EAL Reading Research: A Review of Recent
Research Findings
Prepared by Fiona Middleweek
Department of Education, University of Oxford
January 2010
The following paper reviews the current literature on reading skills in children with
English as an Additional Language (EAL). The review is intended as a brief guide,
and a list of references is attached for further reading.
Word Reading Skills

Studies of EAL children in the US, Canada and UK and language-minority
children in Holland consistently report that EAL children have equal skills to
their English first language (L1) peers on tests of word decoding and
phonological skills (see Lesaux et al., 2008 for an analysis of studies; also
Jean & Geva, 2009).

For example in the UK setting, a two year longitudinal study by Hutchinson et
al. (2003), matching 43 EAL with first language English (L1) children on age,
non-verbal intelligence and gender, found no significant difference between
the EAL and L1 children on word reading skills (for similar findings, see
Burgoyne et al, 2009).

In an international setting, age appropriate decoding skills have been reported
in Spanish EAL children with low socioeconomic (SES) backgrounds
(Nakamoto et al., 2007) and in Dutch language-minority children (Verhoeven,
1990; 2000). Similar findings have been demonstrated in studies of Canadian
EAL children with high and low SES and mixed L1s (Lesaux et al., 2006,
2007; Lipka & Siegel, 2007; Jean & Geva, 2009).
1
Reading Comprehension

Several studies examining children’s reading comprehension have reported
significant differences between L1 and EAL children on reading
comprehension measures (e.g. Burgoyne et al., 2009; Hutchinson et al., 2003).

For example, Hutchinson et al.’s (2003) two year longitudinal study of EAL
and L1 children found that the EAL children performed on average one year
behind the L1 children on the Neale Analysis of Reading Ability (NARA).
Importantly, the one year differential in reading comprehension scores
persisted throughout the duration of the study (from years 2 to 4).

This dissociation between word reading and comprehension abilities is also
observed in studies of US Spanish first language children. For example,
Nakamoto et al (2007) follow reading outcomes for 218 low SES Spanish L1
children from first to sixth grade learning EAL in a US bilingual programme.
The study reports a decline in EAL children’s reading comprehension scores
measured by the Woodcock Johnson Test of passage comprehension from a
mean percentile of approximately 49% in first grade to just over 21% in
grades five and six. Although passage comprehension scores were in the
average range for EAL children in first grade, their scores began to drop in
third grade and were in the bottom quartile for the normative English-speaking
sample by sixth grade. However, the EAL children’s basic word reading skills
scores remained in the average range for the normative English-speaking
sample throughout the six year data collection period.

Not all studies report EAL children experiencing difficulty with reading
comprehension. Three papers from Canada (Lesaux et al., 2006, 2007; Lipka
& Siegel, 2007) investigate longitudinal reading outcomes for middle
elementary school children of mixed L1s.
2
Reading comprehension is
measured by the Stanford diagnostic reading test (SDRT) and all three studies
report no difference between the EAL and L1 groups on this measure.

The reading comprehension abilities of EAL children are currently being
investigated in Oxfordshire schools through the Reading and Language
Comprehension Project (RLCP).
EAL Children and ‘Poor Comprehenders’
 For English first language children, the research literature suggests that
approximately 10 - 15 % of 7 -11 year old children have age-appropriate
decoding skills but poor comprehension abilities (e.g. Nation, 2005; Nation &
Snowling, 2004 ). Children who are poor comprehenders have difficulty in
specific comprehension skills such as making inferences and comprehension
monitoring.
In addition, these children generally demonstrate less well-
developed listening comprehension skills and lower receptive vocabulary
when matched for chronological age and reading ability with children who are
skilled comprehenders
 It is probable that the distinction between poor comprehenders and poor
readers is also applicable to EAL children (Lesaux et al, 2006).
Vocabulary

Vocabulary knowledge has been shown to be an important factor in reading
comprehension and literacy development. Reading studies suggest that preschool vocabulary knowledge is a predictor of reading comprehension in later
primary.
For example, Cunningham and Stanovich (1997) show that
vocabulary tested at first grade is a significant predictor of reading
comprehension ten years later, accounting for more than 30% of the variance
in eleventh grade.
3

Socio-economic status has been shown to affect vocabulary learning in young
children. For example, qualitative and quantitative differences have been
observed in the words encountered by high and low SES children (Hart &
Risley, 1995) and the research suggests that children who come from lowincome backgrounds tend to have lower language abilities than their peers
when they begin school (Hoff, 2006; Hoff & Naigles, 2002).

EAL children have been shown to possess lower receptive and expressive
vocabulary skills than first language English children in a number of recent
studies (see Burgoyne et al., 2009; Hutchinson et al., 2003; Jean and Geva,
2009). Jean and Geva (2009) report that EAL children living in low SES areas
may therefore face an ‘added L2 disadvantage’ in comparison to their L1
peers.

The influence of SES on vocabulary learning for bilingual children should not
be underestimated. For example, a recent report by Paradis (2009) suggests
that parent’s level of education (an indicator of SES) may be as important a
factor as language spoken at home in children’s developing vocabulary
knowledge.

Primary school attendance may not be a sufficient source of vocabulary
acquisition (Biemiller & Boote, 2006) and it is age, rather than school
attendance, that appears to affect vocabulary size (Christian et al., 2000).

Moreover a ‘rich get richer’ effect has been observed in vocabulary
interventions with young children (Penno et al., 2002). Biemiller (2005)
estimates that whereas the average child adds an average of at least 840 root
meanings a year in primary school, children in the lowest quartile add an
average of only 570 root word meanings.

In the US, a team at Harvard University has recently developed a vocabulary
teaching programme for Grade 6-8 children. The researchers report that EAL
children appear to make greater progress with this programme than first
language English children. More details on this programme can be found at
4
www.wordgeneration.org. The programme focuses on cross-curricular
teaching of academic vocabulary and has shown consistent improvement in
children’s vocabulary knowledge and writing skills. For a concise report on
the programme, see also White & Kim (2009).
Listening Comprehension

Listening comprehension has been shown to be an important measure of oral
language skills and reading comprehension for L1 children.

EAL children have been found to perform relatively more weakly compared to
their L1 peers on tests of listening comprehension than on tests of reading
comprehension. For example, Hutchinson et al. (2003) report that the EAL
children perform two years below their L1 peers on an oral version of the
NARA but one year behind on the written version of the same assessment.

Similarly in the US, Proctor et al. (2005) observe that the fourth grade Spanish
L1 children in their study perform at near grade level on the Woodcock
passage comprehension test but perform closer to L1 second grade children on
an equivalent test of listening comprehension.
Other Reading Related Skills

The majority of research has concentrated on EAL children’s phonological,
word decoding and reading comprehension skills. However studies that have
examined factors such as working memory have found no evidence of
differences between the English first language and EAL children (see for
example Jean & Geva, 2009).
Home Literacy Environment

Exposure to books in the home and parental teaching approaches have been
shown to affect children’s reading achievement at primary school. This may
5
be an important factor for EAL children. For more consideration of the home
literacy environment, see Senechal (2006).
Conclusion

The research evidence suggests that EAL children may continue to have areas
of difficulty in literacy, specifically related to vocabulary knowledge and
comprehension, even after five years of schooling. An emphasis on teaching
vocabulary, particularly abstract and academic words, may be helpful for those
children identified as having poor comprehension. However, further research
is needed, particularly among older EAL children.
6
References
Biemiller, A. (2005) ‘Size and sequence in vocabulary development: Implications for
choosing words for primary grade instruction.’ In A. Hiebert & M. Kamil (eds.)
Teaching and Learning Vocabulary: Bringing Research to Practice, Mahwah, N.J.,
Erlbaum, 223-242.
Biemiller, A. (2006) ‘Vocabulary development and instruction: A prerequisite for
school learning’ in D.K. Dickinson & S.B. Neuman (eds.) Handbook of Early
Literacy Research: Volume 2, New York, The Guilford Press, 41-51.
Biemiller, A. & Boote, C. (2006) ‘An effective method for building meaning
vocabulary in primary grades.’ Journal of Educational Psychology, 98 (1), 44-62.
Burgoyne, K., Kelly, J., Whiteley, H. & Spooner, A. (2009) ‘The comprehension
skills of children learning English as an additional language’ The British
Psychological Society, 79, 735-747.
Cunningham, A.E. & Stanovich, K.E. (1997) ‘Early reading acquisition and its
relation to reading experience 10 years later.’ Developmental Psychology, 33, 934945.
Cutting, L.E. & Scarborough, H.S. (2006) ‘Prediction of reading comprehension:
Relative contributions of word recognition, language proficiency, and other cognitive
skills can depend on how comprehension is measured’ Scientific Studies of Reading,
10 (3), 277-299.
Gregory, E. (1996) Making Sense of a New World: Learning to Read in a Second
Language, London, Paul Chapman Publishing.
Hart, B. & Risley, T.R. (1995) Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of
Young American Children, Baltimore, Brookes.
7
Hoff, E. (2006) ‘Environmental supports for language acquisition.’ in D.K. Dickinson
& S.B. Neuman (eds.) Handbook of Early Literacy Research: Volume 2, New York,
The Guilford Press, 163-172.
Hoff, E. (2003) ‘Causes and consequences of SES-related differences in parent-tochild speech. In M.H. Bornstein & R.H. Bradley (eds.) Socioeconomic status,
parenting and child development, Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum.
Hoff. E. & Naigles, L. (2002) ‘How children use input in acquiring a lexicon.’ Child
Development, 73, 418-433.
Hutchinson, J.M., Whiteley, H.E., Smith, C.D., & Connors, L. (2003) ‘The
developmental progression of comprehension-related skills in children learning
EAL’ Journal of Research in Reading, 26 (1), 19-32.
Jean, M. & Geva, E. (2009) ‘The development of vocabulary in English as a
second language children and its role in predicting word recognition ability.’
Applied Psycholinguistics, 30, 153-185.
Lesaux, N.K., Geva, E., Koda, K., Siegel, L.S. & Shanahan, T. ‘Development of
literacy in second-language learners’ in D.August & T. Shanahan (2008) Developing
Reading and Writing in Second-Language Learners: Lessons from the Report of the
National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth, New York,
Routledge, 27-59.
Lesaux, N.K., Lipka, O. & Siegel, L.S. (2006) ‘The development of reading in
children who speak English as a second language.’ Developmental Psychology, 39
(6), 1005-1019.
Lesaux, N.K., Rupp, A.A. & Siegel, L.S. (2007) ‘Growth in reading skills of
children from diverse linguistic backgrounds: Findings from a 5-year
longitudinal study.’ Journal of Educational Psychology 99 (4), 821-834.
8
Lipka, O. & Siegel, L.S. (2007) ‘The development of reading skills in children with
English as a second language.’ Scientific Studies of Reading, 11 (2), 105-131.
Nakamoto, J., Lindsey, K.A. & Manis, F.R. (2007) ‘A longitudinal analysis of
English language learners’ word decoding and reading comprehension.’ Reading
and Writing, 20, 691-719.
Nation, K. (2005) ‘Children’s reading comprehension difficulties.’ In M.J. Snowling
& C. Hulme (eds.) The Science of Reading: A Handbook, Oxford, Blackwell
Publishing, 248-265.
Nation, K. & Snowling, M.J. (2004) ‘Beyond phonological skills: broader language
skills contribute to the development of reading.’ Journal of Research in Reading, 27
(4), 342-356.
Penno, J.F., Wilkinson, I.A.G. & Moore, D. (2002) ‘Vocabulary acquisition from
teacher explanation and repeated listening to stories: Do they overcome the Matthew
effect?’ Journal of Educational Psychology, 94 (1), 23-33.
Proctor, P.C, August, D., Carlo, M. & Snow, C. (2005) ‘Native Spanish-speaking
children reading in English: Toward a model of comprehension.’ Journal of
Educational Psychology, 97 (2), 246-256.
Senechal, M., Ouellette, G. & Rodney, D. (2006) ‘The misunderstood giant: On the
predictive role of early vocabulary to future reading.’ in D.K. Dickinson & S.B.
Neuman (eds.) Handbook of Early Literacy Research: Volume 2, New York, The
Guilford Press, 173-182.
Senechal, M (2006) ‘Testing the Home Literacy Model: Parent involvement in
kindergarten is differentially related to Grade 4 reading comprehension, fluency,
spelling and reading for pleasure’, Scientific Studies of Reading, 10 (1), 59-87.
9