Transcript RtI with English Learners

1
RtI with English Learners
Julie Esparza Brown, EdD
Portland State University
Linda I. Rosa Lugo,EdD, CCC/SLP
University of Central Florida
2
Guiding Questions
What is RTI?
What does an RTI process for ELs look like?
How do cultural, linguistic, and experiential differences
impact instruction and intervention?
How does the RTI process help to determine difference
vs. disability? Is a comprehensive special education
evaluation still necessary in this model?
What competencies do education professionals need to
support EL students through the RTI process?
3
RTI Defined
“Rigorous implementation of RTI includes a
combination of high quality, culturally and
linguistically responsive instruction; assessment;
and evidence-based intervention. Comprehensive
RTI implementation will contribute to more
meaningful identification of learning and behavioral
problems, improve instructional quality, provide all
students with the best opportunities to succeed in
school, and assist with the identification of learning
disabilities and other disabilities.”
National Center on Response to Intervention
4
Improving Learning Outcomes
• One major goal of RTI is to improve the learning
outcomes for all students and reduce the number of
students inappropriately identified as having a specific
learning disability by intervening early in their
educational process.(Individuals with Disabilities
Education Improvement Act, 2004, Part B, Sec 614
(b)(6)(b)).
• RTI is conceptualized as a tiered model of increasingly
intense instructional support to match students’ needs.
• The most common models currently are in reading.
An RTI Model
for English
Learners
intensive
evidence-based
Intervention,
includes oracy
component
(5% of all students)
Core plus strategic
evidence-based
intervention; “double
dose”; must include oracy
component
(15% of all students)
Core curriculum & instruction for ALL students:
school-wide reading, behavior, math and/or
writing, includes sheltered and linguistically
appropriate instruction and culturally relevant
teaching (80% of all students disaggregated by
subgroups)
For ELS: Core includes English as a Second
Language Services
Pre-teach critical vocabulary; PLUSS teaching for transfer
6
Key Features of an RTI Model
• Evidence-based core curriculum; goal is for all
students to reach grade-level benchmarks. Assumes
effective instruction in core for all students.
• Universal screening in foundational components of
reading (or math) to determine who is at-risk for
reading difficulties.
• Intervening early in reading (or math) with increasingly
intense evidence-based interventions taught with
fidelity.
• Use screening and progress monitoring data to
determine students’ responsiveness to
instruction/intervention and progress towards gradelevel benchmarks and standards
7
Concerns When Working with ELs
RTI Feature
• Evidence-based core
curriculum and instruction
for all students to meet
grade-level standards.
• Universal screening in
foundational components
of reading (or math) to
determine who is at-risk for
reading difficulties.
Concern for ELs
• Limited core curriculum
that adjusts instruction
to meet EL students’
language levels;
educators often lack
basic competencies in
working with ELs
• Must determine the
reliability and validity of
screening tools used with
ELs
8
Concerns When Working with ELs
RTI Feature
• Intervening early in reading (or
math) with increasingly intense
evidence-based interventions
taught with fidelity.
• Use screening and progress
monitoring data to determine
students’ responsiveness to
instruction/intervention and
progress towards grade-level
benchmarks and standards
Concern for ELs
• Limited intervention programs
that have been researched on
English Learners (e.g., What
Works Clearinghouse).
• Assessment tools must be
reliable and valid for use with
ELs, ELs cannot be expected to
meet grade-level benchmarks
within the time frame as
English-only students
9
What Do We Need to Know About
English Learners?
10
English Learners Defined
• The National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES, 2011) reports the number of English
Learners (ELs) in public schools rose from 4.7 to
11.2 million between 1980 and 2009 (a 21%
increase).
• ELs are a diverse group representing more than
425 languages, yet what defines them is their
need for specialized language support to fully
participate in English-only educational
programs (Goldenberg, 2008).
• Of all ELs, 80 percent are Spanish-speakers
(Goldenberg, 2008).
11
English Learners Defined
• The majority of them are U.S. born and
have received all of their education in
American schools.
• ELs achieve oral fluency in everyday
language but lag in measures of academic
success and tasks requiring academic
language proficiency.
• The term “EL” student does NOT include
fluent bilingual students.
12
Are ALL Educators Prepared to Teach ELs? How
About You?
• In 2002, the National
Center for Educational
Statistics found that
among 41% of U.S.
teachers with EL
students only 12.5%
had received 8 or more
hours of PD in
instruction of ELLs.
13
Three Categories of ELs who Experience
Academic Difficulties
1. Those with ineffective instructional
programs and environments
▫
Instruction is not appropriately adjusted to
student’s language needs
2. Difficulties due to life circumstances
▫
Interrupted schooling, limited formal
education, mobility, limited access to standard
English, etc.
3. EL students with intrinsic and true
disorders
14
Let’s Talk About
Language
15
Language:
The Big Picture
BICS = Basic
Interpersonal
Communication Skills
B
I
C
S
Pre-Production
Early Production
Speech Emergence
Intermediate Fluency
Hands-on instruction
Emergent readers
Emergent writers
Predictable books
Copying
Everyday communication
Unedited speech
Instant clarification of concept
possible
Playground conversation
Contextualized, concrete
Limited vocabulary
Two to three years to attain
Advanced Fluency
CALP = Cognitive
Academic Language
Proficiency (Cummins,
2000)
C
A
L
P
Academic language
Expository, formal language
Decontextualized, abstract
Required for literacy
Absence of features normally presented
in conversational discourse
Three to ten (or more) to attain
Standardized tests
Content areas
State assessments
16
Basic Interpersonal Communication
Skills (BICS)
• Language proficiency needed in order to
function in everyday interpersonal
contexts and carry on a conversation in
familiar face-to-face situations:
▫
▫
▫
▫
greetings
words of courtesy
numbers/calculations
playground conversation
17
Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency
(CALP)
• Level of language needed to function in decontextualized, academic
settings where students are required to understand linguistically and
conceptually demanding texts in content areas and to use this
language in an accurate and coherent way in their own writing.
▫
▫
▫
▫
Language required for:
solving mathematical word problems
reading academic texts
taking tests
• To develop academic language proficiency requires extensive reading
of texts to expand vocabulary knowledge and demystify language
structures.
• Typically attained between five to seven years in host country but up
to eleven years when native language is not used for instruction
(Thomas & Collier, 2002) .
18
Language Proficiency
• a person's competence in processing
(through listening and reading) and using
(through speaking and writing) language
(WIDA ELD Standards, 2012)
• Language proficiency alone will not be a
determinant of a child’s ability to learn in
L2. Previous schooling, experiences, and
what they have learned in L1 must also be
considered.
19
Primary Language
• Language that the student learns first and
uses most frequently in the early stages of
language development.
• Language of the home and used to make
meaningful communicative relationships
with their family.
• Primary language best determined
through home language surveys and
carefully conducted parent interviews.
• Parents must be encouraged to use and
develop children's home language.
20
Dominant Language
• The language that the student speaks most
fluently and chooses to speak when given a
choice.
• The dominant language can be situational
in nature. For example, a child schooled
only in English will ultimately become
dominant in English academic language.
• However, the primary language may
remain dominant in other social situations
such as church or community events.
21
Proficiency Levels of ELs
I. & II.Pre-Production & Beginning
Students Can:
“I have little
or no English
proficiency.”
Beginner students are those with little or no
English proficiency. The English sound
system is new to them, and they
comprehend little of what is said in English.
!
They may go through a "silent period" where
they do not attempt to speak in English.
!
However, beginner students may quickly connect the concepts
they know in their primary language to the new English language
environment, and they can participate in the classroom by doing
the activities listed here. Beginners may demonstrate various
levels of oral and literacy skills in their primary language.
Adapted from IDRA, Intercultural Development Research Association © 2000
Point
! Draw
! Match
! Select
! Circle
! State
Choose
Act Out
! Label
! Name
! List
!
Northwest Regional Education Service District
22
Proficiency Levels of ELs
III. Intermediate
Students Can: ! Recall
“I have good oral skills
in English, but minimal
reading and composition
skills in English.”
! Retell
! Define
! Describe
! Compare
! Contrast
! Summarize
! Restate
Intermediate level students have good oral skills in English but have minimal
reading and composition skills in English. They may be able to carry on social
conversations, however understanding academic language and reading and
writing at grade-level in English is difficult. Some intermediate students may be
literate at or above grade-level in their primary language. Literate students
quickly transfer reading and writing skills into English and are able to perform
the activities listed here.
Adapted from IDRA, Intercultural Development Research Association © 2000
Northwest Regional Education Service District
23
Proficiency Levels of ELs
IV. & V. Early Advanced and Advanced
Students Can: ! Analyze
! Create
“I am fluent in oral English
! Defend
and have some reading and
! Debate
writing skills, but need help
! Evaluate
to pass tests.”
! Justify
! Support
Advanced students are those who
are nearly proficient in English.
! Explain
They understand and speak English
fluently but have difficulty reading
and writing in English.
Advanced students have difficulty taking standardized and norm-referenced tests
because of the language required to explain thinking. Some advanced students
may by fully literate in their home language (L1) while others may have only
limited literacy skills in their L1. In order for advanced students to become
proficient in English, they need experiences that involve the following skills listed
here.
Adapted from IDRA, Intercultural Development Research Association © 2000
Northwest Regional Education Service District
24
Second Language Acquisition Strategies
and Activities
All students learn when the
information is comprehensible.
ELs require second language
acquisition strategies and
activities that make the
language and information
I. & II. Pre- III. Intermediate
comprehensible.
Production/
Beginning
IV. & V. Early
Advanced/
Advanced
All levels of ELs benefit from:
Modeling & explicit instruction
Frequent opportunities to practice using language
Visual aids & Graphic Organizers
Cooperative grouping activities
Manipulative and hands-on activities
Vocabulary Strategies
Adapted from IDRA, Intercultural Development Research Association © 2000
Northwest Regional Education Service District
25
26
“Young children who have not had
sufficient opportunities to develop
cognitive skills in their first language
before learning a second language are at
greater risk for academic delays than their
peers who have had opportunities to
develop and use their first language”
(cited in Kohnert, et al, Cummins, 1984).
27
Determining Need
for Support
28
Screening and Progress Monitoring in
a Problem Solving Framework
1. Define the problem (screening)
2.Analyze
3.Develop a Plan
4.Evaluate (progress monitoring)
29
Define the Problem: Unique Considerations for
Screening ELs (Brown & Sanford, 2011)
1. Use tools with demonstrated reliability and
validity to identify and monitor students’
needs for instructional support in reading in
both L1 and L2.
2. Assess students’ language proficiency in L1
and L2 to provide an appropriate context
regarding evaluation of current levels of
performance.
3. Plan instruction based on what you know
about the student’s performance and literacy
experiences in L1 and L2 and teach for
transfer if needed.
30
What Are the Unique Considerations for
Screening and Progress Monitoring ELs?
• Reliability: does the assessment produce
similar scores across conditions and
situations?
• Reliability is not a particular problem if the tool has
good psychometric properties.
• Validity: does the test measure what you
want to assess?
• Validity may be a problem because assessment
results could be influenced by students’ language,
cultural and experiential backgrounds.
• There is evidence for the validity of using CBMs
with ELs (Deno, 2005; Wiley & Deno, 2005)
31
Gather Formative Assessment Data
• Screening
• Universal screening is conducted on a
regular basis (2 – 3 times per year) for all
students
• Screening assessments are brief,
individual, and will identify which
students are struggling with core concepts
32
Progress Monitoring
• Progress Monitoring
• Occurs more frequently than
screening assessments
• Tools must be valid and reliable
• Screening and progress
monitoring tools may be the same
instrument.
33
Commonly Used Assessments for ELs:
Screening and Progress Monitoring
• DIBELS/IDEL
▫ General outcome measure
▫ Benchmark and progress
monitoring system based
on student continuous
assessment
▫ Designed to determine if a
student is learning and
making progress toward
the long term reading goal
▫ Between 2 – 5 minutes to
administer per indicator
▫ IDEL is the Spanish
version
• Aimsweb/MIDE
▫ General outcome measure
▫ Benchmark and progress
monitoring system based
on student continuous
assessment
▫ Designed to determine if
a student is learning and
making progress toward
the long term reading
goal
▫ Between 2 – 5 minutes to
administer per indicator
▫ MIDE is the Spanish
version
34
Commonly Used Assessments for ELs:
Screening and Progress Monitoring
• CORE
▫ Assessment of
comprehension skills
related to reading.
▫ Makes classroom
comparisons.
▫ Some assessments in
Spanish but not all.
• STAR
▫ Computerized
benchmark and
progress monitoring.
▫ Available in English
only.
Commonly Used Assessments for ELs:
Diagnostic Assessment
35
• DRA/EDL
• Designed to measure the level in which the
students can read “independently”.
• Considered “benchmark” assessments that help
teachers measure student progress and are
collected at the beginning, middle and/or end of
the year.
• Approximately 30 minutes to 1 hour per student
to administer.
36
Evaluate: Unique Considerations for Progress
Monitoring ELs (Brown & Sanford, 2011)
1. Monitor student’s progress in all languages of instruction
2. Set rigorous goals that support students to meet gradelevel standards. You may need to set shorter term goals to
meet long term goals since ELs will NOT progress at the
same rate as English only students.
3. Evaluate growth frequently, increasing intensity of
instruction (or change interventions) when growth is less
than expected
4. Evaluate growth of “true peers” (peers with similar
background in language, experience, culture, birth country,
education in L1 & L2) to determine whether instruction is
generally effective for students with similar linguistic and
educational experiences
36
37
Tiered Support
• Depending on a student’s need, Tier 1, 2 or 3
interventions are provided.
• Tier 1
▫ Intervention in core materials, small groups (5-7)
in general education
▫ Provided by teacher or other educator
▫ Attention must be given to student’s language
proficiency level (in the language of instruction),
and cultural and experiential background
38
Tiered Support
• Tier 2
▫ A “double dose” of core. May be different materials
but goal is to meet grade-level standards.
▫ Small group instruction (3-5)
▫ Instruction must continue to be adapted to
student’s language proficiency level and cultural
and experiential background
▫ An additional oracy (listening & speaking)
component should be included to ensure ELs
understand the vocabulary and language structures
used within the intervention
▫ Intervention must match instructional language of
classroom
39
Tiered Support
• Tier 3
▫ Different curriculum is used as student is not at grade
level
▫ Small group instruction (1-3)
▫ Instruction must continue to be adapted to student’s
language proficiency level and cultural and experiential
background
▫ An additional oracy (listening & speaking) component
should be included to ensure ELs understand the
vocabulary and language structures used within the
intervention
▫ If an EL student is considered for special education, a
comprehensive evaluation should be conducted.
40
Instruction and
Intervention for
ELs: PLUSS
MODEL
41
Explicit Instruction
• Research indicates that ELLs need explicit and
systematic core reading instruction in reading
instruction (i.e., phonemic awareness, phonics,
fluency with connected text, vocabulary, and
comprehension strategy instruction) (Fien, Smith,
Baker, Chaparro, Baker & Preciado, 2010; Gersten,
Baker, Shanahan, Linan-Thompson, Collins &
Scarcella, 2007).
• Els need additional instructional time for English
language development, with deliberate and focused
instruction on English language proficiency that is
coordinated and aligned with reading instruction
(Linan-Thompson & Vaughn, 2007).
42
The Need to Enhance Core Instruction
and Interventions
• Most core and intervention programs do not provide
enough explicit, scaffolded instruction or practice
opportunities for ELLs (Gersten, 1999).
• Explicit teacher modeling is frequently absent, and, if
present, the models are vague and inconsistent (Baker
& Baker,2008).
• There are limited modeling and practice opportunities
needed for deep understanding.
• Vague directions may confuse EL students.
• However, core programs can be enhanced for ELLs by
focusing on variables related to explicit and systematic
instruction (Linan-Thompson, Bryant, Dickson, &
Kouzekanani, 2005) and language demands.
43
Table 1
PLUSS Framework for Research Based Instruction for ELLs
PLUSS Framework
Definition
Evidence
Pre-teach Critical Vocabulary
Identify and explicitly teach vocabulary that is unknown and
Calderón, 2007; Carlos, et al. 2004;
critical to understanding a passage or unit of instruction
Echevarria, Vogt & Short, 2008; LinanThompson & Vaughn, 2007
Language modeling and
Teacher models appropriate use of academic language, then
Dutro & Moran, 2003; Echevarria, Vogt &
opportunities for practicing
provides structured opportunities for students to practice
Short, 2008; Gibbons, 2009; Linan-Thompson
using the language in meaningful contexts
& Vaughn, 2007; Scarcella, 2003
Use visuals and graphic
Strategically use pictures, graphic organizers, gestures, realia
Brechtal, 2001; Echevarria & Graves, 1998;
organizers
and other visual prompts to help make critical language,
Haager & Klingner, 2005; Linan-Thompson &
concepts, and strategies more comprehensible to learners
Vaughn, 2007; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990
Systematic and explicit
Explain, model, provided guided practice with feedback, and
Calderón, 2007; Flaggella-Luby & Deshler,
instruction
opportunities for independent practice in content, strategies,
2008; Gibbons, 2009, Haager & Klingner,
and concepts
2005; Klingner & Vaughn, 2000; Watkins &
Slocum, 2004;
Strategic use of native
Identify concepts and content students already know in their
Carlisle, Beeman, Davis & Spharim, 1999;
language & teaching for
native language and culture to explicitly explain, define, and
Durgunoglu, et al., 1993; Genesee, Geva,
transfer
help them understand new language and concepts in English
Dressler, & Kamil, 2006; Odlin, 1989;
Schecter, & Bayley, 2002
44
Examples of PLUSS Framework Applied in the Classroom
PLUSS Framework
Example
Pre-teach critical
vocabulary
Select 3-5 high utility vocabulary words crucial to understanding text (not necessarily content specific words) and
explicitly teach student friendly definitions, model using the words, and provide students with repeated
opportunities to use the words over time (Honig, Diamond, & Gutlohn, 2008; Beck, McKeown, Kucan, 2002)
Language modeling and
Provide language frames and sentence starters to structure language interaction. For example, after having
opportunities for
defined the word, ask students to use the word, “preoccupied,” in a sentence, “Think of a time when you were
practicing
preoccupied.” (pause to give time to think). “Turn to your partners and share, starting your sentence with, ‘I was
preoccupied when…’, what will you start your sentence with?” (have students repeat the sentence starter before
turning to their neighbor and sharing).
Use visuals and graphic
organizers
Systematic and explicit
instruction
Consistently use a Venn diagram to teach the concept compare and contrast or use realia and pictures to
support the teaching of concepts (Echevarría, Vogt, & Short, 2008)
Teach strategies like summarization, monitoring and clarifying, and decoding strategies through providing direct
explanation, modeling, guided practice with feedback, and opportunities for application (Honig, Diamond, &
Gutlohn, 2008).
Strategic use of native
language & teaching for
transfer
Use native language to teach cognates (e.g. teach that preoccupied means the same thing as preocupado in
Spanish) or explain/clarify a concept in the native language before or while teaching it in English.
45
Do Skills Learned in L1 Transfer to
L2?
• YES!!!
• Cross-linguistic transfer (CLT) is especially positive for
Spanish and other alphabetic languages since they share
an alphabet and many sounds with English (August &
Shanahan, 2006; Durgunoglu, 2002; Goldenberg,
2008).
• ELs can explicitly be taught the similarities and
differences in reading across alphabets to transfer their
knowledge of pre-reading or reading skills in L1 (the
native language) to L2 (English). Discreet skills
(phonological awareness, orthography)
46
Case Studies of EL Students
47
Scenario 1: Yesenia
• Yesenia was born in the United States and
attended Headstart for one year where she had
some instruction in Spanish. She attended a
bilingual kindergarten until December and then
moved to a school with no bilingual programs.
She continues in an English-only program as a
first grader. Her language proficiency scores on
the Woodcock Muñoz indicate she is a level 3 in
English and level 3 in Spanish.
48
FIRST GRADE - DIBELS
Decision Criteria –
Beg of Yr
Letter Naming Fluency
(LNF)
At Risk
0-24
Some Risk
25-36
Yesenia
27
Low Risk
37+
Phoneme Segmentation
Fluency (PSF)
Deficit
0-9
Emerging
10-34
30
Established
35+
Nonsense Word Fluency
(NWF)
At Risk
0-12
Some Risk
13-23
Low Risk
24+
11
49
FIRST GRADE - IDEL
Decision Criteria –
Beg of Yr
Fluidez en nombrar letras (FNL)
Letter Naming Fluency
At Risk
0-19
Yesenia
Some Risk
20-34
Low Risk
35+
Fluidez en la Segmentación de
Fonemas (FSF)
Phoneme Segmentation Fluency
Deficit
0-34
Emerging
35-49
Established
50+
Fluidez en las Palabras sin Sentido
(FPS)
Nonsense Word Fluency
41
53
At Risk
0-24
Some Risk
25-34
Low Risk
35+
39
Yesenia – Nonsense Word Fluency
50
Nonsense Word Fluency
Tier 1+ Teach for Transfer (Spanish to English)
Monitor Progress every week
Student is on track- continue
intensity of instruction; decrease
frequency of monitoring to 1x/mo
Mid-year cutoff low risk
Mid-year cutoff at risk
Adapted from DIBELS/IDEL Research Team 2006
51
Nonsense Word Fluency
Tier 1+ Teach for Transfer (Spanish to English)
Monitor Progress every week
Student is not on track- implement
Research-based Tier 2 intervention;
include oral language component for ELs
Mid-year cutoff low risk
Mid-year cutoff at risk
Adapted from DIBELS/IDEL Research Team 2006
52
Scenario 2: Margarita
• Margarita came to the United States at the age of
one. She attends a bilingual school with an
early-exit program model; thus, she is
transitioning to English literacy instruction. Her
language proficiency scores on the Woodcock
Muñoz indicate she is a level 2 in English and
level 3 in Spanish.
53
FIRST GRADE - DIBELS
Decision Criteria – Beg
of Yr
Letter Naming Fluency (LNF)
At Risk
0-24
Some Risk
25-36
Margarita
27
Low Risk
37+
Phoneme Segmentation
Fluency (PSF)
Deficit
0-9
Emerging
10-34
30
Established
35+
Nonsense Word Fluency
(NWF)
At Risk
0-12
Some Risk
13-23
Low Risk
24+
11
54
FIRST GRADE - IDEL
Decision Criteria –
Beg of Yr
Margarita
Fluidez en nombrar letras (FNL)
Letter Naming Fluency
At Risk
0-19
19
Some Risk
20-34
Low Risk
35+
Fluidez en la Segmentación de
Fonemas (FSF)
Phoneme Segmentation Fluency
Deficit
0-34
31
Emerging
35-49
Established
50+
Fluidez en las Palabras sin Sentido
(FPS)
Nonsense Word Fluency
At Risk
0-24
Some Risk
25-34
Low Risk
35+
12
Picture
Margarita
– Nonsense
Word
Fluency
1. Identify
5. Review
3Support
Support
Need
Outcomes
for
Support
55
Nonsense Word Fluency
Tier 2+ Research based intervention L2; monitor
weekly
Continue intensity of instruction
and monitoring
Mid-year cutoff low risk
Mid-year cutoff at risk
Adapted from DIBELS/IDEL Research Team 2006
Outcomes
Driven
Moel
a Picture
Margarita
–
Nonsense
Word
Fluency
1. Identify
5. Review
Support
Support
Need
Outcomes
forin
Support
56
Nonsense Word Fluency
Tier 2+ Research based intervention L2; monitor
weekly
Increase intensity of Intervention:
1) Increase intervention fidelity
2) Increase time
3) Smaller Group Size
Mid-year cutoff low risk
Mid-year cutoff at risk
Adapted from DIBELS/IDEL Research Team 2006
57
Language Difference or
Disorder: Special
Education Eligibility
58
The Role of Assessment in Differentiating
Language Difference from Disability
• When EL students reach Tier 3 and special education is
considered, they should receive a comprehensive
evaluation.
• Cognitive assessment of ELs must include the native
language and English.
• Academic assessment of ELs must match the
language(s) of instruction.
• A bilingual profile of performance, based on students’
combined knowledge across languages, is a better
indicator of their abilities than treating them as “two
monolinguals in one” (Kester & Peña, 2002, n.p.).
• Assessment in both languages allows for a description of
what students know cumulatively.
59
Nondiscriminatory Assessment
• Not a single procedures or test
• A process
• A framework to consider relevant information
and data
▫ Guides data collection
▫ Data interpreted in a systematic manner
• Teams should refer to the work of Flanagan and
Ortiz and their Culture-Language Interpretive
Matrices.
60
Remember…
• All children have the capacity to learn a second
language to the level to which they can learn a first;
our language-learning capacity is not languagesystem specific; we are born with the capacity to
learn any language, not just a specific language.
• When a language is being developed, be it a first or
second language, the focus should initially be more
on basic skills; provide lots of contextual cues, such
as pictures and gestures.
• Whenever possible, new concepts and skills should
be introduced in the child’s strongest language
system so as to capitalize on existing skills and
increase learning efficiency.
61
Five Questions
• What is the role of the speech language
pathologist in the RTI process for ELs?