Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Developmental changes in the nature of language proficiency and reading fluency paint a more complex view of reading comprehension in ELL and EL1

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We examined theoretical issues concerning the development of reading fluency and language proficiency in 390 English Language Learners (ELLs,) and 149 monolingual, English-as-a-first language (EL1) students. The extent to which performance on these constructs in Grade 5 (i.e., concurrent predictors) contributes to reading comprehension in the presence of Grade 2 autoregressors was also addressed. Students were assessed on cognitive, language, word reading, and reading fluency skills in Grades 2 and 5. In Grade 2, regardless of language group, word and text reading fluency formed a single factor, but by Grade 5 word and text reading fluency formed two distinct factors, the latter being more aligned with language comprehension. In both groups a substantial proportion of the variance in Grade 5 reading comprehension was accounted for uniquely by Grade 2 phonological awareness and vocabulary. Grade 5 text reading fluency contributed uniquely in the presence of the autoregressors. By Grade 5 syntactic skills and listening comprehension emerged as additional language proficiency components predicting reading comprehension in ELL but not in EL1. Results suggest that predictors of reading comprehension are similar but not identical in ELL and EL1. The findings point to a more nuanced and dynamic framework for understanding the building blocks that contribute to reading comprehension in ELLs and EL1s in upper elementary school. They underscore the importance of considering constructs such as vocabulary, whose role is stable, and other components of language proficiency and reading fluency whose role becomes pivotal as their nature changes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The test–retest reliability coefficients reported here are based on the students’ performance in different years (i.e., Grades 2 and 5).

  2. Note that at the time when this longitudinal study was launched standardized commercial measures of phonological processes (e.g., CTOPP) were not available.

References

  • Aarts, R., & Verhoeven, L. (1999). Literacy attainment in a second language submersion context. Applied Psycholinguistics, 20, 377–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adlof, S. M., Catts, H. W., & Little, T. D. (2006). Should the simple view of reading include fluency component? Reading and Writing, 19, 933–958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al Otaiba, S., Petscher, Y., Pappamihiel, N. E., Williams, R. S., Drylund, A. K., & Connor, C. M. (2009). Modeling oral reading fluency development in Latino students: A longitudinal study across second and third grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 315–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 Psychoeducational Assessment, 28, 3–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biemiller, A. J. (1981). Biemiller test of reading processes. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

  • Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 31–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 Psycholinguistics, 20, 459–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carver, R. P. (1997). Reading for one second, one minute, or one year from the perspective of rauding theory. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 3–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chall, J. S., Jacobs, V. A., & Baldwin, L. C. (1990). The reading crisis: Why poor children fall behind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, W. M., & Levy, B. A. (2008). Developing fluent text procession with practice: Meorial influences on fluency and comprehension. Canadian Psychology, 49(2), 133–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 23, 475–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cutting, L. E., & Scarborough, H. S. (2006). Prediction of reading comprehension: Relative on how comprehension is measured. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 277–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denckla, M. B., & Rudel, R. G. (1976). Rapid automatized naming (R.A.N.): Dyslexia differentiated from other learning disabilities. Neuropsychologia, 14, 471–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, L., & Dunn, L. (1981). Peabody picture vocabulary test–revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durrell, D. D. (1970). Durrell analysis of reading difficulty. New York: Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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(2), 98–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geva, E. (2006). Second-language oral proficiency and second-language literacy. In D. August & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing literacy in second-language learners: A report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth (pp. 123–139). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geva, E., Wade-Woolley, L., & Shany, M. (1997). Development of reading efficiency in first and second language. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1, 119–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottardo, A., & Mueller, J. (2009). are first and second language factors related in predicting school language reading comprehension? A study of Spanigh-speaking children acquiring English as a second language from first to second grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 330–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 127–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson, J. M., Whiteley, H. E., Smith, C. D., & Connors, L. (2003). The developmental progression of comprehension-related skills in children learning EAL. Journal of Research in Reading, 26(1), 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J. S., & Newport, E. L. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kame’enui, R. J., Simmons, D. C., Good, R. H., & Harn, B. A. (2000). The use of fluency-based measures in early identification and evaluation of intervention efficacy in schools. In M. Wold (Ed.), Time, fluency, and dyslexia (pp. 307–333). Parkton, MD: York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirby, J. R., & Savage, R. S. (2008). Can the simple view deal with the complexities of reading? Literacy, 42, 75–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krus, D. J., & Wilkinson, S. M. (1986). Demonstration of properties of a suppressor variable. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 18, 21–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesaux, N. K., Rupp, A. A., & Siegel, L. S. (2007). Growth in reading skills of children from diverse linguistic backgrounds: Findings from a 5-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(4), 821–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesaux, N. K., & Siegel, L. S. (2003). The development of reading in children who speak English as a second language (ESL). Developmental Psychology, 39, 1005–1019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (2002). Statistical analysis with missing data (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacGinitie, W. H., & MacGinitie, R. K. (1992). Gates-MacGinitie reading tests (2nd Canadian ed.). Toronto, ON: Nelson.

  • Meyer, M. S., & Felton, R. H. (1999). Repeated reading to enhance fluency: Old approached and new directions. Annals of Dyslexia, 49, 283–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakamoto, J., Lindsey, K. A., & Manis, F. R. (2007). A longitudinal analysis of English language learners word decoding and reading comprehension. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 20, 691–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perfetti, C. A. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 357–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 545–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raven, J. C., Court, J. H., & Raven, J. (1983). Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales: Section 4 advanced progressive matrices. London: Lewis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosner, J., & Simon, D. P. (1971). The Auditory Analysis Test: An initial report. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 4, 383–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuels, S. J. (2002). Reading fluency: Its development and assessment. In A. E. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed., pp. 166–183). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuels, S. J., Schermer, N., & Reinking, D. (1992). Reading fluency: Techniques for making decoding automatic. In S. Samuels & A. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 124–144). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schafer, J. L. (2000). NORM: Multiple imputation of incomplete multivariate data under a normal model (Version 2) [Computer software]. University Park: Pennsylvania State University, Department of Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreiber, P. A. (1980). On the acquisition of reading fluency. Journal of Reading Behavior, 12, 177–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, K. F., Chalmers, I., Hayes, R. J., & Altman, D. G. (1995). Empirical evidence of bias: Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. Journal of the American Medical Association, 273, 408–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semel, E., Wigg, E. H., & Secord, W. (1995). Clinical evaluation of language fundamentals-3. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statistics Canada. (2001). Census of Canada topic based tabulations, immigration and citizenship tables: Immigrant status and place of birth of respondent, sex, and age groups, for population, for census metropolitan areas, tracted census agglomerations and census tracts, 2001 census (Catalogue number 95F0357XCB2001002).

  • Storch, S. A., & Whitehurst, G. J. (2002). Oral language and code-related precursors to reading. Evidence from a longitudinal structural model. Developmental Psychology, 38, 934–947.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., & Alexander, A. (2001). Principles of fluency instruction in reading: Relationships with established empirical outcomes. In M. Wolf (Ed.), Dyslexia, fluency, and the brain (pp. 333–355). Parkton, MD: York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, D. (1991). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child Development, 69, 335–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, G. S. (1993). Wide Range Achievement Test–Revised (WRAT 3-R) (3rd ed.) . Wilmington, DE: Wide Range.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, M., & Katzir-Cohen, T. (2001). Reading fluency and its intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 211–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodcock, R. W. (1987). Woodcock reading mastery test. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Human Development and Applied Psychology, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, 252 Bloor St. West, Toronto, ON, M5S 1V6, Canada

    Esther Geva

  2. Hincks-Dellcrest Centre/Gail Appel Institute, Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, 114 Maitland Street, Toronto, ON, M4Y 1E1, Canada

    Fataneh Farnia

Authors
  1. Esther Geva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fataneh Farnia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Esther Geva or Fataneh Farnia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Geva, E., Farnia, F. Developmental changes in the nature of language proficiency and reading fluency paint a more complex view of reading comprehension in ELL and EL1. Read Writ 25, 1819–1845 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-011-9333-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-011-9333-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation