[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-536266-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-536266-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","considerations-for-multilingual-and-bidialectal-learners-recommendations-for-local-literacy-plans","Considerations for Multilingual and Bidialectal Learners - Recommendations for Local Literacy Plans","","Recommendations for local literacy planning focused on multilingual learners (MLLs) and bidialectal learners. The guidance outlines how to build a comprehensive early literacy screening system using culturally and linguistically authentic assessments, include MLLs in norming, and provide supports such as bilingual directions and accommodations. It emphasizes using multiple data sources, considering student performance relative to “true peers,” and leveraging language assets through explicit teaching of language similarities and differences, plus supported translanguaging in classrooms.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/exam/","Exam",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/considerations-for-multilingual-and-bidialectal-learners-recommendations-for-local-literacy-plans/536266/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/considerations-for-multilingual-and-bidialectal-learners-recommendations-for-local-literacy-plans/536266.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"McQueen","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-04","2026-10-10",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",5,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"How should early literacy screening be designed for multilingual and bidialectal learners?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Select and administer assessment tools that interpret scores for MLLs, include MLLs in norming when possible, and provide subtests in languages other than English using culturally and linguistically authentic measures.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"What questions help determine whether reading difficulties are related to language development or other factors?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Ask about English proficiency across listening, speaking, reading, and writing; whether reading difficulties appear in both the native language and English; delays in learning to talk; interrupted formal education; and whether cognitive functions such as phonological memory and phonemic awareness have been assessed.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What does “true peers” mean, and how should it be used in interpreting data?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"True peers are students similar in native language proficiency, English proficiency, country of origin, and/or time in the current school or program. Use a comparison group of at least three to five students to judge whether at-risk reading performance matches typical language development.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},536266,1792312630,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,95,99,104,109,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":93,"slug":94},70,"exam",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":96,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":98},"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":100,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":101,"show_sort_weight":102,"slug":103},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":105,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":106,"show_sort_weight":107,"slug":108},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":110,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":111,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":55,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":33,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":26,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":55,"preview_page_count":4},5909890329169,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","Considerations for Multilingual and Bidialectal Learners  \nRecommendations for Local Literacy Plans  \n1. Build a Comprehensive Screening System  \n• Select and administer appropriate early literacy screening assessment tools, considering whether the assessment:  \n■ Provides guidance on interpreting scores for MLLs.  \n■ Includes MLLs in the norming process.  \n■ Offers some or all subtests in a language(s) other than English.  \n■ Uses measures that are culturally and linguistically authentic rather than direct translations from English.  \n■ Provides guidance regarding when and how to present students with directions in their home language.  \n• Use bilingual or native language assessments, when possible, and provide testing supports and accommodations, as appropriate.  \n• Gather and use data from other data sources.  \n\n| OTHER SOURCES\u003Cbr>• Classroom observations\u003Cbr>• Interviews with students and families\u003Cbr>• Informal assessments\u003Cbr>• Home Language Surveys\u003Cbr>• Parent-teacher meetings\u003Cbr>• Student work and performance samples | OTHER INFORMATION\u003Cbr>• Family history of dyslexia/ reading difficulty\u003Cbr>• Students’ language skills in reading both their native language and English\u003Cbr>• Students’ exposure and experiences with both their native language and English\u003Cbr>• Students’ educational history\u003Cbr>• Student work and performance samples |\n| --- | --- |\n\nQuestions to Consider During Screening  \n• What level of English proficiency has the student achieved in each of the four language domains (listening, speaking, reading, writing)?  \n• Are reading difficulties present in both the native language and English?  \n• Did the student experience delay in learning to talk?  \n• Did the student experience limited or interrupted formal education?  \n• Have educators provided structured reading instruction and interventions?  \n• Have cognitive functions, such as rapid automatized naming, phonological memory, and phonemic awareness, been assessed? What were the results of such assessments?  \nMultilingual Learner (MLL)  \nA student that is developing proficiency in two or more languages.  \nBidialectal Learner  \nA student who uses two dialects of the same language.  \nEnglish Learner (EL)  \nA student who has qualified for English learner services under criteria of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), also used when students with EL status are cited or studied within research.  \nTrue Peers  \nStudents who are similar in their native language proficiency, English language proficiency, country of origin, and/or time in the current school or program.  \nTranslanguaging  \nThe use of multiple languages together in a single situation or task.  \nNewcomer  \nA preK-12 student born outside the United States who has arrived in the country in the last three years . Depending on the country of origin, a newcomer student may also be learning English.  \nImmigrant Children and Youth  \nA student status defined under ESSA (Title III) as individuals aged 3 through 21 who were not born in the United States and have attended less than three full academic years [in a U.S. school](in a U.S. school)(s) .  \nMigratory Children and Youth  \nA student who has moved to a new school district on his/her own or with a parent, spouse, or guardian who is a migratory worker (i.e. , has moved within the past 36 months to engage in qualifying seasonal or temporary work in  \nagriculture or fishing) .  \nTerms to Know  \n[isbe](isbe.net)[.net](isbe.net)  \nSeptember 2024  \nILLINOIS  \nSTATE BOARD OF  \nEDUCATION  \n2. Consider Student Data in Relation to “True Peers”  \nTo determine whether a student’s at-risk reading performance is due to typical language development or instead perhaps due to an underlying disability, it is important to ask if the student is making similar progress when compared to multilingual learners with similar backgrounds. Such students are sometimes labeled“true peers.”(Brown & Sandford, 2011)  \nTo select true peers to use as a comparison group, use a minimum of three to five","cbCaihPCIPzDvzT0","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaihPCIPzDvzT0","pdf",2631643,"English","# Considerations for Multilingual and Bidialectal Learners\n## Recommendations for Local Literacy Plans\n## Questions to Consider During Screening\n## Consider Student Data in Relation to “True Peers”\n## Leveraging Students’ Language Assets","[{\"question\":\"How should early literacy screening be designed for multilingual and bidialectal learners?\",\"answer\":\"Select and administer assessment tools that interpret scores for MLLs, include MLLs in norming when possible, and provide subtests in languages other than English using culturally and linguistically authentic measures.\"},{\"question\":\"What questions help determine whether reading difficulties are related to language development or other factors?\",\"answer\":\"Ask about English proficiency across listening, speaking, reading, and writing; whether reading difficulties appear in both the native language and English; delays in learning to talk; interrupted formal education; and whether cognitive functions such as phonological memory and phonemic awareness have been assessed.\"},{\"question\":\"What does “true peers” mean, and how should it be used in interpreting data?\",\"answer\":\"True peers are students similar in native language proficiency, English proficiency, country of origin, and/or time in the current school or program. Use a comparison group of at least three to five students to judge whether at-risk reading performance matches typical language development.\"}]","Considerations for Multilingual and Bidialectal Learners - Recommendations for Local Literacy Plans | PDF",1791602262]