3rd-5th Grade - Gateway 3

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 3–5 of Read Side-by-Side do not meet the expectations for providing explanations of the instructional approaches of the program for MLLs and identifying research-based strategies. While the program includes general discussions of reading development and acknowledges the challenges MLLs may face when acquiring English, it does not outline instructional approaches tailored to MLLs or provide research-based strategies designed to support their language development or access to grade-level texts.

The materials do not provide research-based strategies specific to MLLs, nor do they explain any instructional approach aligned to MLL needs. The only reference to MLLs appears in a brief description intended to contextualize why English learners may struggle with vocabulary and grammar. The materials state:

“The English learner has much to learn about the vocabulary and the structure of English. Approximately 9.5% of students in our schools speak a language other than English (Graves, 2016). These students lack the vocabulary and grammatical knowledge of English, which undermines their ability to decode new words and comprehend text. A child from Mexico, Somalia, or Honduras needs three to five years to acquire the language skills of a native English speaker. During that time, reading ability in English is compromised. By enhancing vocabulary instruction and providing more support, teachers can improve these language skills.”

While this provides some context for why MLLs may experience difficulty, it does not outline a research-based instructional approach or offer actionable, MLL-specific strategies. There is no explanation of how teachers should enhance vocabulary instruction for MLLs, no guidance on scaffolded routines, and no language-development supports connected to text-based instruction. 

Missed opportunities appear throughout the materials. The welcome sections included in both the Read Aloud Teacher’s Guide and the Book Club Teacher’s Guides across grades and units do not include any instructional supports specifically geared toward MLLs. Although certain components of the program—such as sentence stems and structured writing routines—could be repurposed as supports for MLLs, the materials do not frame them as language-development tools or provide guidance for how to use them to build students’ speaking and writing skills. The program also emphasizes word study, root work, and vocabulary worksheets, but does not link these routines to MLLs’ academic vocabulary development.

In summary, the instructional materials do not explain the approaches used to support MLLs and do not reference research-based strategies for MLL instruction. While the program references general literacy research, there is no corresponding framework or guidance tailored to MLLs. As a result, the materials do not meet expectations for this indicator.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 3–5 of Read Side-by-Side do not meet the expectations for including guidance for intentional and flexible grouping structures for MLLs to ensure equitable participation. The materials provide no guidance for intentional and flexible grouping structures for MLLs or for equitable participation in group work. The materials include many opportunities for students to participate in group work, including during Book Clubs and other collaborative learning tasks, and materials offer some general grouping guidance for teachers; however, no evidence was found demonstrating teacher guidance for grouping MLLs or supporting equitable participation. Because the materials lack structures for purposeful grouping, oral language scaffolds, or flexibility in grouping based on language proficiency, the program does not provide the necessary supports for MLLs to engage meaningfully with peers during group activities.

The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 3-5 of Read Side-by-Side do not meet the criteria of providing accommodations that allow MLLs to demonstrate their knowledge and skills without changing the content of the assessment. No evidence of accommodations for MLLs around assessments was found in the materials.