Language Assessment Theories, Diagnostic, And Learning

The benefits English language learners (ELLs) receive from Guided Reading are the same as all other students. However, when a modified approach is used ELLs benefit the most. Language learning opportunities gained by ELLs are those that native speakers acquire implicitly. Language and literacy learning opportunities including detailed vocabulary instruction, variables concerning second language (L2) text structure, such as semantics, syntax, and morphology are enhanced and enriched by modification. Some researchers have determined that ELLs are not generally ready for English reading instruction until they are intermediate stage of English language acquisition, while others advocate that reading and a second language are best acquired simultaneously (Avalos, Plasencia, Chavez, & Rascon, 2007, 319). In working with ELLs at

Harris and Jerome A. Niles (1982), the Informal Reading Inventory’s stated purpose is to determine the reading level of a child by identifying their reading comprehension strengths and weaknesses (Harris & Niles, 1982). This test was developed to measure the reading level of a child, and for some students, it may identify their levels of reading comprehension. It is difficult to determine the reliability and validity of this assessment, not knowing the specifics of the original tested population, the size of the tested group, the sex, or the location of where they were assessed. Due to the lack of developmental data, the overall assessment results from school to school can give inconsistent

Presently there is a rising number of English Language Learners (ELLs) entering into classrooms all over the country. According to the three research studies that I utilized, there are several varied assessment approaches for teaching ELLs in reading (Davis-Lenski, Ehlers-Zavala, Daniel, & Sun-Irminger, 2006; Dreher, & Letcher-Gray, 2009; Ebe, 2010). English Language Learners (ELLs) consistently struggle with some aspects of reading because, they lack background knowledge in terms of the generalized text selections, which they are often given (Davis-Lenski, Ehlers-Zavala, Daniel, & Sun-Irminger, 2006; Dreher, & Letcher-Gray, 2009; Ebe, 2010). The data across all three journal documents agrees that there is an achievement gap where ELLs

Assessing dyslexia can be difficult because dyslexia is a matter of degree and has similar characteristics to different syndromes. Teachers or often the first to notice signs of dyslexia in a child. When teachers notice abnormal literacy difficulties they can use an initial screening device like a checklist to look further into the possibility of this child having dyslexia. These screening devices are informal, but have shown to be useful in the preliminary stage. A professional trained in the assessment of dyslexia is required for a formal assessment and diagnosis.

Several studies have been conducted on reading disabilities, looking at the possible causes and treatments of this neurological difference. McArthur, Ellis, Atkinson, and Colheart (2008) employed the use of the computer program Fast ForWord Language ® to train and develop the children’s skills needed for reading. Register, Darrow, Swedberg, and Standley (2007) utilized the general music classroom. Register et al. developed a specialized curriculum that targeted

Shaywitz, S. & Shaywitz, B. (2005). Dyslexia (Specific Reading Disability). Biological Psychiatry, 57(11), 1301-1309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.01.043

Lee & Schaller’s (1997) quantitative study examined the relationships between ELL students who demonstrated a level of proficiency compared to ELL students’ basic reading skills. The study (1997) tested two hypotheses to check reliability and validity; the hypotheses were examined from the following: (1) a foundation of language proficiency showed learners with below average levels in L2 proficiency showed little relationship between their L1 and L2 reading ability whereas learners with above average in L2 proficiency demonstrated a positive relationship between their L1 and L2 reading abilities.(b) The benefit of L2 proficiency was higher than the benefit of L1 reading ability in predicting L2 reading ability. In addition, Schaller & Lee’s (1997) study showed a correlation between the two hypotheses. For example, when L2 learners obtain previous knowledge from L1 experiences, their reading skills can potentially improve as information is

To determine Bailey’s reading level, she was given reading assessments including the Bursuck & Damer Advanced Phonics Diagnostic assessment and a Qualitative Reading Inventory (QRI-6) which includes a word identification list. The phonics assessment was given to help analyze her phonic awareness and phonics skills to determine if she had an understanding of letter/sound correlation which will affect decoding ability. The evaluation tested numerous phonics aspects including several vowel combinations, consonant diagraphs and blends, other letter combinations, contractions, inflectional endings, hard and soft ‘C’/’G’, prefixes, and suffixes. These skills help to read words that are not recognized by sight. Word identification list can also help determine the passage level to begin with. The QRI-6 analyzed other components of reading including fluency, background knowledge, skill use, and

This article described reading difficulties aligned to the Simple View of Reading (as cited in Gough & Tunmer, 1986). They went into depth about three types of poor readers: (a) dyslexia- those with poor decoding, (b) language comprehension- poor reading comprehension, and (c) listening comprehension- impairments in both decoding and language comprehension. Further, they broke down how each reading difficulty is believed to manifest, is measured, and what it specifically affects.

The authors of the journal article, A Diagnostic Teaching Intervention for Classroom Teachers: Helping Struggling Readers in Early Elementary, organized a study that focused on the development of a reading program that would help struggling readers. Three key points that the authors incorporated into the study were the elements of the intensive instruction in reading, the importance of a code based learning environment, and the TRI system. All of these elements were geared toward testing the students on their fluency, phonological,

Our bilingual students and teachers are facing the same and more complication than a regular classroom. “English language learners, like all the students throughout the United States, are expected to excel on a single-measure high-stakes test” (D. Palmer, A.W. Lynch, June 2008). Not all the students master or gain their second language as the same way like everyone else, some student show difficulties in different areas but the most common one is the writing and reading because they have language gaps that they will being filling over time. “English Language Learners face a particular challenge: to perform in a language that they by definition do not master. Students who are limited in English are unlikely to be able to demonstrate their content knowledge on a test written in English” (Abedi 2004). I am a ELL student, when I was in 11th grade I felt the same pressure that most of the student felt to pass the TASK test to be available to continue with my education and graduated. It was difficult for me to pass the test because the gaps of the language and the vocabulary, I remember seen words that I didn’t recognize. When I took test, I did know that there where accommodation that could be set up for me because I was ELL student, instead I took the test without any accommodations. During that time, I had a lot of pressure from my teachers to

DJ’s independent level for oral reading was estimated to be below pre-primer, his instructional level was grade 2 and his frustration level was at the third grade level. Compared to DJ’s independent reading on the GWL at grade two, DJ’s independent reading level on oral passages was more than two levels lower being estimated at below pre-primer. DJ’s instructional reading on the GWL was at third grade, whereas his instructional level for oral reading fell in the second grade level. This difference suggests that DJ can read words in isolation easier than reading words in context.

Child reading ability at age five was operationalised through the combined scores of three readings tasks: non-sense word reading task, spelling task and a reading task. Academic ability at age seven was operationalised through the implementation of a national test. The test

Kurtis’ overall achievement in reading and written expression fell within the average range with slightly low average scores in reading fluency and oral reading when compared to his same aged peers. Kurtis struggled with word attack skills and had difficulty with sounding out of words. Kurtis could identify beginning sounds, but when he was asked to read nonsense words he struggled with short vowel sounds and correct pronunciation. However, Kurtis’ Letter-Word Identification and Passage Comprehension were within the average range. When he read sentences orally he mispronounced words, and did not slow down to correct his errors even when they did not make sense. On the reading fluency subtest, he was required to read a short sentence and

Many students around the United States have reading difficulties, which can be due to a variety of reason such as: low socioeconomic status, family history of learning disabilities, a neurological disorder, limited exposure, etc. Reading difficulties can lead to further problems with education and learning, therefore the struggles should be addressed and intervention techniques should be implemented promptly. The interventions need to be individualized for the student based on their needs in order to improve the student’s reading to the best of their abilities.