Investigating the Second
Language Reader with Low
Native Language Literacy
Dr. Elaine C. Klein and
Dr. Gita Martohardjono
Research Institute for the Study of
Language in Urban Society (RISLUS)
The CUNY Graduate Center
Email: slal@gc.cuny.edu
AAAL, Washington, D.C, March 29, 2008
The Questions
In young readers, native language (L1) preliteracy and word level reading skills
transfer to the second language (L2).
How does reading develop among older atrisk L2 learners (SIFE)?
 Higher level reading skills?
 Transfer of skills?
2
Who are SIFE?
‘SIFE’ (‘Newcomers’), a subgroup of
ELLs:
 Recently arrived adolescent students
 Little or no English
 Assumed to have:
- Low literacy and academic preparation
- Gaps in prior schooling (+2 yrs)
3
Research on adolescent L2
readers
 Overlooked and underserved
 Very high drop-out rates
 Few appropriate assessment tools
for identification and tracking
 Need for more systematic research
(e.g. Velasco & Fix 2000; Short, Boyston & Coltrane
2003; Freeman, Freeman & Mercuri 2003; Morse 2005;
August & Shanahan 2006; Short & Fitzsimmons 2007)
4
Some Facts about SIFE
in NYC Schools*
 About 15,000 SIFE comprise 11% of
ELLs
 Most enter 8th-10th grades
 59% have Spanish native language
 Graduation rates far lower than other
ELLs
*Bilingual Education Student Information Survey (BESIS)
2006-2007: NYC DOE Office of English Language
Learners, 2007.
5
SIFE Profile and Progress
 What academic skills do SIFE
bring to school in the US?
 How do SIFE compare to their
peer groups?
 What academic skills do SIFE
gain over one year (T1 T2)?
6
The SIFE Project
In Progress
18 month Longitudinal Study
Participants:
 98 students identified as SIFE
 9th and 10th grade
 Native language: Spanish
Schools:
 5 inner-city high schools in NYC
 Various program types
 Native language support
7
Data Collection
Measures of typical language development:
 Versant (Oral Spanish and English)
 Syntactic development (Spanish and
English)
Academic literacy diagnostics:
 Reading and content areas (Spanish and
English)
 Benchmark assessments (State and citymandated tests)
8
Results: Typical L1
Development
 Versant: oral vocabulary, sentence
mastery, fluency
Overall Mean % Correct = 79, SD = 16
 Syntactic comprehension:
Overall Mean % Correct = 89, SD = 12
9
Academic Literacy
Diagnostics
 Pre- and Basic Literacy
 Higher-Level Literacy
- Vocabulary and Reading Comprehension
 Content Areas
- Math
- Science
- Social Science
10
Results: Pre- and Basic
Literacy
 Phonological & Orthographic
Awareness
 Word Reading
 Simple Sentence Comprehension
Mean % Correct = 96, SD = 4.5
11
Results: L1 Reading
Vocabulary
Vocabulary: Percentage of Students Scoring at Each
Grade Level
21%
17%
< Grade 3
Grade 3
9%
27%
8%
18%
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
12
Results: L1 Reading
Comprehension
Reading Comprehension: Percentage of Students
Scoring at Each Grade Level
6%
5%
< Grade 2
36%
Grade 2
Grade 3
42%
11%
Grade 4
Grade 5
13
Difference Between L1 Vocabulary
and Reading Comprehension (at T1)
Reading
Vocabulary
Comprehension
Mean %
Correct
66%
56%
Mean
Grade
Level
5
3.7
(sig; t(97) = 5.5, p < .001)
14
Results: Academic Content
Areas
 Math:
Majority at/below grade 3
 Science:
Majority at/below grade 4
 Social Science:
Majority at/below grade 4
15
What skills do SIFE bring?
 Show typical language development:
- Oral language, syntactic comprehension
 Have basic reading skills
 Show delay in:
- Higher level reading skills:
(4+ grade levels below expected grade)
- Content Area Knowledge:
(5+ grade levels below expected grade)
16
Comparison Groups
Native English Speaker Groups:

 9th and 10th Graders
 Community College West Indian English
speakers
Regular ELL Group:
 9th-12th Graders
Spanish-English Community College Group:
 Did not meet minimum English language
requirements
 Currently taking ESL classes
17
Comparison Between Native
English Speakers and SIFE
Mean Grade Level Scores on Vocabulary and Reading
Comprehension
10
9
8
Grade Level
7
6
5
Vocabulary
4
3
Reading
Comprehension
2
1
0
High School Native English Speakers
SIFE
18
Progress in One Year
(N=23)
 Academic gains in L1 skills
 L2 English development
19
Academic Gains:
L1 Vocabulary
Percent Correct at each Grade Level
Time 1 and Time 2
100%
90%
80%
Percent Correct
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
N=23
Time 1
Time 2
10%
0%
3
4
5
6
Grade Level
7
9
20
Academic Gains:
L1 Reading Comprehension
Percent Correct at each Grade Level
Time 1 and Time 2
100%
90%
80%
Percent Correct
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
N=23
20%
Time 1
10%
Time 2
0%
2
3
4
5
Grade Level
6
7
9
21
Difference Between
L1 Vocabulary and Reading
Comprehension (at T2)
Vocabulary
Mean
Grade
Level
6.8
5
Reading
Comprehension
5.4
3.7
t(22) = 2.9; p < .01
22
A Closer Look at Reading
Comprehension
Basic Understanding (24%):
 Recall factual information
 Identify relevance
Text Level Skills (76%):
 Inferencing
 Interpretation
 Critical Analysis
23
L1 Grade 5 Text Level Skills
Text Level Skills
Mean % Correct
Time 1
49%
Mean % Correct
Time 2
57%
24
L2 English Development
After 1 year:
Oral Language:
 Overall: Very limited speaking and listening skills
 Vocabulary: Basic; slow, simple speech
Syntactic Comprehension:
 Mean percent correct = 58%
Benchmark ESL Reading Test:
 Approximate Grade Level Score = 3rd to 4th
Grade
25
Summary of SIFE Progress
In one year:
 Significant gains in L1 reading skills
 Modest gains in L2 English skills
 Gap between L1 vocabulary and
reading comprehension persists
 Lowest performance still on L1 text
level reading skills
26
Transfer of Skills
Native Language (T1)
Vocabulary
Reading Comprehension
English L2 (T2)
Vocabulary and Reading
Comprehension
approximate grade level
= 4.7
= 3.6
= 3-4
Higher level reading skills transfer
from L1 to L2.
27
Summary and Conclusions
SIFE
 Do not have L1 developmental delays in oral
language or word-level reading
 Lag in knowledge base in L1
 Lag in higher-level reading
 Most severely in text level reading
Transfer reading skills from L1 to L2
 Accelerate development of these skills
in L1.
28
THANK YOU!
Acknowledgements





NYC Department of Education
Participating schools and SIFE liaisons
Participating community colleges
All participants and teachers
RISLUS Research Team
30