speak Engl ish as a s e c o n d language is very simi lar to the deve lopment of reading ski l ls in native Eng l ish speake rs . Phono log ica l p rocess ing p lays a more signif icant role than syntact ic awa reness in the deve lopment of reading skil ls for both L1 and E S L speake rs . T h e success fu l acquisi t ion of the sound-symbo l relationship in Engl ish for ear ly reading is dependent on such factors as instruction and individual di f ferences as opposed to the f luency and prof ic iency with the Engl ish language. Difficulties in acquir ing the sound-symbo l relat ionship for fluent, automat ic decod ing ar ise in approximate ly 2 0 % of chi ldren (Lyon, 1995). Within the G r a d e 2 samp le f rom the district, approximate ly 4 % of chi ldren cont inue to exper ience reading failure. The re is a higher inc idence of schoo l dropout among chi ldren from E S L backgrounds as compared to native Eng l i sh -speak ing students (Gunderson , 1999). It is critical to understand the deve lopment of a c a d e m i c ski l ls for chi ldren who enter the schoo l sys tem in kindergarten with little or no exper ience with Eng l i sh . Speci f ical ly , it is necessa ry to cons ider the extent to which their different l inguistic background has an impact on the p rocess of learning to read Eng l i sh . F o r those E S L - s p e a k i n g chi ldren w h o exper ience difficulty with ear ly reading acquisi t ion in Eng l i sh , the results of this study demonstrate that, as in L1 speake rs , it is related 36 to phonologica l a w a r e n e s s ability. In order for all chi ldren to receive equal opportunity in deve lop ing fluent reading ski l ls, it is critical that both native Engl ish speak ing and E S L speak ing chi ldren are identified at a young age as at-risk for reading failure. O n c e identified as having early reading difficulty, it is necessa ry that those chi ldren receive early intervention that inc ludes, but is not limited to, explicit phonological awa reness instruction. 37 Refe rences A d a m s , M . J . (1990). Beginn ing to R e a d : Thinking and Learn ing about Print. Cambr i dge , M A : MIT P r e s s . Badde ley , A . D . (1986). Work ing Memory . Oxford: Oxford Universi ty P r e s s . Ba l l , E .W.& B l a c h m a n , B. (1991). Does phoneme awa reness training in kindergarten make a di f ference in ear ly word recognit ion and deve lopmenta l spe l l ing? Read ing R e s e a r c h Quarter ly, 26 , 49 -66 . Barwick, M . & S iege l , L .S . (1996). Learn ing difficulties in ado lescent cl ients of a shelter for runaway and home less street youths. Journa l of R e s e a r c h on A d o l e s c e n c e , 6, 649-670. B l a c h m a n , B. (1996). Prevent ing early reading failure. In S . C . C r a m e r & W . E. Ell is (Eds.) Learn ing Disabi l i t ies: Li felong Issues, (pp. 65-70). Toronto: Pau l H. B rookes . Bradley, L. & Bryant, P. (1983). Categor iz ing sounds and learning to read: A causa l connect ion. Nature, 301 , 419 -421 . Brady, S . & Shankwei le r , D. (Eds.) (1991). Phono log ica l p r o c e s s e s in literacy. Hi l lsdale, N J : E r lbaum. Bryant, P. , Brad ley , L., M a c l e a n , M. & C r o s s l a n d , J . (1989). Nursery rhymes, phonological ski l ls, and reading. Journa l of Chi ld Language , 16, 407-428 . Bruck , M . (1992). Pe rs i s tence of dys lex ics ' phonologica l a w a r e n e s s deficits. Deve lopmenta l Psycho logy , 28 , 874-886. Ca l f ee , R., L i ndamood , C . & L indamood , P . (1973). Acous t ic -phonet ic ski l ls and reading-k indergarten through twelfth grade. Journa l of Educat iona l Psycho logy , 64, 293-298. C a m p b e l l , R. & S a i s , E . (1995). Acce le ra ted metal inguist ic (phonological) awa reness in bil ingual chi ldren. Brit ish Journa l of Deve lopmenta l Psycho logy , 13, 61-68 . 38 C h i a p p e , P . , Hashe r , L , & S iege l , L . S . (2000). Work ing memory , inhibitory control, and reading disabil i ty. M e m o r y & Cogni t ion, 28 , 8-17. C h i a p p e , P . & S iege l , L .S . (1999). Phono log ica l awa reness and reading acquisi t ion in Engl ish and Pun jab i -speak ing C a n a d i a n chi ldren. Journa l of Educat iona l Psycho logy , 91 , 20- 28. C i se ro , C A . & Royer , J . M . (1995). The deve lopment and c ross - language transfer o f phonolog ica l a w a r e n e s s . Con temporary Educat iona l Psycho logy , 20 , 275-303 . Counc i l for Except iona l Ch i ld ren. (1994). Statist ical profile of spec ia l educat ion in the Uni ted S ta tes , 1994. Teach ing Except iona l Ch i ld ren, 26. 1-3. C u m m i n s , (1979). Linguist ic in terdependence and the educat ional deve lopment of bi l ingual chi ldren. R e v i e w of Educat iona l R e s e a r c h , 49 , 222 -251 . D a Fontoura & S iege l , L .S . (1995). Read ing , syntact ic, and work ing memory skil ls of bi l ingual Po r tuguese -Eng l i sh C a n a d i a n chi ldren. Read ing and Writ ing: A n Interdisciplinary Journa l , 7, 139-153. Denck la , M . , & R u d e l , R . G . (1976). Rap id 'automat ized ' naming (R .A .N . ) : Dys lex ia differentiated from other learning disabi l i t ies. Neuropsycho log ia , 14, 471 -479 . Durgunog lu , A . , Nagy , W . & Hancin-Bhat t , B. (1993). C ross - l anguage transfer of phonological a w a r e n e s s . Journa l of Educat iona l Psycho logy , 85 , 453 -465 . Ehr i , L . C . & W i l ce , L . S . (1980). D o beginners learn to read function words better in sen tences or in l is ts? Read ing R e s e a r c h Quarter ly, 451-476 . F letcher , J . M . (1992). T h e validity of dist inguishing chi ldren with language and learning disabil i t ies accord ing to d isc repancy with IQ. Journa l of Learn ing Disabi l i t ies, 25 , 546-548. F letcher , J . , Shaywi tz , S . , Shankwei le r , D., Ka tz , L., L ibe rman, I., S tueb ing , K., Franc is , D., Fowler , A . , & Shaywi tz , A . (1994). Cogni t ive Prof i les of reading disabil ity: Compar i sons of d i sc repancy and low ach ievement definit ions. Journa l of Educat iona l Psycho logy , 86, 6-23. F o o r m a n , B .R . , F ranc is , D. J . , Win ikates, D., Meh ta , P. , Scha tschne ide r , C . 39 & Fletcher, J . M. (1997). Ear ly interventions for chi ldren with reading disabi l i t ies. Ear ly interventions for chi ldren with reading disabi l i t ies. Scient i f ic S tud ies of Read ing , 1, 255-276. F ranc is , D., Shaywi tz , S . , S tueb ing , K., Shaywi tz , B. & Fletcher, J . (1996). Deve lopmenta l lag ve rsus deficit mode ls of reading disabil ity: A longitudinal, individual growth curve ana lys is . Journa l of Educat iona l Psycho logy , 88 , 3-17. G e v a , E . & S iege l , L .S . (2000). Or thographic and cognit ive factors in the concurrent deve lopment of bas i c reading ski l ls in two languages . Read ing and Writ ing: A n Interdisciplinary Journa l , 12, 1-30. G e v a , E . , W a d e - W o o l l e y , L , & Shany , M. (1993). T h e concurrent deve lopment of spel l ing and decod ing in two different or thographies. Journa l of Read ing Behav ior , 25 , 383-406. G o l d m a n , R. Fr is toe, M . & W o o d c o c k , R. (1974). Go ldman -F r i s t oe -Woodcock Auditory Ski l ls Tes t Battery. C i rc le P ines : Amer i can G u i d a n c e Serv ice . G u n d e r s o n , L. & C la rke , D. (1998). A n explorat ion of the relat ionship between E S L students ' backgrounds and their Eng l ish and a c a d e m i c ach ievement . In T. S h a n a h a n and F.V. Rodr iguez -B rown (Eds. ) Y e a r b o o k of the Nat ional Read ing Con fe rence , (pp. 264-273) . C h i c a g o : Nat ional Read ing Con fe rences . Ka r l sen , B. & Gardner , E . (1994). Stanford Diagnost ic Read ing Test . S a n Franc isco : Harcourt B race . K e o g h , B. (1996). Strategies for Implementing Po l ic ies . In S . C . C r a m e r & W . E. Ell is (Eds.) Learn ing Disabi l i t ies: Li felong Issues, (pp. 77-82). Toronto: Pau l H. B rookes . Kozuk i , K., Nor ton, B., Ch iappe , P. , S iege l , L .S . (1999). Becom ing literature: Cha l lenges and possibi l i t ies in k indergarten c lass rooms . Unpub l i shed manuscr ipt . Lyon , G . R . (1995). R e s e a r c h initiatives in learning disabi l i t ies: Contr ibut ions from scient ists suppor ted by the Nat ional Institute of Ch i ld Heal th and H u m a n Deve lopment . Journa l of Chi ld Neuro logy, 10, 120-126. 40 Lundberg , I., Frost , J . & Pe te rsen , O . (1988). Effects of an extens ive program for st imulating phonolog ica l awa reness in preschoo l chi ldren. Read ing R e s e a r c h Quarter ly, 23, 263-284. M a n n , V . & L ibe rman , I. (1984). Phono log ica l a w a r e n e s s and short- term memory . Journa l of Learn ing Disabi l i t ies, 17, 592-599. M c B r i d e , H. & S iege l , L . S . (1997). Learn ing disabil i t ies and ado lescen t suic ide. Journa l of Learn ing Disabi l i t ies, 30 , 652-659. M c D o u g a l l , S . , Hu lme, C , El l is, A . & Monk , A . (1994). Learn ing to read: T h e role of short- term memory and phonologica l p rocess ing ski l ls. Journa l of Exper imenta l Chi ld Psycho logy . 58 , 112-133. Mol l , L . C . & D iaz , S . (1985). Ethnographic pedagody: Promot ing effective bilingual instruction. In E . E . G a r c i a & R.V. Padi l la (Eds.) . A d v a n c e s in bil ingual educat ion research (pp. 127-149). T u c s o n : Universi ty of A r i zona P r e s s . Muter, V . , Hu lme, C . & Snowl ing , M. (1997). The Phono log ica l Abi l i t ies Test . London: Psycho log ica l Corpora t ion . R o s n e r , J . & S i m o n , D. (1971). T h e auditory analys is test: A n initial report. Journal of Learn ing Disabi l i t ies, 4 , 384-392 . S h a r e , D., J o r m , A . , M a c l e a n , R., & Mat thews, R. (1984). S o u r c e s of individual d i f ferences in reading acquis i t ion. Journa l of Educat iona l Psycho logy , 76, 1309-1324. S iege l , L .S . (1993). T h e Deve lopment of Read ing . In H.W. R e e s e (Ed.) A d v a n c e s in child deve lopment and behavior , (pp. 63-97) . S a n Diego: A c a d e m i c P r e s s . S iege l , L . S . (1994). Work ing memory and reading: A l i fe-span perspect ive. International Journa l of Behav ioura l Deve lopment , 17, 109-124. S iege l , L .S . & L a d y m a n , S . (2000). A Rev iew of Spec ia l Educat ion in Brit ish Co lumb ia . Brit ish C o l u m b i a : Ministry of Educat ion . 41 S iege l , L. S . , & R y a n , E. B. (1988). Deve lopment of grammatical-sensi t iv i ty, phonological and short- term memory ski l ls in normally achiev ing and subtypes of learning d isab led chi ldren. Deve lopmenta l Psycho logy , 24, 28-37. S iege l , L. S . , & R y a n , E. B. (1989). T h e deve lopment of work ing memory in normally ach iev ing and sub types of learning d isab led chi ldren. Chi ld Deve lopment , 60 , 973-980. S o , D. & S i e g e l , L .S . (1997). Learn ing to read C h i n e s e : Seman t i c , syntact ic, phonolog ica l and work ing memory ski l ls in normal ly ach iev ing and poor C h i n e s e readers. Read ing and Wri t ing: A n Interdisciplinary Journa l , 9, 1-21. S tanov ich , K . E . (1986). Mat thew effects in reading. Read ing R e s e a r c h Quarter ly, 21 , 360-407. S tanov ich , K . E . (1992). Specu la t ions on the c a u s e s and c o n s e q u e n c e s of individual d i f ferences in ear ly reading deve lopment . In P . B . G b u g h , L .C . Ehr i , and R. Tre iman (Eds.) , Read ing Acqu is i t ion , (pp. 307-342) . Hi l lsdale, N J : Er lbaum. Thornd ike , R .L , H a g e n , E . P . , & Satt ler, J . M . (1986). Techn ica l M a n u a l : Stanford Binet Intell igence S c a l e : Fourth Edi t ion. C h i c a g o : R ivers ide. Tunmer , W . & Hoover , W . (1992). Cogni t ive and l inguistic factors in learning to read. In P . B . G o u g h , L . C . Ehr i , and R. Tre iman (Eds.) , Read ing Acguis i t ion. (pp.175-214). Hi l lsdale, N J : E r lbaum. V e r h o e v e n , L. (1990). Acquis i t ion of reading in a second language. Read ing R e s e a r c h Quarter ly, 25 , 90-114. W a d e - W o o l l e y , L. & S i e g e l , L . S . (1997). T h e spel l ing per formance of E S L and native speake rs of Eng l i sh a s a function of reading ski l l . Read ing and Writ ing: A n Interdisciplinary Journa l , 9, 387-406 . Wi l k inson , G . S . (1993). T h e W i d e R a n g e Ach ievement Test - 3. Wi lmington, D E : Jas tak A s s o c i a t e s . 42 Wil lows, D .M . & R y a n , E . B . (1986). The deve lopment of grammat ica l sensit ivity and its relation to ear ly reading ach ievement . Read ing R e s e a r c h Quarter ly, 2 1 , 253-266. W o o d c o c k , R .W. (1973). W o o d c o c k Read ing Mastery Test : Examiner ' s Manua l . C i rc le P ines , M N : A m e r i c a n G u i d a n c e Serv i ce . 43 APPENDIX A 44 Oral Cloze Instructions: I will read something to you and there will be one word missing. Where the word is missing, I will say "beep." I want you to think of a word that would sound right in the "beep." For example, I might say, "The moon shines bright in the "beep." (pause and repeat) and I want you to say "sky" , etc. O.K. Let's try another one. I'll say, "The children "beep" with the toys." (pause and repeat). What is the missing word? If the child fails to respond, say, "How about play?" Then it would be "The children play with the toys." Let's try another one. "The puppy wags its "beep", (pause and repeat). Good! Let's try some more. Discontinue if the child fails the practice items and the first three task items. 1. The ; little pigs ate corn. 2. Fred put the big turkey the oven. 3. The put his dairy cows in the barn. 4. Jane her sister ran up the hill. 5. It was a sunny day with a pretty sky. 6. Betty. a hole with her shovel. 7. Jim set the lamp on the desk so he could . 8. The boy had big brown eyes and a pleasant • . 9. The children put on their boots it snows. 10. When we go the building, we must be quiet. 11. Dad Bobby a letter several weeks ago. 45 Rhyme Detection Instructions Examiner: "Here is a picture of a cat. Down here are three more pictures..." (the examiner points to and names each of the 3 choice pictures). Now which of these three - fish, sun or hat rhymes with cat?" Provide the correct answer (hat) if necessary and explain that hat rhymes with cat because they end with the same sound (at). Continue as above with the other 2 demonstration items, giving explanations when necessary. The instructions fro the 10 items are the same as for the demonstration items. Do not give feedback on the test items. If the child fails the demonstration items and the first 5 test items, you may discontinue the test. Demonstration Items Stimulus Word Response Items 1. cat fish sun hat 2. ball wall bell bag 3. spoon cup moon ship Test Items Stimulus Word Response Items 1. boat foot bike coat 2. key cow tree door 3. chair car table bear 4. house mouse horse window 5. head hand bed eye 6. bell bottle dress shell 7. sock clown clock shoe 8. train rain tractor spoon 9. egg bag spoon leg 10.car star bike cake Syllable and Phoneme Identification 46 Instructions for Syllable Identification (Word completion) Examiner: "Here is a picture of a rabbit. I'm going to say the first part of the word. Can you finish it off for me? Here is a ra..." (The child should respond 'bit.' If the child fails to give the correct answer, say "IF I say ra, you finish the word by saying bit. Let's try it again with rabbit. Ra..." Supply the bit again if necessary.) Repeat as above for the second example, bottle. A full explanation and feedback are given for the two demonstration items. Present the test items 1 to 8 with the instructions, "This is a table. Ta...." Do not give feedback for the test items. If the child fails the demonstration items and the first four test items, the task may be discontinued. Demonstration Items Ra-bbit Bo-ttle Test Items 1. Ta-ble 2. Pic-ture 3. Cabb-age 4. Mon-ey 5. O-range 6. Sand-wich 7. Mon-ster 8. Lem-on score: _ _ _ / 8 Instructions for Phoneme Identification Examiner: "Now we are going to do something that is a bit more difficult. Here is a picture of a watch. I'll say the first part - you finish it off. Here is a watch. Wa..." Provide corrective feedback if necessary. Repeat for the demonstration item, cat. Proceed with items 1-8 using the instructions "This is a horse. Hor..." Do not provide feedback for test items. If the child fails the demonstration items and the first four test items, the task may be discontinued. Demonstration Items: Wa-tch Ca-t Test Items: 1. Hor-se 2. Fi-sh 3. Kni-fe 4. Shi-p' 5. Bo-ne 6. Car-d 7. Ga-te 8. Do-g score: /8 47 Phoneme Deletion Instructions for Initial Phoneme Deletion'- Examiner: "Here is a picture of a bus. If I say the word /bus/ without the / b / , we'll left with /us/. Bus without / b / says us. Let's try some more. Give all 4 demonstration items and explain fully, as for "bus." Administer items 1 to 8 with the instruction, "Meat without /m/ says..." Do not give feedback for the test items. I f the child fails the demonstration items and the first 4 test items, you may discontinue the task. Demonstration Items bus sad pie cow Test Items 1. seat 2. bear 3. hat 4. .s i t 5. jam 6. tin 7. cake 8. cup score /8 Instructions for Final Phoneme Deletion Examiner: "Now this time, instead of taking off the first sound of words, let's try and take off the last sound. This will make things that are not real words. Here's a picture of a foot. Can you hear the last sound in foot? The last sound in foot is /t/. Now can you say foot without hl7 Foot without hi is foo." Give all 4 demonstration items, and explain fully as for foot. Administer items 1 to 8 with the instruction, "Meat without hi says..." Do not give feedback for the test items. If the child fails the demonstration items and the first 4 test items, you may discontinue the task. Demonstration Items foot bag bell spoon Test Items 1. seat 2. sad 3. hat 4. bus 5. jam 6. tin 7. cake 8. . cup Total score /16 4 8 Letter Identification Instructions Examiner: I am going to show you letters one at a time. Tell me the name of each letter. j 9 I z s a e u d w t f _n o c m x .V h r b q y P Score /26 49 J 9 b y k p u d w f n h m 50 Pic tu re Naming (Rapid Automat ized Naming) Show the child the 8 X 5 table of pictures and say: "I want you to look at these pictures and tell me what they are. Let's look at the first row. I'll point to each picture, and then you can tell me what it's a picture of. Let's start." Point (from left to right) to the pear, the bird, the tree, the chair, and the house. Once the child can successfully name each picture, say: "Now let's see how fast you can tell me the names of all these pictures. I want you to go from here (point to the top left picture) to here (point to the top right picture), and then go to the'next row and go from here (left) to here (right). Start when I say go. Ready? Set. Go ! " Record how long it takes the child to name all the pictures from the time you say "Go, " and the number of uncorrected errors. Both the time (in seconds) and the number of uncorrected errors should be recorded on the coversheet. If children consistently misname one of the pictures (such as calling the pear an apple) despite instructions to the contrary during practice, let them continue. However, make a note c f it on the coversheet.  52 S i m p l e Spel l ing " I wou ld like you to s h o w me how to write your name . Wil l you write your n a m e here for m e ? " (Have the chi ld write his or her n a m e on the top line of the page. ) " N o w I wou ld like you to write s o m e more words for me . I a m go ing to read s o m e words to you , and I wou ld like you to print them for me. Try to spel l t hem a s best you c a n . I wil l say the word , then read a sen tence with the word in it, a n d the s a y the word aga in . Y o u only h a v e to write the word once . Try your best. If you are not su re how to spel l a word , it's okay to guess . " 1. no There are no wrong answers . no 2 . dad My dad is happy. d a d 3 . m o m M y m o m p layed with me. m o m 4 . I I live at home . I 5. cat T h e cat p layed with the str ing. cat 53 A P P E N D I X B 54 N a m e O R A L C L O Z E Instructions: Th is t ime I will read someth ing to you and there will be a word m iss ing . W h e r e the word is m iss ing , I will s a y "beep . " I want you to think of a word that wou ld sound right in the spot where I s a y "beep" . F o r examp le , I might say "The moon sh ines bright in the "beep. " (pause and repeat) and I want you to s a y "sky . " O . K . let's try another one . I'll s a y "The chi ldren "beep" with the toys." (pause and repeat). Wha t ' s the miss ing word? (If the chi ld fails to respond, s a y " H o w about, p lay? T h e n it wou ld be "The chi ldren play with the toys. " Let 's try another one . "The little puppy w a g s its "beep . " (pause and repeat). G o o d ! 1. W e have done the work a l ready. W e it yesterday. 2. J o h n is a good player. Bill is a better p layer than J o h n . But T o m is the player of them al l . 3. J a n e her s ister ran up the hill. 4. The brown dog is sma l l ; the gray dog is smal ler ; but the white one is the :. 5. Betty . a hole with her shove l . 6. Yes te rday , T ina and Mar ie walk ing down the street. 7. The girl is tall p lays basketba l l wel l . 8. T h e hungry dogs have all the food. 9. Jeffrey wanted to go the roller coaster . 10. Dad B o b b y a letter severa l w e e k s ago. 11. Yes te rday , J o e the bal l . T O T A L /11 55 Rosner Auditory Analysis Test Now we are going to play a game of removing sounds from words. I'm going to say a word and then tell you to take part of the sound off and then say what's left. Here is how it will work. "Say 'cowboy'." Wait for response. "Now say cowboy again, but without the boy sound". "Say 'toothbrush'." Wait for response. "Now say toothbrush again, but without the tooth sound". If the child fails either of the two practice items, attempt to teach the task by giving the correct response, explaining why it is correct, and re-presenting the item. Say "sat". Now say "sat" without the Isl sound. If either item is failed again, discontinue testing and score the test zero. If the items are answered correctly, then proceed. Testing for all subjects ends after five consecutive errors. Present the remainder of the items in the same way. Check items answered correctly. Mark line under last item attempted. Sample Items: cow(boy) (tooth)brush (s)at 1. birth(day) 2. (car)pet 3. (m)an 4. ro(de) 5. (w)ill 6. (I)end 7. (s)our 8. (g)ate 9. to(ne) 10. ti(me) 11. plea(se) 12. stea(k) 13. bel(t) 14. (sc)old 15. (c)lip 16. (s)mile 17. (p)ray 18. (b)lock 19. (b)reak 20. s(m)ell 21. (t)rail 22. de(s)k 23. (sh)rug 24. cr(e)ate r emove [ee], a n s w e r [crate] 25. s(m)ack 26. re(pro)duce r e m o v e [pra], a n s w e r [reduce] 27. s(k)in 28. s(w)ing 29. (st)rain 30. g(l)ow 31. st(r)eam 32. c(l)utter 33. off(er)ing remove [er], answer [offing] 34. dy(na)mo remove [nuh], answer [dimo] 35. auto(mo)bile remove [muh], answer [autobeel] 36. car(pen)ter remove [puhn], answer [carter] 37. Ger(ma)ny remove [muh], answer [journey] 38. lo(ca)tion remove [kaa], answer [lotion] 39. con(tin)ent remove [tin], answer [conent] 40. phi(lo)sophy remove flawl, answer ffuhsophy] Total Correct /40 57 Working Memory Numbers Procedure: Place card A in front of child. After child finishes counting, immediately turn card over on a stack near yourself, not the child. Using the card A, teach the child to count the yellow dots, ignoring the blue ones. "Count the yellow dots. Try not to pay attention to the blue dots. Just count the yellow dots. You should touch each dot with your finger while you count out loud. Now you can practice counting the yellow dots." "How many yellow dots were there?" Using cards B and C: "Now I want you to count the yellow dots on one card and then on another card. Be sure to touch each yellow dot and to count out loud. Then I want you to tell me how many dots there were on the first card and then on the second card." "Okay, let's try it." "Now we are going to count yellow dots on some more cards. You should start to count as soon as you see a new card. When you see a blank card, you should tell me how many yellow dots were on each card in that set. In the beginning, you will only count 1 card at a time, then 2 cards at a time, and then even more cards. Each time you see the blank card you should tell me the numbers for each card you counted. You should tell me the numbers in the order in which you saw the cards - that is, how many yellow dots on the first card, the second, and so on." Discontinue when child has failed an entire level (i.e. all three items - A, B, C of a particular number). Note: Announce each new level. Record numbers in the order the child has said them. Practice: 1. Card A 1b. Cards B,C Test Items: 2. A. _ _ 4. A. . B. B. : C. C . _ 3. A. 5. A. B. _ B. C. C. TOTAL _/12 IO CO oo CD CM CM CO CM CD 00 CO CO CO 8S 59 RAN Task (Speeded Number Naming) When I turn over this piece of paper you are going to see some numbers. I want you to name them as quickly as you can. Start by going across the page and then do the next row. Keep going and don't stop. (Use stopwatch to time and circle uncorrected errors) 4 1 3 2 5 9 4 2 7 5 3 6 1 9 3 6 8 9 4 8 3 1 5 2 6 Time (to the nearest second): Number of uncorrected errors: Working Memory Task 60 Instructions: I a m g o i n g to s a y s o m e s e n t e n c e s a n d t he las t w o r d in e a c h s e n t e n c e wi l l b e m i s s i n g . I w a n t y o u to tel l m e w h a t y o u th ink t he las t w o r d s h o u l d b e . L e t ' s try o n e . "For breakfast the little girl had orange ." N o w I a m g o i n g to r e a d two s e n t e n c e s . A f t e r e a c h s e n t e n c e , I w a n t y o u to tel l m e the w o r d tha t s h o u l d g o a t t he e n d o f t he s e n t e n c e . W h e n I f i n i sh t he t w o s e n t e n c e s , I w a n t y o u to tel l m e t h e two w o r d s that y o u s a i d f o r t h e e n d o f e a c h s e n t e n c e . P l e a s e tel l m e t h e w o r d s in t h e o r d e r that y o u s a i d t h e m . L e t ' s t ry it. "When we go swimming, we wear a bathing Cars have to stop at a red ." Discontinue w h e n t h e c h i l d h a s f a i l ed a n en t i re l e v e l ( i .e. a l l t h r e e i t e m s - A , B , C o f a pa r t i cu la r n u m b e r ) Note: A n n o u n c e e a c h n e w l e v e l . R e c o r d t he w o r d s in t he o r d e r t h e c h i l d h a s s a i d t h e m . Items 2 A 2 C 3 A 3 B 1) In a baseba l l g a m e , the pitcher throws the 2) O n my two hands , I have ten . • Ch i ld 's r e s p o n s e s : 2 B 1) In the fall, w e need to rake 2) W h e n we are s ick , we often go to the Chi ld 's r e s p o n s e s : • 1) A n e lephant is b ig , a m o u s e is 2) A s a w is used to cut Ch i ld ' s r e s p o n s e s : 1) Runn ing is fast, walk ing is _ 2) At the library people read 3) A n app le is red, a banana is Ch i ld 's r e s p o n s e s : 1) T h e sun sh ines dur ing the day, the moon at 2) In the spr ing, the farmer p lows the 3) T h e young chi ld had black hair and brown Chi ld 's r e s p o n s e s : • _(ball, f ingers) J l e a v e s , doctor) _(small, wood) _(slow, books , yellow) (night, f ield, eyes) 61 3 C 1) In the s u m m e r it is very , . 2) P e o p l e go to s e e monkeys in a . 3) With dinner, we some t imes drink . • Ch i ld 's r e s p o n s e s : [ (hot, zoo , milk) 4 A 1) P l e a s e p a s s the salt and • 2) W h e n our hands are co ld we wea r : • 3) O n the way to schoo l I mai led a . • 4) After sw imming , I w a s soak ing . . Ch i ld 's r e s p o n s e s : ; (pepper, g loves , letter, wet) 4 B 1) S n o w is white, g rass is - . 2) After schoo l , the chi ldren wa lked : . 3) A bird f l ies, a f ish . 4) In the barn, the farmer mi lked the . Ch i ld 's r e s p o n s e s : (green, h o m e , sw ims, cow) 4 C 1) In the autumn, the leaves fall off the : . 2) W e eat soup with a • ; . 3) I go to the pool to 4) W e brush and c o m b our • ; _. Ch i ld 's r e s p o n s e s : • . ( trees, s p o o n , sw im, hair) 5 A 1) For the party, the girl wore a pretty p i n k . _ . 2) Cot ton is soft, and rocks are • . 3) O n c e a week , we Wash the . . 4) In the spr ing it is very . 5) I throw the ball up and then it c o m e s . Ch i ld 's r e s p o n s e s : ' (dress, hard, ca r . . . , rainy, down) 5 B 1) T h e snai l is s low, the rabbit is . 2) At a birthday party, w e usual ly eat ice c ream and . 3) S a n d p a p e r is rough but g lass is . 4) In a ga rden , we pick . 5) O v e r the f ield, the girl rode the gal loping . Ch i ld 's r esponse : ' (fast, c a k e , smoo th , f lowers, horse) 5 C 1) T o cut meat we use a sharp . 2) In the dayt ime it is light, and at night it is . 3) D o g s have four ; \ . 4) At the grocery store, we buy ; ' . 5) A man is b ig, a baby is [ . - Ch i ld 's r e s p o n s e s : __(knife, dark, legs , food, small) Total Correct /12 62 S P E L L I N G W O R D S R E A L W O R D S m e n T h e m e n are ta lk ing . m e n d i d 1 d i d the w o r k y e s t e r d a y . d i d h i m T h e b o o k b e l o n g s to h i m . h i m s a d T h e m o v i e m a d e m e s a d . s a d g o o d T h e c h o c o l a t e t a s t e d g o o d . g o o d love 1 l ove to s k i . l ove toy H e h a s a t o y t ra in . toy s a i d S h e s a i d , " g o o d m o r n i n g . " s a i d h e a d H i s h e a d hurt . h e a d s o m e S o m e p e o p l e c a m e to vis i t . s o m e SPELLING NONWORDS f id (like hid) pern g a n (like man) het (like wet) s o g (like bog) v o o d (like food) o ther a c c e p t a b l e s p e l l i n g s : v u d e tave (like have) o ther a c c e p t a b l e s p e l l i n g s : tav, talve v o n e (like gone) o t h e r a c c e p t a b l e s p e l l i n g s : v a u n , v a u g h a n , v o n , v a w n co th (like both) o t h e r a c c e p t a b l e s p e l l i n g s : ko th , co the , kothe , c o a t h g e a d (like head) o t h e r a c c e p t a b l e s p e l l i n g s : g e d 64 A P P E N D I X C 65 Fw^iMoc g n H Ff fer . t S i z e s for Language Group on Kindergarten Per fo rmance Kindergarten M e a s u r e F-value E ta squared W R A T 3 reading 1.98 -002 1.99 .002 Letter Identif ication G F W S o u n d Mimic ry 7.09* R h y m e Detect ion 40 .38 Syl lab le Identification P h o n e m e Identification .01 P h o n e m e Delet ion Oral C l o z e Rap id Naming .006 .036 1.67 .002 .000 3.02 .003 20.48* .019 32 .02* .029 Memory for S e n t e n c e s 6 8 . 0 1 * .059 S imple Spel l ing 9.20* .008 *p<001 W R A T 3 = W i d e R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t ( 3 r d Ed . ) G F W = G o l d m a n Fr is toe W o o d c o c k F-values and Effect S i z e s for R e a d e r Class i f icat ion on Kindergarten Pe r fo rmance Kindergar ten M e a s u r e F-value . E ta squared W R A T 3 reading 1455.06** .577 Letter Identification 689 .56** .393 G F W S o u n d Mimicry 8.88* .008 R h y m e Detect ion 26 .11 * * .024 Syl lable Identification 35 .49** .032 P h o n e m e Identification 45 .64** .041 P h o n e m e Delet ion 20 .21 * * .019 Ora l C l o z e 18 .83** .017 Rap id Naming 39 .31* * .036 Memory for S e n t e n c e s 15 .41** .014 S imp le Spel l ing 131.42** .110 *e<.oi **p<ooi W R A T 3 = W i d e R a n g e Ach ievemen t Test ( 3 r d Ed.) G F W = G o l d m a n Fr istoe W o o d c o c k 67 F-values and Effect S i z e s for L a n q u a q e * R e a d e r Classi f icat ion on Kindergar ten Per fo rmance Kindergarten M e a s u r e F-value E ta squared W R A T 3 reading 3.97 .004 Letter Identification 7.78* .007 G F W Sound Mimicry 1.19 .001 R h y m e Detect ion .05 .000 Syl lable Identification .05 .000 P h o n e m e Identification .25 .000 P h o n e m e Delet ion .01 .000 Oral C l o z e .01 .002 Rap id Naming 2.05 .002 Memory for S e n t e n c e s 2.55 .002 S imp le Spel l ing .137 .000 *e<ooi W R A T 3 = W i d e R a n g e A c h i e v e m e n t Tes t ( 3 r d Ed. ) G F W = G o l d m a n Fr istoe W o o d c o c k 68 APPENDIX D F-values and Effect S i z e s for Language G r o u p on G r a d e 2 Per fo rmance G r a d e 2 M e a s u r e F-value Eta Squared W R A T 3 reading .05 .000 W - J W o r d Identification .01 .000 W - J W o r d At tack .06 .000 S D R T Read ing C o m p r e h e n s i o n .01 .000 Work ing M e m o r y for N u m b e r s 1.55 .002 Work ing M e m o r y for W o r d s .13 .000 Oral C l o z e 1.12 .000 R o s n e r Audi tory Ana l ys i s 2.37 .003 Rap id Au tom ized Naming ( R A N ) 1.57 .002 One-minute word reading .52 .001 One-minute pseudoword reading .97 .001 W R A T 3 Spel l ing .14 .000 Rea l W o r d Spel l ing .27 .000 Pseudoword Spel l ing .27 .000 W R A T 3 Ar i thmet ic 1.73 .001 W R A T 3 = W i d e R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t W - J = W o o d c o c k - J o h n s o n Read ing Maste ry Tes ts S D R T = Stanford D iagnost ic Read ing Tes t 70 F-va lues and Effect S i z e s for R e a d e r Group on Grade 2 Per fo rmance G r a d e 2 M e a s u r e F-value Eta squared W R A T 3 reading 155.83* .152 W - J Word Identification 63119 .12* .112 W - J W o r d Attack 51791.04* .115 S D R T Read ing C o m p r e h e n s i o n 29783 .19* .063 Work ing M e m o r y for N u m b e r s 33.76 .007 Work ing M e m o r y for W o r d s 3.96 .002 Ora l C l o z e 63 .47* .024 R o s n e r Audi tory Ana l ys i s 752.54* .025 Rap id Au tomized Naming ( R A N ) 69 .37* .009 One-minu te word reading 73 .52* .102 One-minute pseudoword reading 5581.37* .078 W R A T 3 Spel l ing 38984.06* .086 Rea l Word Spel l ing 267 .22* .124 P s e u d o w o r d Spel l ing 109.89* .040 W R A T 3 Ar i thmet ic 8067.38* .018 *p<001 W R A T 3 = W i d e R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t W - J = W o o d c o c k - J o h n s o n R e a d i n g Mastery Tes ts S D R T = Stanford D iagnost ic Read ing Tes t 71 F-values and Effect s i zes for L a n q u a q e * R e a d e r Interaction on G r a d e 2 Pe r fo rmance G r a d e 2 M e a s u r e F-Va lue Effect S i z e W R A T 3 reading .18 .000 W - J Word Identification 1.01 .000 W - J Word At tack .78 .000 S D R T Read ing C o m p r e h e n s i o n .08 .000 Work ing M e m o r y for Numbe rs 1.60 .002 Work ing M e m o r y for W o r d s .29 .000 Ora l C l o z e 1.84 .002 R o s n e r Audi tory Ana lys i s 1.13 .001 Rap id Au tomized Naming ( R A N ) .22 .000 One-minute word reading .58 .001 One-minute pseudoword reading .04 .000 W R A T 3 Spel l ing 1.35 .002 Rea l Word Spel l ing .94 .001 Pseudoword Spel l ing .78 .001 W R A T 3 = W ide R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t W - J = W o o d c o c k - J o h n s o n R e a d i n g Maste ry Tes ts S D R T = Stanford D iagnost ic Read ing Tes t 72 A P P E N D I X E M e a n S c o r e s and F-va lues on Kindergar ten T a s k s for L1 Chi ldren L1 Chi ldren Not At-r isk At-r isk F P Li teracy M e a s u r e s W R A T 3 reading percent i le 68.18 12.85 2012.69 <.001 Letter Identification 18.34 6.25 856.32 <001 S imp le Spel l ing 3.05 1.18 225^56 <001 Phono log ica l P r o c e s s i n g G F W S o u n d Mimicry 82.51 73.64 27.56 <001 R h y m e Detect ion 7.24 5.71 37.51 <.001 Syl lab le Identification 5.03 3.53 49.38 <.001 P h o n e m e Identification 3.23 1.44 59.26 <001 P h o n e m e Delet ion 3.93 2.04 29.56 <.001 Syntact ic A w a r e n e s s Ora l C l o z e 2.63 1.55 29.17 <.001 Lex ica l A c c e s s Rap id Naming (sec.) 66.46 76.73 12.57 <001 Memory Memory for S e n t e n c e s 17.26 15.36 47.91 <001 W R A T 3 = W i d e R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t ( 3 r d Ed. ) G F W = Go ldman-F r i s toe W o o d c o c k M e a n S c o r e s and S ign i f i cance of K indergar ten T a s k s for E S L Chi ldren E S L Chi ld ren Not At-r isk At-r isk F P Literacy M e a s u r e s W R A T 3 reading 72.28 10.50 486 .82 <.001 Letter Identification 19.99 4 .67 239.63 <001 S imple Spel l ing 2.72 .96 42.44 <.001 Phono log ica l P r o c e s s i n g G F W S o u n d Mimicry 76.01 69.28 .720 ns R h y m e Detect ion 5.64 4 .03 7.68 <.001 Syl lab le Identification 4 .72 3.07 13.97 <.001 P h o n e m e Identification 3.51 1.42 17.88 <.001 P h o n e m e Delet ion 3.48 1.56 6.59 <001 Syntact ic A w a r e n e s s Ora l C l o z e 1.68 .56 7.69 <.001 Lexica l A c c e s s Rap id Naming (sec.) 73.86 91 .13 15.07 <001 Memory Memory for S e n t e n c e s 14.21 13.53 1.44 ns W R A T 3 = W i d e R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t ( 3 r d Ed.) G F W = Go ldman-F r i s toe W o o d c o c k 75. A P P E N D I X F M e a n S c o r e s and F -Va lues on G r a d e 2 T a s k s for L1 Chi ldren L1 Chi ld ren A v e r a g e R e a d e r s D isab led R e a d e r s F P Read ing M e a s u r e s W R A T 3 Read ing 73 .97 11.30 250.87 <001 W J Word Identification 76.42 19.55 161.32 <.001 W - J W o r d At tack 74.50 23.58 162.82 <.001 S D R T Read ing C o m p r e h e n s i o n 55.51 14.06 101.28 <001 One-minute word reading 22 .68 10.17 124.89 <001 One-minute pseudoword reading 24.18 6.28 113.83 <001 Phono log ica l P r o c e s s i n g R o s n e r Audi tory Ana l ys i s 22 .02 12.82 72 .65 <001 Syntact ic A w a r e n e s s Ora l C l o z e 7.63 5.18 66.58 <001 Lexica l A c c e s s Rap id Naming (sec.) 12.84 15.72 24.98 <001 Memory Work ing Memory W o r d s (max. 12) 3.52 2.61 10.38 <001 Work ing Memory Numbers (max. 12) 6.16 5.36 3.26 ns Ar i thmetic W R A T 3 Ar i thmet ic 52.46 31.64 29.19 <001 Spel l ing W R A T 3 Spel l ing 62.96 20.61 110.45 <001 R e a l Word Spel l ing 8.88 5.12 136.76 <.001 Nonword Spel l ing 8.40 5.52 70.29 <001 W R A T 3 = W i d e R a n g e Ach ievemen t Tes t ( 3 r d ed.) W - J = W o o d c o c k - J o h n s o n Read ing Maste ry Tes ts S D R T = Stanford D iagnost ic Read ing Test M e a n S c o r e s and F -Va lues on G r a d e 2 T a s k s for E S L Chi ldren E S L Chi ld ren A v e r a g e R e a d e r s D isab led R e a d e r s F P Read ing M e a s u r e s W R A T 3 Read ing 75.71 10.57 66 .32 <001 W J W o r d Identification 80.29 13.00 55.94 <001 W - J W o r d At tack 77 .25 16.00 52.02 <001 S D R T Read ing C o m p r e h e n s i o n 54.14 14.83 15.75 <.001 One-minu te word reading 24.24 10.67 42 .35 <001 One-minu te pseudoword reading 26.28 8.33 29 .69 <001 Phono log ica l P r o c e s s i n g R o s n e r Audi tory Ana l ys i s 22.60 17.50 4 .35 < 0 5 Syntact ic A w a r e n e s s Ora l C l o z e 6.68 4.71 5.14 < 0 5 Lex ica l A c c e s s Rap id Naming (sec.) 12.37 15.57 8.74 <01 Memory Work ing M e m o r y W o r d s (max. 12) 3.34 2.86 .47 ns Work ing M e m o r y Numbe rs (max. 12) 6.22 4.14 4 .55 < 0 5 Ari thmetic W R A T 3 Ar i thmet ic 59.26 38.50 4 .82 <.05 Spel l ing W R A T 3 Spel l ing percent i le 70.01 16.83 35.49 <001 R e a l W o r d Spel l ing 9.29 5.17 68.96 <.001 Nonword Spel l ing 8.84 5.67 5.97 < 0 5 W R A T 3 = W ide R a n g e Ach ievemen t Test ( 3 r d ed.) W - J = W o o d c o c k - J o h n s o n Read ing Maste ry Tes ts S D R T = Stanford Diagnost ic Read ing Tes t

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 6 1
China 3 2
Russia 2 0
Taiwan 1 0
Germany 1 2
Hong Kong 1 0
City Views Downloads
Unknown 5 2
Beijing 3 1
Ashburn 2 0
Mountain View 1 1
Arcata 1 0
Central District 1 0
Salyer 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0053884/manifest

Comment

Related Items