Examining the Relationships between Reading Achievement and Tutoring Duration and Content for Gifted Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students from Low-Income Backgrounds

Abstract

This article describes a study designed to examine the relationship of tutoring in specific reading comprehension strategies to gains in reading achievement for children enrolled in self contained classrooms for gifted students from low-income, culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds and heterogeneous with respect to reading achievement. Participants were 58 students in grades 3–5, including 12 English learners. Eleven adult tutors received training in decoding and 3 basic and 3 higher level reading comprehension strategies consistent with the district's reading program and adapted to include increasing levels of challenge and support for English learners. Scores on a standardized reading achievement test and an assessment of reading fluency served as outcome measures. Findings suggest that tutoring in decoding and higher level reading comprehension strategies supported gains in reading achievement. Gifted students who are English learners appear to benefit from tutoring in decoding and the full range of lower and higher level reading comprehension strategies.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alonzo

, & Tindal

(2004). Analysis of reading fluency and comprehension measures for fourth-grade students (Tech. Rep. No. 27). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon, College of Education, Behavioral Research and Teaching. Retrieved March 17, 2006, from http://brt.uoregon.edu/tech_reports.htm

Bernal

(2005, November). Bilingual gifted students. Distinguished Lecture Series, San Diego City Schools, San Diego, CA.

Bernal

E. M.

Jr. (1978). The identification of gifted Chicano children. In Baldwin

A. Y.

, Gear

G. H.

, & Lucito

L. J.

(eds.), Educational planning for the gifted (pp. 14–17). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.

Betts

J. R.

, Zau

A. C.

, & King

(2005). From blueprint to reality: San Diego's education reforms. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California, San Francisco. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED486459)

Block

C. C.

(2004). Teaching comprehension: The comprehension process approach. Boston: Pearson.

Block

C. C.

, & Pressley

(Eds.). (2002). Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices. New York: Guilford.

Collins

N. D.

, & Alex

N. K.

(1995). Gifted readers and reading instruction (Report No. EDO-CS-95-04). Bloomington, IN: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading, English, and Communication. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED379637)

CTB McGraw-Hill. (2000). California Achievement Test, Sixth Edition Survey. Monterey, CA: Author.

CTB McGraw-Hill. (n.d.). California English Language Development Test. Monterey, CA: Author.

10.

De Avila

(1997). Setting expected gains for non and limited English proficient students (NCBE Resource Collection Series No. 8). Retrieved January 5, 2007, from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/resource/setting

11.

Denton

C. A.

, Anthony

J. L.

, Parker

, & Hasbrouck

J. E.

(2004). Effects of two tutoring programs on the English reading development of Spanish-English bilingual students. The Elementary School Journal, 104, 289–305.

12.

Doherty

R. W.

, Hilberg

R. S.

, Pinal

, & Tharp

R. G.

(2003). Five standards and student achievement. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 1 (1), 1–24.

13.

Elbaum

, Vaughn

, Hughes

M. T.

, & Moody

S. W.

(2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 605–619.

14.

Fountas

I. C.

, & Pinnell

G. S.

(2001). Guiding readers and writers (grades 3–6): Teaching comprehension, genre, and content literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

15.

Fox

(2001). Open Gate. Gifted Education Communicator, 32 (4), 27–29.

16.

Fuchs

L. S.

, Fuchs

, Hosp

, & Jenkins

J. R.

(2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 239–256.

17.

Gersten

, & Baker

(2000). What we know about effective instructional practices for English-language learners. Exceptional Children, 66, 454–470.

18.

González

(2002). Advanced cognitive development and bilingualism. In Castellano

J. A.

& Díaz

E. I.

(eds.), Reaching new horizons: Gifted and talented education for culturally and linguistically diverse students (pp. 47–75). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

19.

Granada

A. J.

(2002). Addressing the curriculum, instruction, and assessment needs of the gifted bilingual/bicultural student. In Castellano

J. A.

& Diaz

E. I.

(eds.), Reaching new horizons: Gifted and talented education for culturally and linguistically diverse students (pp. 133–153). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

20.

Hakuta

, Butler

Y. G.

, & Witt

(2000). How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? (Policy Report 2000–1). Santa Barbara, CA: University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute.

21.

Harvey

, & Goudvis

(2000). Strategies that work. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.

22.

Hasbrouck

, & Tindal

(2005). Oral reading fluency: 90 years of measurement (Tech. Rep. No. 33). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon, College of Education, Behavioral Research and Teaching. Retrieved March 17, 2006, from http://brt.uoregon.edu/tech_reports.htm

23.

Ihnot

(1992). Read naturally. St. Paul, MN: Read Naturally.

24.

Jiménez

R. T.

(2002). Fostering the literacy development of Latino students. Focus on Exceptional Children, 34 (6), 1–10.

25.

Kitano

M. K.

(2005, November). Reading comprehension tutoring strategies for gifted children at risk. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Gifted Children, Louisville, KY.

26.

Kitano

M. K.

, & Espinosa

(1995). Language diversity and giftedness: Working with gifted English language learners. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 18, 234–254.

27.

Kitano

M. K.

, & Pedersen

K. S.

(2002). Action research and practical inquiry: Teaching gifted English learners. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 26, 132–147.

28.

Kuhn

M. R.

, & Stahl

S. A.

(2003). Fluency: A review of developmental and remedial practices. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 3–21.

29.

McLoughlin

J. A.

, & Lewis

R. B.

(2005). Assessing students with special needs (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

30.

Morrow

L. M.

, & Woo

D. G.

(2001). Tutoring programs for struggling readers: The America Reads challenge. New York: Guilford Press.

31.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Findings and determinations of the National Reading Panel by topic areas. Retrieved November 28, 2006, from http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/findings.cfm

32.

NCE scores. (2004). Retrieved February 24, 2006, from http://allpsych.com/stats/unit3/09.html

33.

Office ofthe Deputy Secretary. (2001). Evidence that tutoring works. Washington, DC: Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation Service. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED464343)

34.

Ogawa

R. T.

, & Malen

(1991). Towards rigor in reviews of multivocal literature. Applying the exploratory case study method. Review of Educational Research, 61, 265–286.

35.

Pikulski

J. J.

, & Chard

D. J.

(2005). Fluency: Bridge between decoding and reading comprehension. Reading Teacher, 58, 510–519.

36.

Pressley

(2002). Comprehension strategies instruction: A turn-of-the-century status report. In Block

C. C.

& Pressley

(eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 11–27). New York: Guilford.

37.

Rasinski

, Blachowicz

, & Lems

(Eds.). (2006). Fluency instruction. Research-based best practices. New York: Guilford.

38.

Robisheaux

J. A.

(2002). The intersection of language, high potential, and culture in gifted English as a second language students. In Castellano

J. A.

& Diaz

E. I.

(eds.), Reaching new horizons: Gifted and talented education for culturally and linguistically diverse students (pp. 154–174). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

39.

Rudner

L. M.

, & Schater

W. D.

(2002). What teachers need to know about assessment. Washington, DC: National Education Association.

40.

Salvia

, & Ysseldyke

J. E.

(2004). Assessment in special and inclusive education (9th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

41.

San Diego City Schools. (2004). San Diego City Schools fact sheet: Literacy framework. Retrieved June 15, 2005, from http://www.sandi.net/comm/schools/LiteracyFramework.htm

42.

San Diego Unified School District. (2005). GATE program evaluation report. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from http://studata.sandi.net/programstudies/reports/GATE_Report_2005.pdf

43.

Slavin

R. E.

, Madden

N. A.

, & Chambers

(2001). One million children: Success for all. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

44.

Snow

(2002). Tutoring. In Barley

Helping at-risk students meet standards: A synthesis of evidence-based classroom practices (pp. 65–77). Aurora, CO: Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED475904)

45.

State of California. (2006). Standardized testing and reporting program: STAR help. Retrieved February 24, 2006, from http://star.cde.ca.gov/star2004/help_scoreexplanations.asp

46.

Therrien

W. J.

(2004). Fluency and comprehension gains as a result of repeated reading: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 252–261.

47.

Thompson

M. S.

, DiCerbo

K. E.

, Mahoney

, & MacSwan

(2002). ¿Exito en California? Validity critique of language program evaluations and analysis of English learner test scores. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10 (7). Retrieved August 6, 2006, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n7

48.

U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). America reads: Archived information. Retrieved January 5, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/inits/americareads/index.html

49.

VanTassel-Baska

, & Sher

(2003). Accelerating learning experiences in core content areas. In VanTassel-Baska

& Little

C. A.

(eds.), Content-based curriculum for high-ability learners (pp. 27–46). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

50.

Wasik

B. A.

(1997). Volunteer tutoring programs. Do we know what works? Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 282–287.

51.

Wasik

B. A.

(1998). Volunteer tutoring programs in reading: A review. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 266–292.

52.

Zimmerman

, & Keene

E. O.

(1997). Mosaic of thought: Teaching comprehension in a reader's workshop. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.