Skip to main content

Use of Evidence-Based, Small-Group Reading Instruction for English Language Learners in Elementary Grades

A study on the impact of evidence-based, small-group reading instruction for first- and second-grade English Language Learners in a three-tier intervention model.

  • PreK-12
  • Education Research
  • 1st Grade
  • 2nd Grade
  • Elementary School
  • Kansas
  • Missouri
  • Literacy
  • Early Interventions in Reading
  • Intervenciones tempranas de la lectura
  • ESSA Tier I (Strong)

Description

Article Abstract:

This experimental/comparison study of secondary-level, small-group instruction included 318 first- and second-grade students (170 ELL and 148 English-only) from six elementary schools. All schools served high numbers of ELL students with varying school SES in urban and suburban communities. Experimental schools implemented a three-tier model of intervention. In addition to primary-tier reading instruction, the second-tier, small-group experimental interventions included use of (a) evidence-based direct instruction reading curricula that explicitly targeted skills such as phonological/phonemic awareness, letter-sound recognition, alphabetic decoding, fluency building and comprehension skills; and (b) small groups of 3 to 6 students. Students at comparison schools were not exposed to a three-tier reading program but received (a) an ESL intervention using balanced literacy instruction with a focus on word study, group and individual story reading, and writing activities; and (b) small groups of 6 to 15 students. The ESL/balanced literacy intervention was generally in addition to primary reading instruction. Results indicated generally higher gains for ELL students enrolled in direct instruction interventions.

 

Research Citation:

Kamps, D., Abbott, M., Greenwood, C., Arreaga-Mayer, C., Wills, H., Longstaff, J., Culpepper, M., & Walton, C. (2007). Use of evidence-based, small-group reading instruction for English language learners in elementary grades: Secondary-tier intervention. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30(3), 153–168.

Visit Article Page