AUTHOR:KIMBERLY LENTERS TITLE: No half measures: Reading instruction for young second-language learners SOURCE:The Reading Teacher 58 no4 328-36 D 2004/Ja 2005 COPYRIGHT:The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and it is reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article in violation of the copyright is prohibited. To contact the publisher: http://www.reading.org/

The timing of second-language reading instruction for young learners appears to be a subject fraught with little data and much conflicting popular opinion (Fitzgerald, 1995). In their report for the National Research Council, Snow, Bums, and Griffin (1998) made this observation:

Surprisingly, given the many millions of initially non-English-speaking children who have acquired literacy in English in the United States, and given the many millions of dollars expended on efforts to evaluate bilingual education programs, straightforward, data-based answers to [specific questions regarding acquisition of second-language literacy] are not available, (p. 234)

Indeed, to the novice or the uninitiated, some assertions regarding reading instruction made within the field of bilingual education even appear to be contradictory. Here is one case in point: Some contend that second-language reading instruction must be delayed until first-language reading is firmly established (Weber, 1991; Wong-Filmore & Valdez, as cited in Anderson & Roit, 1996); others question the validity of waiting that long (Fitzgerald & Noblit, 1999). With seeming disagreement in the research community, how are educators to address the ubiquitous concern regarding second-language reading instruction for young learners? Given that approximately one fifth of school-age children in the United States speak a first language other than English (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000), this question is of critical importance. Fitzgerald's (1995) research review of English as a second language (ESL) reading instruction contains the following sweeping observation: "The spectrum of research on ESL reading in the United States might best be characterized as having considerable breadth, but little depth" (p. 115). In the absence of detailed longitudinal studies, a return to first principles regarding bilingualism and the young child seems the wisest approach to untangling the conflicting interpretations drawn from limited research. In an era when political rhetoric and budget constraints seek to determine educational policy, it is crucial that teachers have a solid understanding of the educational needs of young bilingual children. When speaking of second-language reading acquisition, it is important to note the age and literacy background of the second-language learner; one observation does not fit all. Young second-language learners have unique needs to be addressed. In this article I attempt to survey the literature on bilingual reading for young children, keeping these considerations in mind. I then go on to address the issue of reading instruction in culturally and linguistically diverse schools. Theoretical framework Forty years ago, few thought to ask whether or not second-language reading instruction should be undertaken with young second-language learners. The prevailing notion of the melting pot and the assumption that immigrants must assimilate the host culture as quickly as possible left little room to question the methodology of educating second- language children. As pluralism and multicultural-ism came to be embraced in the 1960s and 1970s, the education of minority children came to be widely scrutinized. Much of that scrutiny focused on the affective benefits accrued to children when their home culture was not only recognized but also celebrated. Paralleling this phenomenon was the rise of bilingualism in countries such as Canada and the United States. While countries in Europe, for example, had been effectively offering dual-language programs for decades, administration of bilingual programs in Canada and the United States appeared to be a novel concept. In Canada dual-language programs were developed with the goal of promoting bilingualism, whereas in the United States the 1968 Bilingual Education Act was developed as a gesture to the Latino community, which up until then had been largely ignored (Baker & Hakuta, 1997). The notion of childhood bilingualism soon found itself under the lens of linguistic researchers, who began to ask how children cope cognitively with more than one language in their lives. Cummins's (1979) seminal work on communicative competence, his theory of linguistic interdependence, and threshold hypothesis have provided an enduring theoretical framework for approaching bilingualism in education and an answer to questions regarding possible cognitive confusion in bilingual children. Interdependence theory states that development of competence in a second language is partially a function of the type of competence already developed in the first language at the time when intensive exposure to the second language begins (Cummins). Threshold hypothesis suggests that there are threshold levels of linguistic competence that bilingual children must achieve in both of their languages for two reasons: to avoid cognitive disadvantages and to allow the, benefits of bilingualism to influence cognitive functioning (Cummins & Swain, 1986). Central to these theories is the concept that there are enormous cognitive benefits to bilingualism, such as cognitive flexibility, superior language skills, and a higher IQ. These benefits are found only in additive forms of bilingualism, where careful support, development, and maintenance of the first language are provided (Cummins & Swain). Cognitive benefits support the provision of bilingual education for young second- language learners (and, one might argue, for all young learners), but further import is added when the negative effects of some types of immersion programs are considered. When young second-language children in submersion programs are immersed in the target language and receive no instruction in their first language, the results are typically a loss over time of the first language--in addition to cognitive and affective difficulties in the immersion program (Cummins & Swain, 1986). Unfortunately, many English immersion programs fall into the submersion category. Gunderson (2000) spoke of the difficulties of minority-language high school students who have been characterized by high dropout rates and poor academic achievement when their teachers fail to take an interest in these students' first languages. It appears that significant measures should be taken to prevent first-language loss. The picture that emerges from this discussion is that children experience important cognitive (in addition to affective) gains through bilingualism. These gains, however, are only experienced when both languages develop to a point of proficiency where transfer can take place between the two. It is this dual proficiency that we must be cognizant of when considering reading instruction for young second-language learners. In general, the development of this proficiency will mean that bilingual children will receive dual- language instruction throughout their primary school years, with no half measures in either language. If there are enormous benefits to bilingualism, why has bilingual education become a controversial subject? Aside from issues of funding, one major source of contention stems from the critical shortage of trained bilingual teachers in the United States. This shortage results in teachers not trained in ESL pedagogy being employed in bilingual classrooms (see Fitzgerald, 1995; Garcia, 2000) and delivering programs where English dominates the instruction (Weber, 1991). Too often, half measures abound. In an ideal world, children would receive instruction in their first language to the point where they were proficient in all aspects of it. At that time transition to second-language learning would begin. This typically would occur somewhere around the age of 7. Reading instruction in the second language would seek to build on what the child knew about reading in the first language and would encourage transfer of skills. This type of dual instruction currently takes place in locales where numbers warrant and school boards have embraced the theory behind interdependence and language threshold (Cummins, 1979; Garcia, 2000). However, as I will discuss later, this is not the sole route to success for bilingual children. Cutbacks to bilingual programs in some regions, in addition to the growing multiplicity of languages spoken within North America, make it virtually impossible for all public school systems to provide the ideal early education outlined above. In this article I wish to address the needs of these young bilingual students, and so the question turns from whether second-language literacy instruction should be undertaken with young children to how it is best achieved.

Interpreting the research The arguments for first-language maintenance--difficulties associated with first- language loss and the positive effects of first-language maintenance--are compelling and provide the impetus to find a method of second-language instruction that builds on research and not simply on fiscal or political ideology. Untangling the findings as they pertain to young second-language learners takes some effort, however. For instance, one might interpret Cummins's (1999) work as suggesting that young children must be given a strong first-language base in their early years of schooling before formal instruction in the new language is undertaken. Indeed, Cummins's stated that "the better developed the conceptual foundation of children's first language, the more likely children are to develop similarly high levels of conceptual abilities in their second language" (p. 51). Longitudinal studies have found that immigrant children, from advantaged families, who arrived in the United States at ages 8 and 9 with first-language literacy skills already developed, performed better in U.S. schools than younger children, ages 5 and 6, who came without developed first-language literacy skills. It took more than 7 to 10 years for these children to perform at grade level in English, as opposed to 5 to 7 years for the older children. The children in this study entered submersion programs, and the younger children did not receive formal first-language instruction, which accounted for their difficulties (Collier & Thomas, as cited in Snow et al., 1998). However, this evidence does not imply that there is a critical order in which bilingual learners must learn to read. Verhoeven's (1994) study, examining linguistic interdependence among Turkish children learning Dutch as a second language, found that transfer between two languages can proceed in two directions at the level of literacy skills. Chang and Watson (as cited in Garcia, 2000) did an investigation of predictable texts used in the reading instruction of Chinese bilingual kindergarten students who attended weekend Chinese school. It showed that these children transferred what they knew about reading in English to their Chinese reading. This phenomenon is also demonstrated in Canadian French immersion programs. Children first receive formal instruction in second-language reading and then move on to begin formal first-language reading instruction in the third or fourth grade. The documented success of French immersion programs that actively promote proficiency in both languages does support the finding that language of initial literacy need not be the child's native language. As the various findings are untangled, a picture emerges of young second-language children successfully learning to read in a new language, provided they have reached an oral language threshold that enables them to handle the vocabulary of simple text geared toward young emergent readers. This picture is qualitatively different from that of the older second-language reader. However, the success of these young readers will continue only if they are taught to read in their first language and enabled to develop a level of reading proficiency in it that allows interdependence between the two languages to occur in their elementary school years. These specific findings also provide direction for undertaking second-language reading instruction with young children.

Instructional guidelines Many researchers have supplied guidelines for second-language reading instruction. Agreement appears to be present in the idea that recent findings in first-language reading acquisition have much to contribute to the area of second-language reading instruction. (See Figure 1 for a summary of the similarities and differences between first- and second- language readers.) In the remainder of this article I explore key instructional focuses that help young second-language readers to attain proficiency in both of their languages. (I also provide guidelines that I hope will lead to successful reading instruction for young second-language learners.)

Oral language proficiency Reading in the first or second language is founded upon oral knowledge of the language. One cannot read with comprehension a language one cannot speak and comprehend; reading instructors of young second-language learners need to be mindful of this. While a definitive level of the oral proficiency essential for reading instruction to begin is difficult to pinpoint, it appears that readers must be familiar with a minimum of 95% of the vocabulary in the text for comprehension to occur (Laufer, as cited in Carrell & Grabe, 2002). This belief corresponds with the widely accepted first-language axiom that independent reading only occurs at the level of 95% word recognition and above and works to the advantage of young second-language learners--given the availability (and age-appropriateness) of texts that are geared toward young first-language learners and that contain simple, high-frequency vocabulary. But it also highlights the need to continually work at increasing the vocabulary of young second-language readers and to address problematic vocabulary within any text given to them. Cummins and Swain (1986) reminded us that if second-language learners have reached an acceptable level of conversational ability, we must not assume proficiency has been reached. Because it takes young second-language learners between 7 and 10 years to reach the academic proficiency of their first-language peers, explicit attention must be given to building vocabulary throughout the primary and intermediate years of education. Droop and Verhoeven (2003) found that extensive vocabulary training is crucial for efficient second-language reading comprehension: Deep understanding of vocabulary must be fostered on the semantic level through multiple exposures to words in a variety of genres, subject areas, and contexts. Rereading of text, advocated by Samuels (2002), helps with this vocabulary development. The use of graded readers is a systematic method for addressing vocabulary acquisition through reading (Nation & Meara, 2002). Care must be taken, however, to provide text that is at least somewhat reflective of natural speech, if this mode of vocabulary acquisition is to have a positive impact on oral development (Anderson & Roit, 1996). It is noted throughout recent second-language literature that second-language students have little opportunity within the classroom to simply converse (see Au, 2000; Toohey, 1998). Meaningful opportunity for oral interaction is one way teachers can foster vocabulary acquisition for young learners. For second-language learners, it is particularly important to develop the child's familiarity with and comprehension of oral speech, which in turn assists vocabulary knowledge for reading development. (See Figure 2 for ideas to promote oral language.) Two more notes of caution are needed here. First, negative correlations have been found to exist between the emphasis on accuracy in pronunciation and grammar with young second-language learners (Fitzgerald, 1995). Second, Cunningham and Stanovich (1998) reminded us that most first-language vocabulary growth in a child's lifetime occurs indirectly through language exposure rather than direct teaching. It has been demonstrated that second-language vocabulary acquisition should not be assumed to be complete when only incidental vocabulary teaching is used (Nation & Meara, 2002). The notes of caution are a reminder that vocabulary building to bolster second-language reading should be undertaken in a manner that is thoughtful and attentive to the affective and cognitive needs of young second-language children. Vocabulary must be attended to but not belabored or fostered in isolated drills that serve as replacements for meaningful oral interaction. Some evidence is emerging that second-language reading instruction may benefit second-language orality. Dlugosz's (2000) pilot study was designed to teach English to beginning second-language kindergarten students while simultaneously teaching them to read in English. These children were not yet reading in their first language, Polish. Dlugosz had students engage in multiple listenings with recordings of simple story books. The test group members, who had been taught the graphic forms of words used in the storybook series and how to reconstruct the story for themselves using copies of the text, not only learned to read in English but also developed stronger speaking and comprehension skills than the control group, which had been instructed with an emphasis on oral response and picture drawing. Children in the test group also demonstrated much better retention rates for understanding and speaking, as well as apparent increased eagerness to speak in English. Although one might find the approach to reading instruction used in this study somewhat restrictive and therefore not advisable as the sole methodology for second-language reading instruction, the findings do lend support to the mounting evidence that reading in a second language can assist oral development in it (Anderson & Roit, 1996; Gersten, as cited in Fitzgerald, 2000).

Alphabet instruction Many in the second-language reading field have observed that second-language learners, whether from backgrounds that employ a similar alphabetic system or backgrounds with completely dissimilar orthographies, benefit from explicit instruction in the second-language sound-symbol system (Carrell & Grabe, 2002; Wallace, 2001). In first-language reading acquisition, Adams (1994) contended that not only is difficulty at the word-recognition level a leading cause of reading delay, but also difficulty at the letter-recognition level is significant as well. For some, the difficulty may lie with simply having incomplete alphabetic knowledge at the single-letter level, but for many the difficulty lies in incomplete knowledge of likely letter combinations. One method of phonics instruction that has been found to be particularly effective with young second-language children is the Jolly Phonics program (Lloyd, 1993). Jolly Phonics is a multisensory program that employs systematic, cumulative over-learning of the names, sounds, and symbols of the English alphabet, as well as the common blends and digraphs (i.e., it combines phonemic awareness training with early phonic skill). In response to the challenge that children must first learn to read in their native language, while early second-language instruction focuses on speaking and listening, Kwan and Willows (1998) undertook a study designed to systematically teach English sounds and symbols to kindergarten and grade I second-language children using the Jolly Phonics program. These children, who were in the very early stages of English-language learning, had not learned to read in their native language. The researchers found that children taught through the program outperformed their untrained first-language counterparts in auditory discrimination and phoneme blending and equaled them in phoneme segmentation. The study demonstrated that there is no need to continue with the prevailing assumption that young second-language learners have acoustic-based processing weaknesses that require a focus on literacy development in their first language before their second. For young children, explicit, systematic instruction in the second- language sounds and symbols does appear to address perceived auditory weaknesses, just as it does for first-language children with poorly developed phonemic awareness.

Comprehension Vocabulary and orthography are two important areas that must be addressed; however, comprehension is also an area of difficulty for the second-language learner, particularly when the teacher does not speak the first language or there are no other children of similar background present in the class. The language experience approach to teaching reading has long been a useful method for instructing young first-language children in early reading. Its deployment in second- language reading not only allows the young child to understand the encoding of oral language into written language but also provides tremendous opportunity to use concepts, contexts, and language that are important and meaningful to the second-language child. In working with this highly meaningful text, comprehension (in addition to vocabulary and orthographic development) is greatly enhanced. Shared reading methodology, widely used with top-down reading approaches, is also helpful for comprehension building as texts are jointly read and reread by students and teacher. Text type is also an area of comprehension concern when working with second- language readers. Some types of illustrations found in many western-world texts may be confusing and unfamiliar to second-language students (Gregory, 1996). Anderson and Roit (1996) made a similar observation regarding the efficacy of using text that contains culturally familiar content. They extend this notion to the provision of culturally familiar content area text and to inviting parents to share their personal cultural expertise. Seeking to balance instruction with texts whose content is culturally sensitive to these learners helps to bridge comprehension gaps. Where this is not possible, concerted effort is necessary to fill in the missing background knowledge for second-language children. Gregory (1996) addressed issues of comprehension by forming strong home-school links with students' families (even those with limited or no second-language proficiency). She described a helpful early reading process that recognizes the parent as the expert in the first language and the child as the expert in the second language, simultaneously honoring both languages.

Children take home "key words" from classroom reading sessions, practice "matching" them to words and pictures on a card and spelling them.... If possible, the caregiver writes the words in the child's mother-tongue on the back and discusses the word with the child, encouraging him/her to use the word in sentences. With this kernel of key words, the child practices making sentences and completing a variety of word games. The child writes the sentences made in an exercise book which, like the books used in many community classes, is specifically designed for this purpose, (p. 109)

This practice, when thoroughly explained to parents, fosters comprehension and encourages transfer skills between the two languages in accordance with interdependence theory. Where parents were not available or able to fill this role, Gregory employed older siblings to mediate the process. In addition, book packages would be sent home with copies or translations of the text in the child's first language. Parents or older siblings and children were then encouraged to share the book in both languages, listen to audiotapes of the book in both languages (if possible), use puppets or figurines to act out the story, and play games with the words to build vocabulary. Similar programs exist in the United States through family literacy initiatives (Paratore, Melzi, & Krol-Sinclair, 1999). Another method for developing comprehension is to allow students to respond to text in their first language, rather than discouraging first-language orality in the second- language classroom. Focusing on reading comprehension as a gateway to oral language development rather than on proficient language as a prerequisite to reading helps increase the understanding of text and, simultaneously, oral proficiency (Anderson & Roit, 1996). Many creative and useful techniques exist for fostering comprehension in young second-language readers. That comprehension is at the heart of reading, be it first or second language, must be a reminder to educators to give attention to this important area from the beginning of second-language reading instruction. (See Figure 3 for ideas to develop comprehension.)

Respect for first-language reading practices Underpinning vocabulary, orthography, and comprehension development, and perhaps most important, is the requirement that the schools in which children receive their second-language instruction support and celebrate the first language. Programs that experience the greatest success not only promote literacy in the home but also recognize the first-language literacy practices of the children's families. This is true of family literacy initiatives (see Paratore et al., 1999), home-school interactions (Gregory, 1996), and classroom practice in general (Au, 2000). The reasons for this positive correlation are twofold: Children bring skills and abilities from their first language, which must be seen as assets not setbacks (Anderson & Roit, 1996; Au, 2000; Gregory, 1996); when parents believe their literacy beliefs and practices are respected and upheld, they become strong supporters of the second-language school practices and effective allies for their children in the negotiation of meaning between their two languages. To this end, and in accordance with interdependence theory and threshold hypothesis, schools and teachers need to work not only to honor first-language traditions but also to find ways to actively support the child's first-language reading acquisition. (See Figure 4 for a list of suggestions for supporting first-language reading instruction.)

Concluding thoughts Given present demographic realities, which find significant linguistic diversity in an ever-increasing number of regions worldwide, and the limited resources of school systems in general, it is critical to consider literacy practices that ensure success for young second-language children. Fitzgerald (1995) observed that ESL instructional philosophy contains much more debate than in the past about whether it is best to teach ESL reading by beginning with native-language instruction, by teaching native-language reading concurrently with ESL reading, or by solely teaching ESL reading. Even now, almost 10 years later, research findings continue to appear to be contradictory. Until more definitive longitudinal studies are completed, educators will need to keep three principles in mind. First, it is clear that when seeking to understand the needs of the bilingual child, age and previous literacy experience must be considered. Second, regardless of the order of literacy acquisition, the principle of developing proficiency in both languages at primary school will underlie all sound approaches. Considering programs or proposals that do not give credence to this or that advocate half measures will prove only a disservice to the bilingual child. Third, important discoveries in first- language reading research and their applicability to second-language reading acquisition should not undercut or circumvent what we know about how to help young bilingual children become successful and proficient in both of their languages. Children of diverse linguistic backgrounds are a fact in educational systems worldwide; embracing this diversity and building on first principles for the reading instruction these children receive seems the obvious and necessary approach. Their future depends on educators taking no half measures. ADDED MATERIAL Lenters is a doctoral student in the department of Language and Literacy Education at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver (2121 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada). E-mail [email protected].

References Adams, M.J. (1994). Modeling the connections between word recognition and reading. In R. Ruddell, M. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models -and processes of reading (4th ed., pp. 838-863). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Anderson, V., & Roit, M. (1996). Linking reading comprehension instruction to language development for language-minority students. Elementary School Journal, 96, 295-310. Au, K.H. (2000). Literacy instruction for young children of diverse backgrounds. In D.S. Strickland & L.M. Morrow (Eds.), Beginning reading and writing (pp. 35-45). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Baker, S., & Hakuta, K. (1997). Bilingual education and Latino civil rights. Retrieved November 29, 2003, from http://www.civilrightsproject.harvard.edu/research/latino97/Hakuta. pdf Bamford, J., & Day, R.R. (1998). Teaching reading. In W. Grabe (Ed.), Annual review of applied linguistics: Volume 18. Foundations of second language teaching (pp. 124- 141). New York: Cambridge University Press. Carrell, P.L., & Grabe, W. (2002). Reading. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (pp. 233-250). London: Edward Arnold. Clay, M.M. (1993). Reading recovery: A guidebook for teachers in training. Hong Kong: Heinemann. Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49,222-251. Cummins, J. (1999). Alternative paradigms in bilingual education research: Does theory have a place? Educational Researcher, 28(7), 26-32. Cummins, J., & Swain, M. (1986). Bilingualism in education: Aspects of theory, research, and practice. London: Longman. Cunningham, A.E., & Stanovich, K.E. (1998, Spring/Summer). What reading does for the mind. American Educator, 8-15. Dlugosz, D.W. (2000). Rethinking the role of reading in teaching a foreign language to young learners. ELT Journal, 54, 284-291. Droop, M., & Verhoeven, L. (2003). Language proficiency and reading ability in first- and second-language learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 78-103. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.38.1.4 Eskey, D. (2002). Reading and teaching of second language reading. TESOL Journal, 11, 5-9. Fitzgerald, J. (1995). English-as-a-second-language reading instruction in the United States: A research review. Journal of Reading Behavior, 27,115-149. Fitzgerald, J. (2000). How will bilingual/ESL programs in literacy change in the next millennium? Reading Research Quarterly, 35,520-523. doi: 10.1598/RRO.35.4.4 Fitzgerald, J., & Noblit, G.W. (1999). About hopes, aspirations, and uncertainty: First- grade English-language learners' emergent reading. Journal of Literacy Research, 31,133- 182. Garcia, G.E. (2000). Bilingual children's reading. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 813-834). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Grabe, W. (2002). Reading in a second language. In R. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 49-59). New York: Oxford University Press. Gregory, E. (1996). Making sense of a new world: Learning to read in a second language. London: Paul Chapman. Gunderson, L. (2000). Voices of the teenage diasporas. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43,692-707. Hudson, T. (1998). Theoretical perspectives on reading. In W. Grabe (Ed.), Annual review of applied linguistics: Volume 18. Foundations of second language teaching (pp. 43-60). New York: Cambridge University Press. Kwan, A.B., & Willows, D.M. (1998, December). Impact of early phonics instruction on children learning English as a second language. Paper presented at the National Reading Conference, Austin, TX. Lenters, K. (2003). The many lives of the cut-up sentence. The Reading Teacher, 56,535-536. Lloyd, S. (1993). The phonics handbook. Chigwell, UK: Jolly Learning. Nation, P., & Meara, P. (2002). Vocabulary. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (pp. 35-54). London: Edward Arnold. Paratore, J.R., Melzi, G., & Krol-Sinclair, B. (1999). What should we expect of family literacy? Experiences of Latino children whose parents participate in an inter- generational literacy project. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. 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 (pp. 166-183). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Snow, C.E., Burns, M.S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Stinson, K. (1982). Red is best. Toronto: Annick Press. Toohey, K. (1998). "Breaking them up, taking them away": ESL students in grade 1. TESOL Quarterly, 3, 61-84. U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Census 2000, summary file 3 from the World Wide Web. Retrieved November 29, 2003, from http://www.census.gov/population/cen2000/phc- t20/tab02.pdf Verhoeven, L.T. (1994). Transfer in bilingual development: The linguistic interdependence hypothesis revisited. Language Learning, 44, 381-415. Wallace, C. (2001). Reading. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages (pp. 143-160). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Weber, R. (1991). Linguistic diversity and reading in American society. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 97-119). White Plains, NY: Longman.

FIGURE 1 Similarities and differences In first- and second-language reading Requirements of first- and second-language readers: * alphabetic understanding * decoding skills * automaticity of sight vocabulary * overall fluency * development of metacognitive strategies that foster fluency and comprehension * text matched to reading level and interests * engagement in extensive reading Unique challenges second-language readers face: * sound/symbol dissimilarity or interference * oral vocabulary constraints * limitations due to background knowledge * difficulties with text structure (Bamford & Day, 1998; Carrell & Grabe, 2002; Eskey, 2002; Grabe, 2002; Hudson, 1998; Wallace, 2001)

GUIDELINES FOR SUCCESSFUL READING INSTRUCTION FOR YOUNG SECOND- LANGUAGE LEARNERS

Oral language * Develop the child's oral vocabulary to the point of basic communicative competence before attempting reading instruction. * Continue to work on vocabulary training with the child well beyond the point of basic communicative competence to ensure adequate vocabulary for increasingly more difficult text. * Provide opportunity for second-language children to converse in the classroom, being careful not to place undue emphasis on accurate speech.

Reading materials * Remember that the child must know 90% to 95% of the vocabulary in the text before that text is used for reading instructional purposes. * Use graded readers with second-language readers to ensure that text difficulty keeps pace with vocabulary development. But be sure to supplement with authentic literature first in read-alouds, then shared reading, and finally independent reading to ensure second-language readers are exposed to text that reflects natural speech. * Encourage and provide opportunity for rereading of text.

Phonemic awareness * Extend phonemic awareness training to include phonics instruction/using materials that teach sound-symbol correspondences in a multisensory and systematic manner.

Comprehension * Use a language experience approach to provide meaningful materials the child is able to read. * Pay attention to cultural biases in text and illustrations presented to young second- language learners. * Fill in the missing cultural information when materials must be used that are culturally unfamiliar to the learner. * When possible, use translations alongside English texts to enhance comprehension and support first-language reading skills. Parents and older siblings may be enlisted for this process. * Allow students to respond to text in their first language.

First-language reading support * Form strong home-school connections with the families of second-language learners. * Value the child's first language. * Find any means possible to ensure that the child receives reading instruction in his or her first language. FIGURE 2 Ideas to promote oral language for ESL reading development * Scaffold vocabulary development through prereading activity where children take turns with proficient English speakers discussing the illustrations of a story to predict its content prior to reading it. * Engage in repeated reading of simple, predictable texts such as Red Is Best (Stinson, 1982). New vocabulary and important text structures may be internalized through this method. * Tape recordings of simple stories and graded readers will allow ESL readers to independently engage in shared and repeated reading. * Highlight the vocabulary and story structure of favorite simple stories the children are learning to read, and have them reconstruct the stories in book-making activities. The activity will provide ESL learners with a growing library of personal texts they may read and reread for oral vocabulary and sight word development.

FIGURE 3 Ideas to develop ESL reading comprehension * Use language experience book-making methods to help ESL children make the connection between oral and written language, especially in the very early stages of their reading development. * Use of the cut-up sentence (Clay, 1993) provides a meaningful and engaging vehicle for the ESL child's voice in reading acquisition. Type or print the child's simple dictated stories. Then, with the help of a proficient English speaker, have the child cut the sentences into individual words and glue them into a premade blank booklet, which is later illustrated by the child (see Lenters, 2003, for an elaboration of this technique). * Involve parents or older siblings in the making of translations of favorite simple stories. These translations may be illustrated by the student for placement alongside the English version in the classroom library. * Encourage ESL speakers of the same language background to discuss stories they are reading in English in their native language. Together they will naturally support one another to address gaps in comprehension.

FIGURE 4 Supporting first-language reading acquisition * Encourage parents to engage in meaningful conversation and read in the first language with their children. * Allow the children to demonstrate what they can do in first-language reading. * Purchase first-language texts to match the second-language texts being used. * Find a bilingual volunteer to translate the text and make first-language translation audiotapes. * Help families find first-language resources within the community. * Advocate for after-hours provision of space within the school building for first- language instruction.