Evaluating Responsiveness to Intervention for English-Language Learners: A Comparison of Response Modes on Letter Naming Rates

An alternating treatments design was used to compare the effects of two response modes on acquisition and retention rates of letter naming fluency performance (LNF) by six kindergarten English Language Learners (ELLs) performing below the average letter naming level and slope of other ELL classmates. With equal amounts of practice opportunities, ELLs practiced by orally reading printed letters (see/say) or practiced by pointing to a printed letter that was orally read to them (hear/point). The see/say intervention practiced printed letter sounds to enhance oral reading competence. Alternatively, the hear/point intervention confirmed a non-verbal recognition of oral letter sounds to increase attention and information processing of oral and printed letters prior to an oral LNF assessment. The see/say intervention was moderately more effective on LNF rates than the hear/point intervention for all ELLs on the acquisition assessment and for 4 of the 6 ELLs on the retention assessment. Results are discussed in terms of efficiency as well as effectiveness when making decisions about selecting and implementing responsiveness to intervention assessments when ELLs students are not responding to an effective general education program.