Toward modeling reading comprehension and reading fluency in English language learners Zohreh Yaghoub Zadeh • Fataneh Farnia • Esther Geva Published online: 21 August 2010 Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010 Abstract This study investigated the adequacy of an expanded simple view of reading (SVR) framework for English language learners (ELLs), using mediation modeling approach. The proposed expanded SVR included reading fluency as an outcome and phonological awareness and naming speed as predictors. To test the fit of the proposed mediation model, longitudinal data from 308 ELLs from different linguistic backgrounds were analyzed using structural equation modeling. We examined the mediating role of Grade 2 word-level reading skills in the association between Grade 1 phonological awareness, naming speed, and listening compre- hension and Grade 3 reading comprehension and reading fluency. The results indicated that word-level reading skills fully mediated the association between phonological awareness, reading comprehension and reading fluency. Word-level reading skills partially mediated the association between naming speed and reading fluency. Listening comprehension contributed directly to reading comprehension and reading fluency. It appears that reading development in ELLs is better under- stood when reading fluency is added to the SVR framework as an outcome and naming speed as a building block of SVR. Theoretical aspects of the mediation model in relation to ELL reading development are also addressed. Z. Yaghoub Zadeh (&) Directions Evidence and Policy Research Group, 1055 Dunsmuir, Suite 1254, Four Bentall Centre, P.O. Box 48448, Vancouver, BC V7X 1A2, Canada e-mail: [email protected]F. Farnia Adolescent Biliteracy Development, Department of Human Development and Applied Psychology, The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Hincks-Dellcrest Centre/Institute, Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, 252 Bloor St, West Toronto, ON M5S 1V6, Canada E. Geva Department of Human Development and Applied Psychology, The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, 252 Bloor St, West Toronto, ON M5S 1V6, Canada 123 Read Writ (2012) 25:163–187 DOI 10.1007/s11145-010-9252-0
25
Embed
Toward modeling reading comprehension and reading fluency ... · between Grade 1 phonological awareness, naming speed, and listening compre-hension and Grade 3 reading comprehension
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Toward modeling reading comprehension and readingfluency in English language learners
Zohreh Yaghoub Zadeh • Fataneh Farnia •
Esther Geva
Published online: 21 August 2010
� Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010
Abstract This study investigated the adequacy of an expanded simple view of
reading (SVR) framework for English language learners (ELLs), using mediation
modeling approach. The proposed expanded SVR included reading fluency as an
outcome and phonological awareness and naming speed as predictors. To test the fit
of the proposed mediation model, longitudinal data from 308 ELLs from different
linguistic backgrounds were analyzed using structural equation modeling. We
examined the mediating role of Grade 2 word-level reading skills in the association
between Grade 1 phonological awareness, naming speed, and listening compre-
hension and Grade 3 reading comprehension and reading fluency. The results
indicated that word-level reading skills fully mediated the association between
phonological awareness, reading comprehension and reading fluency. Word-level
reading skills partially mediated the association between naming speed and reading
fluency. Listening comprehension contributed directly to reading comprehension
and reading fluency. It appears that reading development in ELLs is better under-
stood when reading fluency is added to the SVR framework as an outcome and
naming speed as a building block of SVR. Theoretical aspects of the mediation
model in relation to ELL reading development are also addressed.
Z. Yaghoub Zadeh (&)
Directions Evidence and Policy Research Group, 1055 Dunsmuir, Suite 1254,
Four Bentall Centre, P.O. Box 48448, Vancouver, BC V7X 1A2, Canada
2009), orthographic representation (Berninger et al., 2010), and orthographic pattern
recognition (Katzir et al., 2006) may explain additional variance in reading fluency
and contribute further to this model. The results pertaining to reading fluency in
ELLs are in line with L1-based research pointing to a ‘‘complex view of reading
fluency’’ (Katzir et al., 2006, p. 77). Clearly, more research is needed to understand
what cognitive processes contribute to the reading comprehension and reading
fluency of ELLs, in addition to those associated with language comprehension and
word-level reading skills (Cain et al., 2004; Kirby and Savage, 2008; van Gelderen
et al., 2007).
This study expands the SVR framework for young ELLs coming from different
language backgrounds. However, because the sample size for students from
different language backgrounds was not large enough, it was not possible to
examine the mediation model for different language groups in this study. The extent
to which the predictability of this expanded mediation model might be upheld,
regardless of typological language differences and across different ages, is open for
further investigation.
These findings have practical implications for assessment of at-risk ELLs. Our
findings suggest that phonological awareness, naming speed, and oral language
measured in Grade 1 ELLs have predictive power for how well their reading
comprehension and reading fluency will develop subsequently. While mindful of
their ELL status, poor performance of young ELLs on phonological awareness,
naming speed and oral language can be a warning sign of potential difficulties in
their subsequent word reading, reading fluency, and reading comprehension. The
model suggests that early identification can take place even before ELLs
demonstrate reading problems. When failing to complete preliteracy tasks, such
as phonological awareness and speed of processing, ELLs should be supported to
develop these skills to avoid word reading problems. If this support is accompanied
Mediation model of ELL reading 183
123
with activities to enhance their linguistic comprehension, ELLs may be less likely to
develop difficulties in reading comprehension and reading fluency. By Grade 2,
additional information about risk status can be determined if students have
difficulties with word-level reading skills. These findings could be used as a starting
point for identification and validation of screening tools for ELLs with reading
difficulties.
Appendix
See Table 2.
References
Adlof, S. M., Catts, H. W., & Little, T. D. (2006). Should the simple view of reading include a fluency
component? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 19, 933–958.
Allison, P. D. (2003). Missing data techniques for structural equation modeling. Journal of AbnormalPsychology, 112, 545–557.
August, D., & Shanahan, T. (2006). Introduction and methodology. In D. August & T. Shanahan (Eds.),
Developing literacy in second language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel onLanguage-Minority Children and Youth (pp. 1–42). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
Bashir, A. S., & Hook, P. E. (2009). Fluency: A key link between word identification and comprehension.
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40, 196–200.
Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Trivedi, P., Olson, E., Gould, L., Hiramatsu, S., et al. (2010). Applying
the multiple dimensions of reading fluency to assessment and instruction. Journal of Psychoed-ucational Assessment, 28, 3–18.
Table 2 Means, standard deviations, F-value, and p-value for missing group and the group with com-
task, Oddity pseudoword first phoneme identification, WID word identification, MAT (ss) standardized
non-verbal IQ. The sample size for missing group was 83 for the Grade 1 measures and 129 for the Grade
2 measures. For complete group, the sample size was 225 for Grade 1 measures and 179 for Grade 2
measures
184 Z. Yaghoub Zadeh et al.
123
Biemiller, A. J. (1981). Biemiller test of reading processes. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto
Press.
Biemiller, A. (1999). Language and reading success. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.
Bowers, P. G. (1995). Tracing symbol naming speed’s unique contribution to reading disability over time.
Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 7, 189–216.
Bowers, P. G., Golden, J., Kennedy, A., & Young, A. (1994). Limits upon orthographic knowledge due to
processes index by naming speed. In V. W. Berninger (Ed.), The varieties of orthographicknowledge: Vol. 1. Theoretical and developmental issues (pp. 173–218). Dordrecht, The
Netherlands: Kluwer.
Buly, M. R., & Valencia, S. W. (2002). Below the bar: Profiles of students who fail state reading
assessments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 219–239.
Cain, K., Oakhill, J. V., & Bryant, P. (2000). Phonological skills and comprehension failure: A test of the
phonological processing deficit hypothesis. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 13,
31–56.
Cain, K., Oakhill, J. V., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: Concurrent
prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 96, 31–42.
Carlisle, J. F., Beeman, M., Davis, H. L., & Spharim, G. (1999). Relationship of metalinguistic
capabilities and reading achievement for children who are becoming bilingual. Applied Psycho-linguistics, 20, 459–478.
Carver, R. P., & David, A. H. (2001). Investigating reading achievement using a causal model. ScientificStudies of Reading, 5, 107–140.
Catts, H. W., Fey, M. E., Zhang, X., & Tomblin, B. (1999). Language basis of reading and reading
disabilities: Evidence from a longitudinal investigation. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 331–361.
Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Chiappe, P., Siegel, L. S., & Wade-Woolley, L. (2002). Linguistic diversity and the development of
reading skills: A longitudinal study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6, 369–400.
Cohen-Mimran, R. (2009). The contribution of language skills to reading fluency: A comparison of two
orthographies for Hebrew. Journal of Child Language, 36, 657–672.
Cole, D. A. (1987). Utility of confirmatory factor analysis in test validation research. Journal ofConsulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 584–594.
Collins, W. M., & Levy, B. A. (2008). Developing fluent text procession with practice: Memorial
influences on fluency and comprehension. Canadian Psychology, 49, 133–139.
Collins, L. M., Schafer, J. L., & Kam, C. M. (2001). A comparison of inclusive and restrictive strategies
in modern missing data procedures. Psychological Methods, 6, 330–351.
Colon, E. P., & Kranzler, J. H. (2006). Effect of instructions on curriculum-based measurement of
reading. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 24, 318–328.
Crosson, A. C., & Lesaux, N. K. (2010). Revisiting assumptions about the relationship of fluent reading to
comprehension: Spanish-speakers’ text-reading fluency in English. Reading and Writing, AnInterdisciplinary Journal, 23, 475–494.
Cutting, L. E., Materek, A., Cole, C. A. S., Levine, T. M., & Mahone, E. M. (2009). Effects of fluency,
oral language and executive function on reading comprehension performance. Annals of Dyslexia,59, 34–54.
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, 277–299.
Denckla, M. B., & Rudel, R. G. (1976). Rapid automatized naming (R.A.N.): Dyslexia differentiated
from other learning disabilities. Neuropsychologia, 14, 471–479.
Droop, M., & Verhoeven, L. (2003). Language proficiency and reading ability in first- and second-
language learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 78–103.
Durrell, D. D. (1970). Durrell analysis of reading difficulty. New York: Psychological Corporation.
Francis, D. J., Fletcher, J. M., Stuebing, K. K., Lyon, G. R., Shaywitz, B. A., & Shaywitz, S. E. (2005).
Psychometric approaches to the identification of LD: IQ and achievement scores are not sufficient.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 98–108.
Geva, E. (2006). Second-language oral proficiency and second-language literacy. In D. August &
T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the NationalLiteracy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth (pp. 123–139). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Mediation model of ELL reading 185
123
Geva, E., & Yaghoub Zadeh, Z. (2006). Reading efficiency in native English-speaking and English-as-a-
second-language children: The role of oral proficiency and underlying cognitive-linguistic
processes. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 31–57.
Gottardo, A., & Mueller, J. (2009). Are first and second language factors related in predicting school
language reading comprehension? A study of Spanish-speaking children acquiring English as a
second language from first to second grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 330–344.
Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. RASE: Remedial andSpecial Education, 7, 6–10.
Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: AnInterdisciplinary Journal, 2, 127–160.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.
Jenkins, J. R., Fuchs, L. S., van den Broek, P., Espin, C., & Deno, S. L. (2003). Sources of individual
differences in reading comprehension and reading fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95,
719–729.
Johnston, T. C., & Kirby, J. R. (2006). The contribution of naming speed to the simple view of reading.
Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 19, 339–361.
Joreskog, K. G., & Serbom, D. (2001). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software.
Joshi, R. M., & Aaron, P. G. (2000). The component model of reading: Simple view of reading made a
little more complex. Reading Psychology, 21, 85–97.
Katzir, T., Kim, Y., Wolf, M., O’Brien, B., Kennedy, B., Lovett, M., et al. (2006). Reading fluency: The
whole is more than the parts. Annals of Dyslexia, 56, 51–82.
Kirby, J. R., & Savage, R. S. (2008). Can the simple view deal with the complexities of reading? Literacy,42, 75–82.
Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
Lesaux, N. K., Lipka, O., & Siegel, L. S. (2006). Investigating cognitive and linguistic abilities that
influence the reading comprehension skills of children from diverse linguistic backgrounds. Readingand Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 19, 99–131.
Lesaux, N. K., Rupp, A. A., & Siegel, L. S. (2007). Growth in reading skills of children from diverse
linguistic backgrounds: Findings from a five-year longitudinal study. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 99, 821–834.
Manis, F. R., Seidenberg, M. S., & Doi, L. M. (1999). See Dick RAN: Rapid naming and the longitudinal
prediction of reading subskills in first and second graders. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 129–157.
Maxwell, S. E., & Cole, D. A. (2007). Bias in cross-sectional analyses of longitudinal mediation.
Psychological Methods, 12, 23–44.
McBride-Chang, C., Wagner, R. K., & Chang, L. (1997). Growth modeling of phonological awareness.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 621–630.
Merbaum, C., & Geva, E. (1998, December). The relationship between listening and readingcomprehension in L1 and L2 Grade one children. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
National Reading Conference (‘‘The role of oral language proficiency in the development of English
as a second language reading skills of young children’’), Austin, TX.
Meyer, M. S., & Felton, R. H. (1999). Repeated reading to enhance fluency: Old approaches and new
directions. Annals of Dyslexia, 49, 283–306.
Miller, J. F., Heilmann, J., Nockerts, A., Iglesias, A., Fabiano, L., & Francis, D. J. (2006). Oral language
and reading in bilingual children. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 21, 30–43.
Nakamoto, J., Lindsey, K. A., & Manis, F. R. (2008). A cross-linguistic investigation of English language
learners’ reading comprehension in English and Spanish. Scientific Studies of Reading, 12, 351–371.
Parrila, R. K., Kirby, J. R., & McQuarrie, L. (2004). Articulation rate, naming speed, verbal short-term
memory, and phonological awareness: Longitudinal predictors of early reading development.
Scientific Studies of Reading, 8, 3–26.
Pennington, B. F., Cardoso-Martins, C., Green, P. A., & Lefly, D. L. (2001). Comparing the phonological
and double deficit hypotheses for developmental dyslexia. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplin-ary Journal, 14, 707–755.
Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. ‘‘What should the scientific study
of reading be now and in the near future?’’ [special issue]. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4),
357–383.
Proctor, C. P., Carlo, M., August, D., & Snow, C. (2005). Native Spanish-speaking children reading in
English: Toward a model of comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 247–256.
186 Z. Yaghoub Zadeh et al.
123
Puranik, C. S., Petscher, Y., Al Otaiba, S., Catts, H. W., & Lonigan, C. J. (2008). Development of oral
reading fluency in children with speech or language impairments. A growth curve analysis. Journalof Learning Disabilities, 41, 545–560.
Riedel, B. W. (2007). The relation between DIBELS, reading comprehension, and vocabulary in urban
first-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 546–567.
Rosner, J., & Simon, D. P. (1971). The auditory analysis test: An initial report. Journal of LearningDisabilities, 4, 383–392.
Schafer, J., & Graham, J. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7,
147–177.
Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New
procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422–445.
Slocum, T. A., Street, E. M., & Gilberts, G. (1995). A review of research and theory on the relation
between oral reading rate and reading comprehension. Journal of Behavioral Education, 5, 377–398.
Sparks, R., & Ganschow, L. (2001). Aptitude for learning a foreign language. Annual Review of AppliedLinguistics, 21, 90–111.
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading ResearchQuarterly, 24, 402–433.
Torgesen, J., Rashotte, C., & Alexander, A. (2001). The prevention and remediation of reading fluency
problems. In M. Wolf (Ed.), Dyslexia, fluency, and the brain (pp. 333–355). Cambridge, MA: York
Press.
Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Burgess, S., & Hecht, S. (1997). Contributions of
phonological awareness and rapid automatic naming ability to the growth of word-reading skills in
second- to fifth-grade children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 161–185.
van Gelderen, A., Schoonen, R., de Glopper, K., & Hulstijn, J. (2007). Development of adolescent
reading comprehension in language 1 and language 2: A longitudinal analysis of constituent
components. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 477–491.
van Gelderen, A., Schoonen, R., de Glopper, K., Hulstijn, J., Simis, A., Snellings, P., et al. (2004).
Linguistic knowledge, processing speed and metacognitive knowledge in first and second language
reading comprehension: A componential analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 19–30.
Verhoeven, L. (2000). Components in early second language reading and spelling. Scientific Studies ofReading, 4, 313–330.
Vukovic, R. K., & Siegel, L. S. (2006). The double deficit hypothesis: A comprehensive review of the
evidence. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 25–47.
Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., Hecht, S. A., Barker, T. A., Burgess, S. R., et al. (1997).
Changing relations between phonological abilities and word-level reading as children develop from
beginning to skilled readers: A five-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 33,
468–479.
Wiley, H. I., & Deno, S. L. (2005). Oral reading and maze measures as predictors of success for English
learners on a state standards assessment. Remedial and Special Education, 26, 207–214.
Wilkinson, G. S. (1993). Wide range achievement test–Revised (WRAT 3-R) (3rd ed.). Wilmington, DE:
Wide Range.
Wolf, M., & Katzir-Cohen, T. (2001). Reading fluency and its intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading,5, 211–239.
Wolf, M., Pfeil, C., Lotz, R., & Biddle, K. (1994). Toward a more universal understanding of the
developmental dyslexias: The contribution of orthographic factors. In V. W. Berninger (Ed.), Thevarieties of orthographic knowledge: Vol. 1. Theoretical and developmental issues (pp. 137–171).
Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Wood, D. E. (2009). Modeling the relationships between cognitive and reading measures in third and
fourth grade children. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 27, 96–112.
Woodcock, R. W. (1987). Woodcock reading mastery test. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance