What Does Oral Language Have to Do With It?

Helping Young English-Language Learners Acquire a Sight Word Vocabulary

Lori A. Helman, Matthew K. Burns

Becoming proficient readers who not only decode but also understand what they are reading is a crucial goal for young English-language learner (ELL) students, and a sight word vocabulary that can be used in fluent reading is an important component of this proficiency.

ight-year-old Choua sits at his desk in the second-grade classroom and concentrates intently on the reading lesson his teacher is giving. Although Choua has had less than a year of formal schooling since his family came to the United States from a refugee camp in Thailand, he has made progress in learning the letters and sounds of the English language, and he is developing a beginning sight word reading vocabulary. As the reading lesson extends beyond a few minutes, however, the young students eyes glaze over and he shrugs when asked a question. His teacher wonders, How can I provide challenging instruction to help Choua catch up without overwhelming him? Many classroom teachers who work with Englishlanguage learners (ELLs) find themselves in the same position as Chouas teacher. On the one hand, grade-level benchmarks and reading standards are an omnipresent source of pressure for speeding up the curriculum; on the other hand, teachers understand that simply pouring more in does not promote their students success. Teachers are looking for effective strategies that are not one size fits all

but, rather, take into account the strengths and challenges of teaching with students who are learning to speak and read in English at the same time. This article focuses on a specific area of early reading developmentthe acquisition of a set of words that students can retrieve quickly and automatically as they read texts. First, we discuss how this skill fits into the continuum of reading development for young ELL students. Next, we briefly summarize our recent study examining the relationship between oral language proficiency and the acquisition rate of sight words among ELLs. The study serves as a starting point as we consider how reading teachers can also be language teachers and how meaning can be incorporated with the learning of skills. A section of practical applications fleshes out specific ideas for supporting students reading development that incorporate the need to look at both reading skills and language learning in order to provide challenging and meaningful curriculum. All student, teacher, and school names are pseudonyms.

Why a Sight Word Vocabulary Is Important

Proficient reading involves the automatic decoding of words on the page so that a readers mental energy can be used for understanding the text (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHD], 2000). Students who develop an extensive bank of words that they can retrieve effortlessly by sight will find reading new texts easier and more meaningful and are in a position to learn many more new words from grade-level texts (Johnston, 2000).

14

The Reading Teacher, 62(1), pp. 1419 DOI:10.1598/RT.62.1.2

2008 International Reading Association ISSN: 0034-0561 print / 1936-2714 online

We refer to a sight word vocabulary as the commonly used high-frequency words in students reading materials, such as those represented by Frys 300 Instant Sight Words in which words such as the, and, I, and little are in the most frequent 100 (Fry & Kress, 2006). A growing sight word vocabulary develops with other reading skills. Emergent readers may memorize a small set of words by remembering them visually, but this method will be too cumbersome for developing reading proficiency (Ehri, 1995). Beginning readers use the alphabetic principlethe idea that letters represent specific soundsto help them decode text: They learn to discriminate the sounds in words and make lettersound connections (Adams, 1990; NICHD, 2000). The alphabetic code provides students with a way to make sense of the writing system so that each new word does not have to be memorized in isolation. In other words, phonics knowledge acts as a trail marker for students on their journey toward an extensive sight word vocabulary. As beginning readers master the code and have numerous encounters with high-frequency and decodable words, their reading requires less effort; they see patterns in written words, and they move toward becoming fluent and automatic readers. This next stage of reading development has been called consolidated alphabetic (Ehri, 1995) or transitional (Henderson, 1981). Transitional readers are able to read longer texts, such as early chapter books, with greater ease (Ehri, 1995; Henderson, 1981); with reading practice and its attendant exposure to more words comes greater automaticity in decoding. Transitional readers have an extensive sight word vocabulary and are constantly adding to it. They are well on their way to developing reading proficiency. Recent research summaries show that ELLs develop word-reading skills in a comparable manner to native speakers (August & Shanahan, 2006). The factors influencing their second-language, word-reading skills include phonemic awareness, phonics, letter knowledge, and working memory in the second language (Chiappe & Siegel, 2006; Lesaux, Koda, Siegel, & Shanahan, 2006). The process of acquiring a sight word vocabulary may be a more challenging task for ELLs, however, for several reasons. Many ELL students, especially recent immigrants, are less familiar with the vocabulary, syntax, and phonology of English (Caldern et al., 2005). If students do not have a word in their oral vocabulary, it takes away an anchor for their word-reading development. Simply

stated, students must learn the oral and written version of words in English at the same time. In addition, ELLs may have fewer experiences with print materials in English, thereby reducing exposure to specific words that could become part of a sight word vocabulary. Instructional practices tailored to build on what students know and to support their oral and written language skills in English may be more effective than ignoring students background experiences.

The Relationship Between Oral Language Proficiency and Acquisition Rate of Sight Words
Recently, we conducted a study in three elementary schools in an urban district in the midwestern United States to investigate a possible relationship between the oral proficiency of students learning English and the number of sight words they could learn in a single sitting. Our participants were 43 second-grade students with Hmong-speaking backgrounds who received ELL services at school. Although we did not have demographic data for each individual, the student population of the three schools they attended consisted of 93.1%, 85.3%, and 83.9% students who were eligible for the federal free or reduced-price lunch program and 51.0%, 46.6%, and 64.0% who were ELLs. The research questions we asked were (a) Is there a significant relationship between English proficiency and acquisition rates of English sight words for students who are learning English? and (b) Do students who are learning English but have a higher level of English proficiency demonstrate higher acquisition rates of English sight words than other ELL students who demonstrate lower levels of English proficiency? To answer these questions we measured students oral proficiency in English with the Language Assessment Scales-Oral (LAS-O; De Avila & Duncan, 1994). The LAS-O measures speaking and listening skills, including vocabulary, listening comprehension, and verbal proficiency, to come up with a single summary score. Acquisition rate of English sight words was measured with a procedure used in previous research with native English speakers (Burns, 2001) in which each student was taught a series of unknown high-frequency words by rehearsing them

What Does Oral Language Have to Do With It?

15

among known words at a ratio of one unknown word to eight known words. When a child made three errors while practicing a new word, the lesson was discontinued and the acquisition rate calculated. For example, if the student successfully learned five unknown words with little error but made three errors while learning the sixth word, the students acquisition rate would be five. Our data analysis found a significant correlation between students acquisition rates and their language proficiency scores, with r (42) = 0.63, p < 0.001. This moderate effect accounted for 40% of the variance in scores. Thus, we determined that a significant relationship did exist between English proficiency and acquisition rates of English sight words for ELL students. Our second research question examined the effect of varying levels of English proficiency on sight word acquisition rates. In order to answer this question, we formed three groups based on the students language proficiency in English. One group consisted of students who earned a LAS-O score of 1 or 2 (very limited oral English proficiency), another group included students who earned a LAS-O score of 3 (limited oral English proficiency), and the final group consisted of students with a LAS-O score of 4 or 5 (fluent). We then conducted an analysis of variance (ANOVA) with these three groups, using the acquisition rate of English sight words as the dependent variable. Students with the lowest oral English proficiency had a mean acquisition rate of 3.24 words, the group with limited oral English proficiency had a mean acquisition rate of 5.50 words, and the group of ELL students with the highest oral language proficiency had a mean acquisition rate of 7.00 words. A significant effect was noted for these three groups F (2, 39) = 8.80, p < 0.001, with the mean for acquisition rate directly following oral English proficiency level. A Bonferroni post-hoc analysis determined that both the highest and middle English proficiency groups demonstrated significantly higher acquisition rates than the lowest group. The scores for the highest proficiency group and the middle group, however, were not found to be significantly different from each other. Following the post-hoc analysis, Cohens d was used to compare the acquisition rate scores for the three groups. The scores of the most proficient group compared with the least proficient group led to a large effect (d = 1.84), and the most proficient group also outscored the middle group with a moderate effect (d = 0.65).

Finally, the middle group outperformed the least proficient group with a large effect (d = 0.96), demonstrating a strong relationship. Results of this study point out the significant relationship between language proficiency and the acquisition rate of sight words in English. Students with the lowest oral English proficiency had the lowest rate for acquiring sight words in a single sitting (about three words), and the group of ELLs with the highest oral language proficiency had the highest mean acquisition rate (seven words). We do not know if it is language proficiency that supports a higher acquisition rate, a higher acquisition rate that supports language development, or if a third factor influences these two abilities. For practical purposes, educators hoping to encourage sight word development with ELLs should not overlook the important connection we observed between students language proficiency and the number of words they learned in a single sitting. Another insight may be suggested based on the fact that students in the middle and higher language proficiency groups demonstrated significantly higher acquisition rates than the lowest group; perhaps a minimal level of oral English can support successful sight word acquisition rates. Although acquisition rates grew steadily as English-language proficiency rose, there was not a statistically significant difference between the scores of students at the highest level and the scores of students at the middle level. This suggests that a dual effort in both language development and skills instruction for students with the least proficiency in English may help skills be more easily learned and may ensure that instructional time in the classroom is most productive.

How Can Teachers Support the Acquisition of Sight Word Vocabulary With Students?
Given what we know about second-language reading development and the important connection between oral and written language skills, the results of our study on sight word acquisition rates allow several teaching ideas to come into view. We suggest that (a) teachers differentiate their instructional activities in reading to support the language level of their students, (b) language development activities be embedded within skill instruction, and (c) students have

16

The Reading Teacher Vol. 62, No. 1 September 2008

multiple opportunities in their school day to read high-frequency words in connected text. Integral to all of these suggestions is the guiding principle that language development is crucial to proficient reading; effective teachers of reading with ELLs scaffold both oral language and literacy skills. We now share some examples of how this might be done.

Differentiate Instructional Activities Based on Language Proficiency

Teachers use a variety of grouping strategies in their literacy instruction in the classroom, from whole group to small groups to providing individual attention. Often these groupings are based on informal or formal assessments of students reading levels. Based on our study of the acquisition rates of ELLs, we suggest that another consideration for differentiation might be students oral language development. For students who are just beginning to learn English, reading lessons that are shorter and more frequent may prove most effective. In word study, consider introducing three new words at a time in lessons for beginning ELLs. Students at intermediate levels of oral English proficiency may be fine with five new words, and seven may work for students who are fluent. This would align with the results we found for average acquisition rates in our study. For beginners in English, learning new written words in reading groups can also be a time to develop their vocabulary. Create minilessons for beginning ELLs that do some or all of the following:
n

Another important aspect of differentiation involves which words are chosen for instruction. Beginning ELLs should focus on the most common and useful words that will be immediately reinforced in daily conversation and reading activities. Include language experience activities in which students dictate the words they know, which are very likely the most essential and important words in their lives. Do not assume that basic words that are critical to the content in the reading program are already part of a students oral and written vocabulary. Spend time focusing on these words and note gaps in students oral repertoires. By choosing words that are important to understanding early reading materials, teachers help students reach a level of basic oral proficiency that provides a foundation for expanded word learning.

Incorporate Language Development Within Skills Instruction

Earlier in this article we discussed how word learning grows along with decoding abilities. As ELL students develop as readers, they become more adept at fluently and automatically recognizing an extensive set of sight words. For teachers to support this development and provide instruction in the right skills at the right time, it is important that they know where students are on the road to proficient reading (Helman & Bear, 2007). This is especially critical when designing instruction for ELL students because English language proficiency must also be considered in the planning. At each of the early stages of reading development, there are numerous ways to incorporate language learning within literacy skills instruction. Emergent readers will be developing phonemic awareness and lettersound knowledge in English. The more words students know in English, the larger the pool of sounds they can work with and the more examples of lettersound relationships they will have to draw from. Using picture sorts of words that compare beginning or ending sounds supports vocabulary learning, phonemic awareness, and phonics. Alphabet materials that use high-utility words for reference are another way to support both the skills and language development of emergent ELL readers. Beginning ELL readers will focus much of their reading energy on sounding out words and noticing their spelling patterns. Creating individual picture dictionaries using high-frequency words supports

 rovide visual support for new words through P pictures, objects, or actions  ive students opportunities to hear new words G in context and ask questions about what they mean  onnect the oral and written forms of new readC ing words  ave students use new words in their own H sentences  ncourage students to self-monitor for underE standing of word meaning, such as sorting words they can read into I know what it means and I dont know what it means categories  heck frequently for understanding of student C comprehension

What Does Oral Language Have to Do With It?

17

both vocabulary learning and lettersound knowledge. These dictionaries can also be an important reference for students as they search for words to write or say. Small cards with words that students can read can be put together into collections, or word banks, for students to practice and sort. When students look for patterns, such as those in a words, sorts help students better understand written English. When students sort the words conceptually, such as by whether the word is something you could buy in a store, sorts help students learn the meaning of words and practice reading them without context clues. As we described earlier, when students progress beyond the alphabetic level they become transitional readers who possess a large set of sight words they can read automatically, and they use knowledge of word patterns to decode analogous words. For instance, if students can read bright, they can also quickly decode might, fright, and sight. Because it takes less effort for transitional readers to decode words, teachers may mistakenly believe that because students can read a word, they also know what it means or how to use it in context. Language development activities that are easily integrated into skills lessons for transitional readers include helping them read with expression by focusing on meaning and by following the punctuation cues of the passage. Vocabulary instruction overlaps with word learning as the teacher supports inquiry into the multiple meanings of words (e.g., count, as in count how many; count on someone; or a nobleman who is a count), homophones (e.g., meet and meat), and the clarification of sounds, meanings, and spellings of complex single-syllable words (e.g., crowd, ought, and spoil ). While conducting phonics or other skills lessons, teachers take the time to talk with students about word meanings, ask students what they understand about specific words, and encourage them to use those words in a meaningful sentence.

 reate Personal Readers for studentsPersonal C Readers are collections of short memorized texts, poems, or dictated stories that are typed up or copied and put in a folder for students to read and reread (Bear, Invernizzi, Templeton, & Johnston, 2008). As these short texts are reread, students match oral language to print, see familiar words over and over, and gain rhythm and confidence in their reading.  rovide time every day for students to read P materials at their instructional and independent levelsInstructional reading is done with teacher support; material is slightly above what students could read independently, but the scaffolding allows them to be successful (Clay, 1991). Students should also have time to read materials with which they have 95% accuracy and above. Both kinds of reading give students the opportunity to practice their word-reading skills in context and see the fruits of their word study work.  hoose texts that contain features to scaffold C ELLs reading success, such as (a) phonetically regular and high-frequency words, (b) words of high interest to students personal lives, (c) words that represent familiar concepts and images, (d) high word repetition rates, and (e) a low ratio of unfamiliar words (Hiebert, Brown, Taitague, Fisher, & Adler, 2004). These scaffolds will decrease the cognitive load for students learning to speak and read English at the same time.  se the materials and activities listed in the preU vious bullets to create opportunities for students to reread familiar texts. Repeated reading has been shown to increase fluency and consolidate the automatic recognition of sight words (NICHD, 2000). Meaningful repeated readings can occur when students read with a partner, to a younger buddy, for their parents at home, or to perform a Readers Theatre play or poem.

Provide Multiple Opportunities for Students to Read High-Utility Words

For specific words to become part of students sight word vocabulary, they need to have been read dozens of times (Hargis, Terhaar-Yonkers, Williams, & Reed, 1988). A final set of suggestions describes ways for students to get practice reading high-utility words so that they become automatically recognized.

Conclusion
Becoming proficient readers who not only decode but also understand what they are reading is a crucial goal for young ELL students. Developing a sight word vocabulary that can be used in fluent reading is an important component of this proficiency.

18

The Reading Teacher Vol. 62, No. 1 September 2008

Teachers need tools to best instruct students to accomplish this. In this article we have discussed how an extensive sight word vocabulary develops alongside and contributes to proficient reading and how this process may look different for students who are learning to speak English. We have shared results from a study of sight word acquisition rates with ELLs and used our results to make the case that language development activities need to be integrated into literacy skills instruction. We have presented numerous examples of how to support an extensive sight word vocabulary with ELL students through differentiating instruction, integrating language development into skills-focused lessons, and providing multiple opportunities for students to read and reread high-utility words. We began this article by describing a young ELL student, Choua, and the dilemma his teacher faces in providing effective literacy instruction for him. It is our hope that classroom teachers become attuned to the role of language development as they plan instruction to help their ELL students become fluent and automatic readers in English. Language learning is highly connected to proficient reading development, so, in working with ELLs, we must become teachers of language as well as reading skills. References
Adams, M.J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. August, D., & Shanahan, T., (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on language-minority children and youth. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Bear, D.R., Invernizzi, M., Templeton, S., & Johnston, F. (2008). Words their way: Word study for phonics, vocabulary, and spelling instruction (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Burns, M.K. (2001). Measuring sight-word acquisition and retention rates with curriculum-based assessment. Journal of P s ycho educat ional A s s es s ment , 19 (2), 148 157. doi:10.1177/073428290101900204 Caldern, M., August, D., Slavin, R., Duran, D., Madden, N., & Cheung, A. (2005). Bringing words to life in classrooms with English-language learners. In E.H. Hiebert & M.L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice (pp. 115136). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Chiappe, P., & Siegel, L.S. (2006). A longitudinal study of reading development of Canadian children from diverse linguistic backgrounds. The Elementary School Journal, 107(2), 135152. doi:10.1086/510652

Clay, M.M. (1991). Becoming literate: The construction of inner control. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. De Avila, E.A., & Duncan, S.E. (1994). Language assessment scales. Monterey, CA: CTB Macmillan/McGraw-Hill. Ehri, L.C. (1995). Phases of development learning to read words by sight. Journal of Research in Reading, 18 (2), 116125. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.1995.tb00077.x Fry, E.B., & Kress, J.E. (2006). The reading teachers book of lists (5th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hargis, C.H., Terhaar-Yonkers, M., Williams, P.C., & Reed, M.T. (1988). Repetition requirements for word recognition. Journal of Reading, 31(4), 320327. Helman, L.A., & Bear, D.R. (2007). Does an established model of orthographic development hold true for English learners? In D.W. Rowe et al. (Eds.), 56th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 266280). Chicago: National Reading Conference. Henderson, E.H. (1981). Learning to read and spell: The childs knowledge of words. DeKalb: Northern Illinois Press. Hiebert, E.H., Brown, Z.A., Taitague, C., Fisher, C.W., & Adler, M.A. (2004). Texts and English language learners: Scaffolding entre to reading. In F.B. Boyd & C.H. Brock (Eds.), Multicultural and multilingual literacy and language: Contexts and practices (pp. 3253). New York: Guilford. Johnston, F.R. (2000). Word learning in predictable text. Jou r na l o f E duca t iona l P s ycholog y , 92 (2), 24 8 255. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.2.248 Lesaux, N.K., Koda, K., Siegel, L.S., & Shanahan, T. (2006). Development of literacy. In D. August & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on language-minority children and youth (pp. 75122). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Helman teaches at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA; e-mail lhelman@umn.edu. Burns also teaches at the University of Minnesota; e-mail burns258@umn.edu.

For related lesson plans visit ReadWriteThink.org and click Lessons to find 4 Learning Vocabulary Down By the Bay 4 Active Reading Using The Enormous Watermelon 4 Word Sorts for Beginning and Struggling Readers

What Does Oral Language Have to Do With It?

19