Hill Publishing Group | contact@hillpublisher.com

Hill Publishing Group

Location:Home / Journals / The Educational Review, USA /

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2022.04.003

Effects of Curriculum, Socioeconomic Status and Gender on L2 English Reading Acquisition for Students in Grade 1

Date: April 28,2022 |Hits: 366 Download PDF How to cite this paper

Sunaina Shenoy1,*, Kathryn Overton2, Nisha M. Rao3

1Department of Special Education, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.

2Department of Political Science, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.

3Department of Psychology, St. Joseph’s College, Bangalore, India.

*Corresponding author: Sunaina Shenoy

Abstract

This longitudinal study was targeted at (a) measuring L2 English reading acquisi-tion across the school year using progress-monitoring tools and; (b) describing the effects of independent variables on the reading growth trajectory for students across first grade. Participants included 368 students in Grade 1 (ages 6-7 years), representing low-cost, middle-cost and high-cost schools in Bangalore, India. We utilized a mixed-effects hierarchical growth model to observe growth in their reading abilities. The results suggested that curriculum had the most significant and positive effect on skills acquisition, irrespective of gender or socio-economic status. These results will shed light on the linguistic context of learning English as a second language; reading assessment and intervention practices in the Indian context; and the implications on students from low-cost schools who do not have access to adequate reading assessment and instruction.

References

Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Aggarwal, S. (1991). Three language formula: An educational problem. Gyan Publishing House.

Anderson, D., Alonzo, J., Tindal, G., Farley, D., Irvin, P. S., Lai, C. F., ... and Wray, K. A. (2014). Technical Manual: easyCBM. Technical Report# 1408. Behavioral Research and Teaching.

Annual status of education report. (2016). ASER Centre, New Delhi.

Chiu, M. M. and McBride-Chang, C. (2006). Gender, context, and reading: A comparison of students in 43 countries. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(4), 331-362.

Deno, S. L. (2003). Developments in curriculum-based measurement. The Journal of Special Education, 37(3), 184-192.

Dixon, P., Schagen, I., and Seedhouse, P. (2011). The impact of an intervention on children’s reading and spelling ability in low-income schools in India. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 22(4), 461-482.

Ehri, L. C. (2002). Reading processes, acquisition, and instructional implications. Dyslexia and Literacy: Theory and Practice, 167-186.

Gelman, A. (2006). Multilevel (hierarchical) modeling: what it can and cannot do. Technometrics, 48(3), 432-435.

Gillon, G. T. (2005). Phonological awareness: Effecting change through the integration of research findings. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36(4), 346-349.

Goffreda, C. T. and DiPerna, J. C. (2010). An empirical review of psychometric evidence for the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills. School Psychology Review, 39(3), 463-483.

Good, R. H., Kaminski, R. A., and Cummings, K. (2011). DIBELS next. Cambium Learning.

Greene, W. H. (2003). Econometric analysis. Pearson Education India.

Gupta, R. (2014). Change in Teaching Practices: Case of Phonics Instruction in India. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3911-3915.

Hart, B. and Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Paul H Brookes Publishing.

Kalia, V. (2007). Assessing the Role of Book Reading Practices in Indian Bilingual Children’s English Language and Literacy Development. Early Childhood Educ J., 35, 149-153 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-007-0179-2.

Kaminski, R. A. and Good, R. H. III. (1996). Toward a technology for assessing basic early literacy skills. School Psychology Review, 25(2), 215-227.

Keller-Margulis, M. A., Shapiro, E. S., and Hintze, J. M. (2008). Long-term diagnostic accuracy of curriculum-based measures in reading and mathematics. School Psychology Review, 37(3), 374-390.

Kieffer, M. J. (2011). Converging trajectories: Reading growth in language minority learners and their classmates, kindergarten to grade 8. American Educational Research Journal, 48(5), 1187-1225.

Kurrien, J. (2005). Notes for the Meeting of the National Focus Group on Teaching of English, and Note on Introduction of English at the Primary Stage. Ms., NFG-English.

LaBerge, D. and Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 293-323.

Levy, R. (2012). Probabilistic models in the study of language. Online Draft, Nov.

National Council of Educational Research and Training. (2011). National Curriculum Framework 2005 (No. id: 1138).

National Reading Panel (US), National Institute of Child Health, & Human Development (US). (2000). Report of the national reading panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.

Neff, L. (2015). The relationship between reading enjoyment, gender, socioeconomic status, and reading outcomes in PISA 2009.

Noble, K. G., McCandliss, B. D., and Farah, M. J. (2007). Socioeconomic gradients predict individual differences in neurocognitive abilities. Developmental Science, 10(4), 464-480.

Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. Oxford University Press.

Rabe-Hesketh, S. and Skrondal, A. (2008). Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using Stata. STATA press.

Ramachandran, V., Pal, M., Jain, S., Shekar, S., and Sharma, J. (2005). Teacher motivation in India (pp. 96-103). Discussion Paper. (Azim Premji Foundation, Bangalore, 2005).

Ramanathan, H. (2008). Testing of English in India: A developing concept. Language Testing, 25(1), 111-126.

Ramanathan, H. and Bruning, M. D. (2003). Reflection on Teaching Oral English Skills in India: A Research Report. Journal of the International Society for Teacher Education, 7(1), 48-55.

Ramanathan, V. and Atkinson, D. (1999). Individualism, academic writing, and ESL writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 45-75.

Scarborough, H. S. (1998). Early identification of children at risk for reading disabilities: Phonological awareness and some other promising predictors. Specific Reading Disability: A View of the Spectrum, 75-119.

Share, D. and Stanovich, K. (1995). Has the phonologial recording model of reading acquisition and reading disability led us astray. Issues in Education, 1, 1-57.

Stahl, S. A. and Murray, B. A. (1994). Defining phonological awareness and its relationship to early reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 221-234.

Wolf, M. and Katzir-Cohen, T. (2001). Reading fluency and its intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 211-239.

Zhang, Y., Tardif, T., Shu, H., Li, H., Liu, H., McBride-Chang, C., ... and Zhang, Z. (2013). Phonological skills and vocabulary knowledge mediate socioeconomic status effects in predicting reading outcomes for Chinese children. Developmental Psychology, 49(4), 665-671.

How to cite this paper

Effects of Curriculum, Socioeconomic Status and Gender on L2 English Reading Acquisition for Students in Grade 1

How to cite this paper:  Sunaina Shenoy, Kathryn Overton, Nisha M. Rao. (2022). Effects of Curriculum, Socioeconomic Status and Gender on L2 English Reading Acquisition for Students in Grade 1. The Educational Review, USA6(4), 133-146.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2022.04.003

Free HPG Newsletters

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from Hill Publishing Group.

Contact us

Hill Publishing Group

8825 53rd Ave

Elmhurst, NY 11373, USA

E-mail: contact@hillpublisher.com

Copyright © 2019 Hill Publishing Group Inc. All Rights Reserved.