ELL Case Study: Interviewing the Cooperating Classroom Teacher

I interviewed a second grade general education teacher at an elementary school in Jericho School District. 

• Please describe your ELL teaching experience.

In my twelve years of teaching, I’ve taught fourth grade for nine years and now I’m in my third year as a second grade teacher.  In most of my classes, I’ve had at least one ELL student.  In almost all cases, these students and their families emigrated from Asia where students are introduced to some form of English reading, writing and verbal communication.  With a familiarity with the English language, most students were able to transition nicely over time.  The basics are hardest to learn for any learner so the bigger challenges with my ELL students were to get them to grade appropriate skill levels.  I concentrated on their reading skills first before moving on written work.  Increased verbal interaction seemed to come naturally as these students gained confidence in reading and writing.  Small group work was a huge help as students helped each other and I can monitor progress.

• What is your perception on ELLs in terms of their learning motivation and performance

(especially in reading and writing)? What learning difficulties do ELLs usually encounter

in schools? What is the role of family and community in helping ELLs’ learning?

I can answer this through my previous experiences. For the most part, my former ELL students were very motivated to learn the language to fit in socially with their classmates who were more proficient with the English language.  I found that progress in reading and writing were excellent once they started with intervention but the level of progress slowed to a steadier pace as the demands became harder.  Their verbal skills lagged from lack of confidence and also as they learn cultural differences in this country to speak more freely.  That adjustment frequently holds them back from demonstrating what they have learned.  I find that many families are making the same adjustments so it’s probably the biggest challenge to becoming proficient and confident.  I’ve seen my ELL students do well with close relationships with siblings who are learning at the same time. Having that support really helps a lot.

• In your opinion, how do classroom teachers resolve ELLs’ learning difficulties? What

strategies do you adopt? Are they effective or not?  How do you make sure that

your teaching is culturally responsive? How do you go about reaching out to the family

and the community?

In my experience, small groups of mixed abilities work really well with ELL students.  I had started with small groups of students with similar ability and found their progress to be steady but felt more could be done.  At times, I felt the ELL students in the group were unintentionally picking up on bad habits in such groups. I then mixed the small groups and they worked really well especially for ELL students who got the benefit of learning from more proficient students.  In turn, my higher achieving students really enjoyed sharing their knowledge. These mixed ability groups got everyone engaged.

For ELL students, frequent assessment is important to measure their progress which can be remarkable given their relative lack of experience.  By demonstrating their new abilities, ELL students gain confidence to move on to learn more difficult concepts.  Also, frequent assessments identify where a student is off track in a timely manner.  I found this was common when a story contained unfamiliar settings, figurative language or cultural-specific context. By assessing comprehension frequently, I was able to clarify misunderstandings before the students go totally off track with their reading.

The school district has grown rapidly in diversity in the 13 years I’ve taught here.  I have personally learned many new cultural aspects each school year from my students.  I take great interest in other cultures and by letting all my students know that, I feel I create an open environment where students feel comfortable sharing their own cultures.  We purposefully uncover each of our cultural differences throughout the school year and use that information to guide some of my instruction so that it is culturally responsive.  We bring in the experiences of students’ families often during our writing workshops especially during certain holidays like Chinese New Year and winter holidays.  I think some of my students’ best experiences in the school year are learning from each other.

• If you have an ELL in your class whose culture you are not familiar with at all, how do

you go about teaching the child?,

Several times, I’ve had students from cultures that I was unfamiliar with.  I seek the advice from colleagues first before researching on my own. In all cases, my professional network helped me better understand the cultural differences and how best to approach instruction.  I’ve learned that different cultures require different instructional approaches.  Common to all approaches are individual and small group work and frequent assessment.

Week 12, Assignment 2: Using Technology to Support Literacy Instruction (Prezi)

Using Technology to Support Literacy Instruction
http://prezi.com/ldjltszhnhqf/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy&rc=ex0share

Week 12, Assignment 1: Lesson Plan, Technology Integration

Your name:  Henry Chiu        

Grade Level: 4

Title of the lesson:  Exploring Ways to Publish Science Research

Length of the lesson: One 40 minute period

Central focus and central technology of the lesson The central focus of this lesson will to introduce Google Docs as an effective collaborating tool for students to work on their small group projects with the goal of publishing their science research on the development of tadpoles.

Knowledge and skills of students to inform teaching (prior knowledge/prerequisite skills and personal/cultural/community assets) Through prior instruction and practice, students will have proficient skills in writing informative texts to examine a topic and convey ideas and information clearly and with descriptive details and clear event sequences.  Students will also have practiced conducting scientific research through observation to build knowledge of a specific topic.  Students will have observed and taken notes of the classroom’s developing tadpoles prior to this lesson.

Common Core State Standards/Content Standards CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.4.6 With some guidance and support from adults, use technology, including the Internet, to produce and publish writing as well as to interact and collaborate with others; demonstrate sufficient command of keyboarding skills to type a minimum of one page in a single sitting.

Support literacy (traditional literacy, domain specific literacy, or new literacy) development through language (academic language) Students will describe their scientific research with descriptive details of their observations in a logical sequence.  They will create a shared Google document that will describe their project, analyze the physical changes of the tadpoles, provide evidence, make scientific inquiry and generate predictions.

Learning objectives The objective of this lesson is to introduce the use of Google Docs as a collaborating tool to capture the observations of students in written form.

Formal and informal assessment (including type[s] of assessment and what is being assessed) The teacher will work with students individually who have challenges using Google Docs before pairing up more technologically proficient students to assist fellow classmates.  In this introductory lesson, students will be assessed on their understanding of the benefits of a collaboration tool and their ability to utilize Google Docs to begin capturing their written work.

Instructional procedure: ·         The teacher will lead a class discussion to review their recent observations of the developing tadpoles. ·         The teacher will utilize the classroom SMART Board to demonstrate Google Docs using previously-prepared files that show collaboration. ·         The teacher will explain and demonstrate the key functions of Google Docs on the SMART Board. ·         The teacher will task the students with collaborating in their previously-established small groups to capture their observations, scientific inquiry and evidence. ·         In their small groups, students will begin their collaboration using Google Docs while the teacher will provide assistance as needed. ·         After twenty minutes, the teacher will regroup the students for a class discussion on their experiences and challenges using Google Docs.

Instructional resources and materials used to engage students in learning. Classroom SMART Board plus one classroom computer for each group of 3 or 4 students.

Reflection This lesson supported the objective of introducing a collaboration tool like Google Docs so students can capture their written work, analysis, details, and evidence.  This was meant to start the students on a multi-week project that will result in final small group projects that will be presented to the class.  With minimal instruction provided by the teacher, students will engage in constructivist learning to form their understanding and develop practical knowledge of Google Docs.

Week 10, Assignment 4: Lesson Plan on Author's Purpose

Candidate’s Name:  Henry Chiu

Grade Level: 5

Title of the lesson: Finding the Author’s Purpose

Length of the lesson: One, 40 minute class period

Central focus of the lesson (The central focus should align with the CCSS/content standards and support students to develop an essential literacy strategy and requisite skills for comprehending or composing texts in meaningful contexts) The central focus of this fifth grade lesson is write informative/explanatory texts to examine a topic and convey ideas and information clearly.  Also, this lesson will draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research.  These objectives align with CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.5.2 and CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.5.9.

Knowledge of students to inform teaching (prior knowledge/prerequisite skills and personal/cultural/community assets) Knowledge of previous classroom Text Talk Time discussion about the shared text and comprehending the author’s viewpoint including a definition of viewpoint. Understanding of literacy skills to quote accurately and draw inferences from a text. Ability to read and comprehend informational texts, including history/social studies, in the grades 4-5 text complexity band independently and proficiently.

Common Core State Standards (List the number and text of the standard. If only a portion of a standard is being addressed, then only list the relevant part[s].) Common Core Learning Standards for ELA and Literacy) CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.5.2.B Develop the topic with facts, definitions, concrete details, quotations, or other information and examples related to the topic. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.5.9 Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.5.9.B Apply grade 5 Reading standards to informational texts (e.g., "Explain how an author uses reasons and evidence to support particular points in a text, identifying which reasons and evidence support which point[s]"").

Support literacy development through language (academic language) Write about a complex text Determine main idea of the text Support a topic with concrete details and information Draw evidence to support thinking and reflection about a text Quote accurately from the text

Learning objectives Students will develop writing skills to convey the author’s viewpoint of an expository text passage and support with evidence from the text to support their thinking.

Formal and informal assessment The accuracy, completeness and overall quality of the written responses of students will be used as the formal assessment of this lesson.  Additionally, the quality of responses if the small group discussion will add to the assessment of ELL students.

Instructional procedure: Instructional strategies and learning tasks (including what you and the students will be doing) that support diverse student needs. 1. Teacher will review previous class discussion that defined “viewpoint” as an opinion or position and “author’s viewpoint” as how the author feels about a topic. 2. Through teacher-led class discussion, students will deepen their understanding with examples of their own viewpoints on relevant topics and/or author’s viewpoints of familiar texts. 3.  Teacher will provide instructions on completing the class assignment.  Teacher will distribute assignment that tasks students with writing responses that demonstrate their comprehension of the shared expository reading passage on Lewis and Clark. 4. Teacher will gather the ELL students to a large table with their assignment sheets and a pencil. 5. While the other students work independently, teacher will lead a small group discussion to reinforce understanding of author’s viewpoint and how to determine that from the text along with supporting evidence.  The small group will discuss ideas before collaborating with the teacher to write the first sentence to state the author’s viewpoint.  The teacher will provide support to these students as they attempt to complete the assignment independently. 6. When the students have been given ample time to complete the assignment, papers will be collected for review and grading.  Teacher will then lead a class discussion where students will share their answers to written prompts like “The author thinks exploring is _________” to demonstrate comprehension and “On page _____ it says _____” to demonstrate citing evidence from the text.   Accommodations: Instructions and assignment questions will be presented verbally and visually.  ELL students will be provided additional supports by the teacher through small group discussion.

Instructional resources and materials used to engage students in learning. Copies of expository text on Lewis and Clark for each student

Reflection This lesson provided whole class instruction that followed a previous discussion that defined key terms that will be expanded upon through students’ writing. Differentiated instruction for ELL students is provided through small group discussion and scaffolded assistance to complete the written assignment.  Engaging students in discussion prior to the writing exercise will help them form their ideas. This approach provides an effective learning environment that allows all students to demonstrate their proficiency in writing skills.

Week 9, Assignment 3: Comparing QRI-5 and DIBELS

QRI-5 and DIBELS are two popular assessment tools used to measure literacy skills of students.  While their goals may be aligned to allow educators to assess skills that are important for reading proficiency, there are differences that allow these tools to serve multiple purposes.

QRi-5, Qualitative Reading Inventory, is an individualized, informal reading assessment that teachers can use to determine students' reading abilities and instructional needs in grades P through 12.  This comprehensive, non-standardized instrument is useful to determine each student’s reading level, word identification skills, comprehension skills, strengths and developmental opportunities.  Results will also aid teachers in matching appropriately-leveled materials for each student. 

In one-on-one conferences, students will read narrative and expository passages starting at two levels below their current grade.  Teachers use graded word lists to assess each student’s oral reading, silent reading, or listening comprehension. Additionally, teachers can assess comprehension through inquiry with implicit and explicit questions, retelling, look-backs and think-alouds.

DIBELS, Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills, is a series of research-based, criterion-referenced assessments to measure literacy skills and fluency of students from kindergarten to sixth grade.  DIBELS provides indicators on five specific aspects of literacy: phonemic awareness, alphabetic principle, accuracy and fluency with connected text, reading comprehension, and vocabulary.

These brief, one-minute assessments are performed with individual students in a one-to-one setting and administered by a trained assessor using standardized, grade-specific passages.  Through early and regular use of DIBELS, educators can get data to monitor the early reading skills of their students and identify those who are at-risk for reading difficulties in future grades. This information can also guide instruction and determine intervention for students.

Comparison

The two assessment tools share several similarities beyond measuring skills important for literacy. Both are brief, can be used for students in kindergarten through grade six, and are administered in one-to-one settings with prepared materials.  Either one can be used to measure fluency and comprehension.  However, there are some key differences.  QRI-5 assessments can be used for grades P through twelve and focus more on decoding, comprehension, and background knowledge.  Students are not timed in their reading as assessors use miscue analysis, implicit and explicit questions, and progressively harder narrative and expository text passages to determine their appropriate reading levels.  Unique benefits of DIBELS are the finer level of detail that educators can gain from assessments.  Teachers can hone in on specific skills like letter recognition and blending sounds that early readers may need additional instruction.  While critics of DIBELS question the use of nonsense words and a short time limit, the assessment scores are research-based and serve as predictors of future reading success.

Complementary Use in the Classroom

Teachers in kindergarten through grade six should consider utilizing both QRI-5 and DIBELS to assess their students’ skills to plan instruction and provide intervention.  With their differences, the two can complement each other to give a more comprehensive picture of their students’ developmental needs.  For example, teachers can administer the QRI-5 at the start of the school year to determine reading levels and assign students to appropriate reading groups.  This assessment can be repeated a few more times throughout the school year to measure progress and make adjustments.  The teacher can also administer DIBELS at the start of the school year to measure each student’s skills on phonological awareness and alphabetic principles and plan instruction to target deficiencies and boost their proficiency in those specific areas.  A focus on these early skills is critical to build fluency.  Both sets of assessments can be used to determine intervention needs, evaluate reading comprehension and guide the scaffolding of lessons to provide the optimal level of instruction to support each student’s learning.

Week 6: Instructional Intervention for Mary

Based on Mary’s QRI-5 assessments, the instructional focus for the remainder of her third grade school year should build upon her strength in word identification to improve reading comprehension and recall.  While she demonstrated proficiency in reading accuracy at the second grade level, Mary was unable to achieve nearly the same levels in recall of supporting details of the expository passage titled “Whales and Fish”.  The resulting “frustration level” assessment score of her recall and comprehension abilities indicates a strong need for intervention.

The constraints of time of this last quarter of the school year will be a large determining factor in the intervention provided to Mary.  Without the benefit of several months to administer intervention, assess the student’s progress and adjust the instruction, the intervention will be structured daily for four weeks.  We will use a team approach to provide varied instructional technique while adhering to a common objective of helping Mary achieve proficiency in recall and comprehension at the second grade level.  The classroom teacher or a reading resource specialist will work with the student individually for twenty minutes each day.  

These sessions can be scheduled in the student’s school day and/or before the school day starts.  Her parents should be informed of the assessment results and the desired objective.  With their support, the intense, short term intervention for the remainder of the school year can be accomplished.

The structure of the intervention will focus on short, second grade level narrative and expository passages of starting with familiar subjects before advancing to unfamiliar topics.  This strategy of using passages of familiar subjects will help Mary practice activating her prior knowledge to comprehend her reading.  By utilizing narrative and expository passages, Mary will have opportunities to develop skills in story structure, main idea, retell and recall from different forms of text.

At each twenty minute session, the teacher will ask Mary read a selected passage aloud to monitor her reading accuracy and frustration level.  This read-aloud will also allow the teacher to pause for instruction and emphasis to aid comprehension. After completing the passage, the student will be prompted to verbally recall the main idea and as many supporting details as she can remember utilizing a graphic organizer as a guideline to the discussion.  The teacher will ask additional questions to assess the student’s understanding of the passage.  After this unaided activity, the teacher will instruct Mary to apply the “look back” strategy to verbally share additional details from the passage.  To end each session, the teacher will repeat the main idea and supporting facts that Mary recalled about the passage to demonstrate her comprehension and recall skills and to reinforce her abilities to build confidence.

As the student makes adequate progress in comprehension and recall as determined through close monitoring by the team, Mary will be tasked with independently completing graphic organizers with and without using “look back” on paper.  Her written work will be then reviewed verbally by the teacher to ensure Mary was able to express her thoughts clearly to demonstrate understanding.  By scaffolding the task, the teacher can provide early support through verbal interaction and prompts before gradually reducing such supports as the student works more independently.  By keeping records of Mary’s recall and comprehension from each session, the team will be able to assess her daily results and chart her progress through the four week invention.

Week 5: Administering QRI-5

In the Assignment 1 video clip, the third grade student, Mary, read twenty words from the Level 2 Word List. She read confidently and independently through the majority of the words.  I scored her reading 16 words correctly for an 80% score for word identification which places her on the Instructional level.  Of these 16 words, I noted 14 were identified automatically and two were identified.  Mary did not correctly identify four words (though, begins, breathe and noticed).

In the Assignment 2 video clip, Mary had considerably more difficulty identifying words in the Level 3 Word List.  I scored her reading 4 of the 20 words correctly for a 20% score for word identification. This clearly places her at the Frustration level for this Word List and supports the decision that Level 2 is the appropriate reading level for Mary.

In the video clips for Assignment 3, Mary indicates some prior knowledge about the topic of whales and fish.  In her reading of the 197 word expository passage, I recorded 10 errors and 5 self-corrections.  Mary's error rate was 1:20, her accuracy rate was 95% and her self-correction rate was 1:3.  This assessment indicates the reading passage was easy enough for Mary to read independently and that she is self-monitoring her reading.  In the Assessment of Comprehension, Mary was able to summarize the passage and recall several facts accurately.  She recalled differences (method of birth, size and how babies get food) and similarities (presence and location of fins and flippers).  Mary demonstrated good comprehension of the expository passage.

Using the examiner's scoring sheets in Assignment 4, Mary's accuracy rate of ten miscues for this reading passage places her on the Instructional level.  Her Words Per Minute (WPM) was 46 and her Correct Words Per Minute (CWPM) was 44. Of the 49 ideas listed in the Retelling Scoring Sheet, I noted that Mary recalled 22 ideas.  Combining all the measures, Mary appears to be at Level Two reading level with strengths in word identification, self-correction, comprehension and recall.  During her reading, she had a few instances of omission and insertion but most of the errors came from mispronouncing "live" and "must" which may be corrected through repetitive use of word pairs.