Intensive Instruction and Interventions for Academics: Next Steps in Providing a Continuum of Supports for English Language Learners

1

• Intensive Instruction and Interventions for
  Academics Next Steps in Providing a Continuum of
  Supports for English Language Learners
• Alba A. Ortiz
• alba.ortiz_at_mail.utexas.edu
• The University of Texas at Austin
• 2008 OSEP Project Directors Conference

2
Features of RTI

• High quality classroom instruction
• Research-based instruction
• Universal screening all students
• Continuous progress monitoring
• Research-based interventions
• Progress monitoring during interventions
• Fidelity measures

3
Disproportionate Representation of English
Language Learners in Special Education

• Field Initiated Study Field-initiated Study,
  Bilingual Exceptional Students Effective
  Practices for Oral Language and Reading
  Instruction (BESt Practices Project), Department
  of Education, OSEP, 1999-2003)
• Model Demonstration Project Determining Special
  Education Eligibility for the Bilingual
  Exceptional Student Early Intervention, Referral
  and Assessment, U. S. Department of
  Education,OSEP, and the Texas Education Agency,
  2004-2007

4
RTI and ELLs

• Teachers do not know how to document and/or use
  data for progress monitoring and/or to
  substantiate their concern that the student has a
  disability.
• Despite frequent testing and benchmarking,,
  teachers bring little data to problem-solving
  meetings.
• Teachers do not understand the meaning of
  "interventions". Typical interventions include
• Simplified the assignment
• Provided small group instruction
• Assigned a buddy
• (Robertson, Wilkinson, Ortiz, 2008)

5
RTI and ELLs

• Bilingual education teachers report that the
  Problem-solving Team (PST) process does not work
  well for ELLs.
• Teams
• do not adequately address issues of linguistic
  and cultural diversity
• Do not design or monitor interventions prior to
  special education referral
• As a result, teachers do not routinely request
  assistance from PSTs
• (Robertson, Wilkinson, Ortiz, 2007)

6
RTI and ELLs

• Referrals to PSTs are sometimes correlated with
  accountability assessments
• the way the reality is here and the fear about
  the state achievement testIts an end run
  around the test when they know that this kid is
  not going to be able to pass, and so instead of
  that kid being a blemish, you know, a hash mark
  in the negative column. . . I was ordered to
  refer three kids to the Intervention
  Assistance Team. Teacher
• Support services are not routinely available for
  ELLs
• We under test (for alternative programs or
  services). There is no help for bilinguals, so
  why help them. ELLs have usually been
  under-identified. Administrator
• (Robertson, Wilkinson, Ortiz, 2008)

7
Issues with Typical RTI Models

• RTI models tend to focus on prevention and early
  intervention at the level of the classroom. They
  do not adequately address prevention at the
  school level and/or the contribution of school
  climate to the success of ELLs.
• Though not intended, their focus on concepts like
  universal screenings and standard protocols are
  too often interpreted as endorsing one size fits
  all approaches to resolving student
  difficulties.
• (Garcia Ortiz, in press)

8
RTI and ELLs

• Support services are often inconsistent with the
  students academic program (e.g., specialists
  lack expertise in the education of ELLs programs
  designed to provide increasingly intensive
  interventions are available only in English).
• It is difficult to implement effective tertiary
  interventions as called for in Tier 3, if Tiers 1
  and 2 are not working.

9
School Context Conducive to the Success of ELLs

• A shared knowledge base related to the education
  ELLs
• Linguistic and cultural pluralism
• Well-implemented bilingual education and/or
  English as a Second Language programs
• Ongoing, systematic evaluation of student
  progress in the native language (L1) and/or in
  English as a second language (L2)
• Collaborative school, home, and community
  relationships
• Mechanisms in place for mentoring new faculty
• (Garcia Ortiz, in press Ortiz, 2002 Wilkinson
  Ortiz, 1991)

10
School Context

• Special language program models grounded in sound
  theory and best practices associated with an
  enriched, not remedial, instructional model.
• Programs of instruction that are properly scoped,
  sequenced, and articulated across grade levels
  and aligned with developmentally appropriate
  practices and student language proficiency levels
  in the native language and/or in English.
• Use of instructional strategies known to be
  effective for ELLs
• (Garcia Ortiz, in press Ortiz, 2002 Wilkinson
  Ortiz, 1991 Montecel Cortez, 2002)

11
School Context

• On-going professional development
• Fully credentialed bilingual education and ESL
  teachers are continuously acquiring new knowledge
  regarding best practices in bilingual education
  and ESL.
• General education and special education teachers
  regularly participate in professional development
  focused on meeting the needs of ELLs (e.g.,
  information about bilingual education, ESL
  strategies, and about the cultural and linguistic
  characteristics that serve as assets to the
  academic success of ELLs).
• (Montecel Cortez, 2002 Garcia Ortiz, in
  press)

12
Professional Development Targets

• Philosophy, purpose, and rationale for bilingual
  education and ESL programs
• Fidelity of implementation of program model
• Language acquisition and development
• Assessment of conversational and academic
  language proficiency.
• Other influences on student learning
• Culture (that of students and of educators)
• Socioeconomic status
• (Ortiz, 2002 Garcia Ortiz, in press)

13
A Shared Knowledge Base

• Effective instructional approaches
• Linguistically and culturally responsive
  assessment and progress monitoring (within and
  across grades)
• Partnerships with ELL families and communities
• Recognizing and overcoming deficit perspectives
  toward ELLs and their families
• (Ortiz, 2002 Garcia Ortiz, in press)

14
Consideration in Conducting Screening Assessments

• Assess all students on appropriate measures that
  match the language(s) of instruction
• Examine students scores in relationship to
  established goals and language program
• Use results to inform both whole group and small
  group instruction
• Monitor progress to monitor student learning and
  to evaluate the efficacy of instruction
• (Linan-Thompson Ortiz, 2007)

15
Effective Language and Literacy Instruction

• Provides opportunities for students to develop
  full and productive proficiencies in the native
  language and/or English in listening, speaking,
  reading, and writing, consistent with high
  expectations for all students.
• (Center for Equity Excellence in Education,
  1996 August Hakuta, 1997 Goldenberg, 1998).

16
Language and Literacy Connections

• It is important to think about language
  proficiency as a continua of proficiencies in
  L1 and L2.
• Oral language for social and academic
  interactions
• Narrative skills
• Reading

17
Relationships among Oral Language and Reading

• Students rated as proficient in Spanish on the
  Student Observation or Oral Language (SOLOM)
  measure
• Were more likely to meet reading benchmarks
• Had higher scores on storytelling tasks.
• Students who were not proficient in Spanish
  performed at lower levels in English.
• Oral language proficiency correlated positively
  with reading skills in both L1 and L2.
• (Ortiz, Wilkinson, Robertson, 2007)

18
Instructional Recommendations

• Teachers must recognize the variation in
• oral language and narrative skill development
  among their students and provide instruction
  consistent with student characteristics.
• Focus on communication
• Focus on language development
• Focus on language enrichment

19
Sarita's Spanish Story Level 4 Focus on Language
Enrichment

• Um, había una vez un niño que, un día fue al
  zoológico, al circo. Y fue a ver, a ver los
  payasos y a ver los leones. Entonces cuando
  salió, ya se iba allí, pero de repente un domador
  de león descuidó un poco la jaula del león, y
  entonces el león se va, y la jaula no estaba
  cerrada con candado. entonces el león se salió, y
  atacó al niño, entonces el niño se iba a
  tropezar. El niño se tropezó, y luegó, y como
  había comprado unas palomitas, se le cayeron las
  palomitas. Y llegó un domador de leones y este lo
  metió en la jaula. Y el niño se fue a su casa,
  teniendo miedo de los leones, pero le preguntó a
  su mamá, Mamá vienen aquí los leones? Y su mamá
  le dijo, No, aquí no vienen los leones. Y ya
  el niño se tranquilizó, pero, luego fue a un
  circo, a los pocos días o si, fue a una, cómo se
  llama, un zoológico, y cuando se salió del
  zoológico, los leones se habían escapados y
  andaban por todas las rutas.

20
Sarita's English Story Level 1 Focus on
communication

• And and a boy is um, um, I. What is this? Is um
  is um. Is this boy, is um um, no. Boy uh is

21
Research on ELLs and RTI Interventions

• ESL literacy services are not sufficient for
  struggling learners students need targeted
  reading intervention and ESL intervention
• ELLs benefit from the same early literacy
  interventions found to be successful with
  English-only students
• Students enrolled in small groups using direct
  instruction, or highly structured, curricula
  (e.g., Reading Mastery, Early Interventions in
  Reading, Read Well, Programmed Reading, Open
  Court, Read Naturally) improved in
  secondary-level interventions
• (Kamps et al., 2007 Vaughn, Linan-Thompson,
  Hickman, 2003)

22
Research on ELLs and RTI Interventions

• Secondary level interventions may be needed for
  an extended period of time
• By establishing a priori criteria for success and
  a maximum amount of time for supplemental
  instruction, it is possible to identify a
  distinct cohort of students who require
  substantial support and more intensive and
  explicit instruction These students can be
  considered as requiring special education.
• (Kamps et al., 2007 Vaughn, Linan-Thompson,
  Hickman, 2003)

23
Research on ELLs and RTI Interventions

• Small group interventions of at least 20 weeks
  can allow many students to make substantial gains
  in reading outcomes (Vaughn, Linan-Thompson,
  Hickman, 2003).
• (Vaughn, Linan-Thompson, Hickman, 2003).

24
Effective Literacy Instruction

• Reflects a balanced approach--a focus on both
  skills and meaning
• Incorporates components shown to be determinants
  of literacy achievement for both monolingual
  students and ELLs (i.e., phonemic awareness,
  phonics, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension)
• Incorporates study skills and strategies
• Provides for differentiated instruction based on
  student characteristics (e.g., levels of
  proficiency)
• (Francis, 2005 Snow Burns, 1998 Goldenberg,
  1998)

25
Effective Instructional Strategies

• Incorporate direct instruction and interactive
  approaches
• Emphasize meaningful language use across the
  curriculum
• Use the native language as a bridge to English
  instuction in L1 or L1 support
• Make connections between existing knowledge,
  skills, experiences, and the academic curriculum.
• Emphasizes on vocabulary development
• (Genesee, 2005 Gersten, Baker, Haager, Graves,
  2004 Beck, McKeown, Kucan, 2002 Carlo,
  McLaughlin, Snow, August, 2003 Gersten, Marks,
  Keating, Baker, 1998)

26
What works for ELLs?Potentially Positive
Effects

• What Works Clearninghousehttp//ies.ed.gov/ncee/w
  wc/

27
Reading AND Language Development
28
Language Development
29
Reading
30
Ultimately, educators must determine
What works? For which student(s)? In what
context, and under what conditions?