Thank you for inviting us to attend the National Literacy Panel outreach meeting last Monday. I think it is important that the panel is listening to diverse voices and considering those concerns in relation to the research you are conducting. Upon reflection, I would like to share the following two concerns with the Panel. First, in light of the push for "scientifically-based research" that is repeated throughout the No Child Left Behind Act, I think that it will be essential to define what this term means. I am heartened to note that the panel is considering both qualitative and quantitative research. I would urge you also to make your criteria for scientific evidence and your selection process transparent and available to the public.

My second concern also relates to methodology. A great number of studies tend to focus on short-term, discrete, skills-based outcomes in reading and writing. I believe that limiting our research to the early years of schooling cuts short our ability to examine whether growth has been adequate to sustain the ultimate purposes of literacy (e.g., providing children with the skills to succeed in life). Due to the complex, developmental nature of literacy, I think it will be critical to include a major section of your report on longitudinal studies that track student outcomes beyond the first years of school, and that examine broad definitions of literacy. In other words, we need to address the question, literacy for what? Once students have mastered the basic skills of decoding and encoding, are they able to apply these skills toward success in school and in other endeavors?

I appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback, and look forward to hearing more about the work of the panel as it develops.

Dear panel members,
After listening to the variety of needs expressed during the outreach session on September 24 in Washington, DC, I would like to make a request on behalf of myself and other technical assistance providers who help educators and schools with literacy for language minority students and second language learners:

Schools and educators under pressure to raise test scores in reading (often bypassing writing) tend to reach for quick and easy solutions. They often think that they can buy software or literacy packages which will help all students.

I would like to ask that your report help us TA providers to educate clients about essential factors in choosing and implementing literacy instruction for language minority and ELL students. We need to help educators to understand the complexity underlying the labels \'ELL student\' or \'LEP student,\' which obscure the variety of learning needs of these students. In addition, we TA providers also need to help educators to understand what a complex act \'literacy\' actually is.

I am very interested in the future outcomes of this panel. After 31 years of teaching ESL at the elementary level, ESL Masters from Brown University, and teaching a graduate course on the development of literacy among second language learners, this is of tremendous interest to me. I have these questions at present:

• What specifically were the outcomes of the two public outreach meetings in Los Angeles and Washington?
• What \"relevent\" literature will the panel of researchers be surveying?
• What documents will be analyzed?
• Have they formulated the research questions that will be used to guide them? If so, what are they?
• By \"evidence-based review of the research literature\", do they mean actual classroom practices that have been proven successful?
• Have they actually documented/ visited classrooms where literacy development of second language learners have been highly successful? They exist!

Thank you for the opportunity to comment and I hope I will be able to get a response.

My name is Alison Gabriele. I am representing RISLUS, the Research institute for the Study of Language in Urban Society based at the CUNY Graduate Center in New York. I am here on the behalf of the Institute's directors, Professors Gita Martohardjono and Ricardo Otheguy. There are currently 2 research areas that our institute would be interested in having this study address:

The first area addresses the relationship between first and second language syntax and reading skills. We have conducted a pilot study with Spanish-speaking kindergartners who are learning English as a second language. We have looked at the connection between syntactic knowledge in both their first language Spanish and their second language English, and performance on the Gates-McGinitie reading test. Specifically we've looked at knowledge of pronominal reference, coordination and subordination. Our preliminary results show a significant correlation between knowledge of these syntactic structures and pre-reading skills. Based on these results we are beginning to develop an intervention study for pre-schoolers focusing on these same aspects of syntax. Thus we would be very interested in learning of any other research that has empirically investigated the relationship between first and second language syntax and literacy.

Our second area of interest addresses the development of academic literacy in a second language. In this area we would be interested in any research that has investigated to what degree proficiency in the first language effects the acquisition of academic literacy in the second language. RISLUS is currently looking at community college placement tests for ESL learners. We are interested in assessing literacy in the L1 as well as in L2 English. For this reason we would like to know of any valid and reliable literacy tests for languages other than English.

Thank you for listening our suggestions.

3 references submitted:

Porter, Rosalie. (Ed.). (2000). READ Perspectives: Testing in Texas (Vol. VII). Washington, DC: Center for Equal Opportunity.

Porter, Rosalie. (Ed.). (2001). READ Perspectives: The Cost of English Acquisition Programs (Vol. VIII). Washington, DC: Center for Equal Opportunity.

Porter, Rosalie. (Ed.). (2001). READ Perspectives: Educating Language Minority Children (Vol. VI). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.

It is gratifying to me to see that the literacy needs of language minority children are being addressed through the National Literacy Panel research.

I would like to put in my plea that the needs of American Indian children and youth be a part of this study. We work with teachers on the Navajo and Hopi reservations -- teaching and mentoring them in strategies for teaching literacy.

There is a growing body of research into the literacy needs of Native children, but most of the research currently is on other language minority groups. This makes it difficult for our teachers to "buy into" findings. Plus, the language environments of immigrants are often very different from those on reservations. This makes current research on language minority needs often of no use to our teachers.

Therefore, I would like to request that the needs of the multitude of Native children be addressed in the work of the Literacy Panel if at all possible.

• The National Reading Panel and ELLs: Phonemic Awareness (PDF)

• The National Reading Panel and ELLs: Phonics (PDF)

• The Relationship of Literacy and Oracy in First and Second Languages (PDF)

• Teachers' Beliefs and Knowledge About Bilingual Education (PDF)

My main question for the panel: What are the limits to the generalizations that can be drawn from the research, especially on young language minority children who are beginning literacy in English?

In my experience, investigators tend to overgeneralize from their findings, whether based on large-scale studies or case studies (there seem to be few in between), and only superficially recognize the many factors that enter into learning English literacy across the country. These include: Demographic factors, such as class, the mobility of families, the vitality of the children's speech community.

Unintended instructional outcomes such as the "mixed" ESL/ bilingual experience revealed by the 1990's longitudinal study in New York City.

Local instructional constraints, such as the organization of school time, and the assertiveness of appropriate teaching The interplay among constructs (as questionable as they may be), such as spoken and written English, comprehension and instruction, metalinguistic and linguistic entitities.

I have been involved with the Philadelphia Newcomer Center since its inception. I hope that your study can examine questions about literacy instruction for older children who arrive with interrupted or no formal education. What are the essential features of a competent effective program?

I also am concerned about fair testing for ELLs. While the English proficiency tests mandated by Title III may help with this situation, there are still high stakes tests in math and science required inn many districts and states . This issue has to do not only with item writing and test development but with the organization of the whole assessment system (cf. TX, DE, and PA for example). Furthermore, it needs to be clearer to educators the shortcomings of accommodations and translated tests. What existing assessment systems are fair to ELL\'s? If none are, what features need to be present in one that is?

I am also concerned about meeting the needs of ELL students in Special Education. The issues range from initial assessment (and how) and placement to program design and instructional strategies. A synthesis of what we know for how incidence populations would be very helpful to the field. What are effective measures in each of the issue areas mentioned above? What kinds of action research can classroom teachers engage in to advance their practice in regard to ESOL/Special Ed students?

I plan to attend, but will forego making oral statements. Interested in conclusive findings on types of programs that produce \"balanced bilingual\" students who achieve average or above average on national reading measures, especially in settings where resources are limited (urban, high poverty).

Realize that this particular question may be beyond the scope of the project, but will ask anyway—what is the literature saying about distinguishing students who are acquiring a second langauge from students who are acquiring a second language and may be suspected of having a learning disability (language-based disability).