The Steps to English Proficiency continua (STEP) is one of those teaching tools that never ceases to surprise me with new insights every time I come back to it. To be sure, there are moments when I wish it was updated, more reflective of changing pedagogy, and more streamlined. However, its importance in our linguistically diverse schools is undeniable.
To those who are unfamiliar, STEP is an Ontario Ministry-developed tool that help educators understand and track the English language development of multilingual language learners (MLLs). They are used to guide instruction, accommodations, and programming in oral communication, reading, and writing.
I have noticed in recent years that many educators are less intrigued by language proficiency and more concerned with literacy screener scores – and it’s not hard to see why.
Unlike other ways of measuring language development, STEP does not have a tangible and specific assessment that generates scores and identifies students at risk. Its purpose is to give educators a sense of a student’s level of English proficiency, so they can plan, adapt, and assess instruction accordingly. Educators use triangulated assessment (observations, conversations, products) to place students at different proficiency levels. When a student remains “stuck” at a level for an extended period of time, it would be a possible indicator that additional assessments and direct support may be needed.
Screeners and diagnostics, on the other hand, really pinpoint which skills students need to develop to become better readers, and regular progress monitoring helps educators, students, and their families to map growth. What is important to note, however, is that literacy screeners assume that students already know and speak the language they mapping onto different combinations of letters, or graphemes. MLLs in the early STEPs, unlike proficient English speakers, have the more complex challenge of learning the English language at the same time that they are connecting its phonemes to written script.
So what does the STEP continua have to do with it? When we stop paying attention to language proficiency, we risk looking at literacy screener and diagnostic scores out of context. It is only when we look at both of them in tandem that we can gather useful insights about an MLL’s literacy portrait.
For example, an early STEP student may score low on a literacy screener because they are still learning English sounds and syntax, developing oral speech in English, acquiring vocabulary, or processing unfamiliar academic language: not necessarily because of an underlying reading difficulty. It is only when educators examine both STEP data and literacy assessment results together that they can build a more accurate and strengths-based literacy portrait of MLLs.
A colleague recently shared her frustration that the “MLL perspective” was noticeably absent from conversations with about literacy screeners at her school. Another literacy coach commented, “I’m tired of hearing teachers use ESL as an excuse for students doing poorly in reading.” Statements like these highlight the ongoing need for professional learning that bridges the gap between English language learning pedagogy and structured literacy approaches.
It is clear that STEP implementation is more important than ever. Without regularly utilizing and referencing shared language and tool for describing language proficiency for MLLs, especially those in the youngest and most formative years, we minimize and possibly even lose sight of a critical piece of data about students’ oral language foundations, which is well known to be a key indicator of student success.
Did you know that ETFO has a resource that may be a great starting point for you if you are interested in learning more?
Enhance classroom practices with these considerations when implementing early reading screeners and analyzing the data from multilingual language learners. (PDF)
