what's lang got · some myths & realities of second language learning one institutional...

© Susana Dutro/2005 of 15

What's Language Got to Do With It? Considerations in Courses of Study for Secondary English Learners

By Susana Dutro

Adapted from a March 23, 2005 Presentation for California Secondary Summit, San Diego, California

The Challenge Because of the tremendous increase in the number of English learners over the past two decades, most California teachers now serve students who are learning English as a second language.

Each of these teachers deserves support in gaining a more sophisticated understanding of the process of learning a second language, the role of language in content learning, how to provide English learners quality subject matter instruction at an acceptable pace, and how to integrate all students into a vibrant learning community.

We know that while most English learners in California schools are gaining fluency in English as measured by the CELDT, a disturbing number of English learners continue to do poorly in both oral and written tasks requiring academic language proficiency. This suggests that the notion that the academic language can be acquired without direct instruction is wanting.

Consider: A native English-speaking student enters school with an internalized understanding of the syntax and phonology of English, plus a vocabulary ranging from a few thousand to up to 20,000 words. Immediately this language base is increased through new experiences in school and continuously reinforced and expanded in home and community settings. Year by year, their competence in language and content knowledge increased.

English Learners enter school with an internalized knowledge of their mother tongue, also with tremendously varying levels of vocabulary knowledge. However, in contrast to their native English-speaking peers, the language minority student brings partial, if any, understanding of the phonology and syntax of English. Depending on his or her experience with English he or she may have a vocabulary ranging from a few to a few hundred words – often one to ten percent of that of a native speaker of the same age. In addition, there may be little or no opportunity for reinforcement and expansion of this knowledge outside of the school setting.

English language learners face a daunting task. They must learn the English language, including:

Phonology, rhythm, cadence Vocabulary (basic, general utility, low utility/content specific), Syntax (word order), Language forms (structures, verb tenses, grammar), Functions (for both social and academic purposes), Discourse styles in speaking and writing (formal/informal social/academic), and Cultural contexts,


And grade level subject matter content. They must do this all the while competing with native-English speaking peers who are rapidly increasing their knowledge of the English language and applying that knowledge to the content standards. Some Myths & Realities of Second Language Learning

One institutional challenge English learners face is pervasiveness of myths about how children learn a second language (McLaughlin, 1992). One of the most common is that children learn second languages quickly and easily. While children may appear to learn more quickly, the requirements to communicate as a young child are quite different from those of an adult because constructions are shorter and simpler, and vocabulary is relatively small. In studies of second language learning, adolescents and adults outperform children. They bring more experience, cognitive sophistication, and knowledge of both language and content to the task. Pronunciation is one area where prepubescent children have an advantage, as their motor patterns have not been fossilized in the first language. Another myth is that students have acquired a second language once they can speak it. In reality there is much more involved. Proficiency in face-to-face communication does not equal academic language proficiency. It is a much longer process to learn the abstract uses of language needed for success in school, which requires separating language from the context of actual experience. Problems in reading and writing in the later grades often stem from limitations in vocabulary and syntactic knowledge of English. Even children who are skilled orally can have these gaps. English Learners are English Language Novices

In the process of learning English, Cummins describes two types of language that English learners need: basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS) – the type of language kids use naturally while speaking on the playground and in other everyday interactions – and cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP) – the specific language required to read textbooks, discuss academic topics, and to write in academic genres. Many English learners, particularly long term residents, come to school with substantial everyday English (BICS) and students new to English acquire BICS fairly quickly in the context of daily life in and out of school. This learning is often accelerated through intentional instruction in beginning through intermediate level ELD classes. Yet even English learners with a great deal of fluency in everyday oral language may score low when taking academic tests. Why is this so? While many English learners appear fluent and have gleaned a great deal of vocabulary, grammatical forms, conventions, and rules of discourse, they often have significant knowledge gaps and a haphazard understanding of how the English language works. Most often this lack of knowledge is the result of not having been taught English explicitly. A lack of advanced English language skills should not be taken as a sign that students have a language or learning deficit, but rather that their language experiences have not included sufficient language instruction. They need to be taught the academic language necessary for school success.


The Need for Language Acquisition AND Learning

Canale and Swain (1980) studied two groups of English learners. One group was taught in predominantly natural settings with an emphasis on real communication. The other group learned English predominantly through formal instruction, with little emphasis on communication. What they found was that the acquisition group was fluent and communicative, but made frequent mistakes. The learning group made fewer mistakes, but virtually never talked. This strongly suggests English learners need a program that provides a proportionate focus on both processes. More evidence of the need for explicit instruction in how English works is shared by Scarcella (1996) who finds “… L2 students are coming to University of California, Irvine without sufficient academic English to undertake university coursework successfully…" She notes that L2 students at UCI enter the university with many years of schooling in the United States (8 years on average), excellent high school grade point averages (3.5 or higher and in the top 12% of their graduating class), and high scores on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (over 1000). Yet these students have English language problems that prevent them from achieving success in freshman writing courses. She lists two main English language problems — limited vocabulary and limited understanding of English morphology and sentence structure. The limited vocabulary understanding results in:

• Misuse of words or word forms • Mishandling of diction (using conversational words in academic writing), and

• Use of acoustic approximations (the novel Catch Her in the Right).

The limited understanding of English morphology and sentence structure results in: • Misuse of articles, pronouns, and nouns

• Misuse handling of verb tenses • Inability to handle causative and conditional structures.

Scarcella asks, “Why do such bright successful high school students enter UCI with such weak English language skills?” She offers a passage from a UCI student as a possible answer:

“I want people correct me. Correcting show me my errors. But no teacher ever tell me what wrong with my English. They only tell me it very A+.”


COMMON PRACTICES THAT FAIL TO ADDRESS THE CHALLENGE

1. Lowering expectations for English Learners by slowing instruction and teaching below grade level content, assigning “friendly” assignments that do not require rigorous content knowledge, and pronouncing the resulting student work “good enough, considering…”

These low expectations lead to tragically false sense of accomplishment and results in students being poorly prepared for the next grade, causing them to fall further behind each year.

2. Teaching all students the same way by teaching grade level content standards to maintain rigor, but not providing language support or instructional scaffolds to ensure students understand and are able to fully participate.

This results in lots of Ds and Fs, students who are not learning the subject matter and are increasingly discouraged.

3. Providing intervention that does not include language support by re-teaching skills and concepts without instruction and practice using the language needed to express understanding.

Each of these responses exacerbate the challenges English learners face by either giving them less instruction – almost certainly guaranteeing they will fall further behind – or more instruction that they do not yet have the language knowledge to comprehend or express. Neither response addresses the real need. Supporting Achievement for English Learners

Adaptations in content instruction to ensure comprehensibility and authentic access for English Learners include:

Primary language instruction and/or support at the appropriate level of challenge where possible; partnering with a bilingual student; content materials (texts) in the primary language for student to access course information; bilingual dictionaries

Before/during/after school tutoring with a teacher, bilingual paraprofessional or fellow student at the same or above level of content knowledge

Explicit teaching of key content vocabulary through labeling of pertinent diagrams, charts, equations, and so on

Frontloading language needed to engage in the upcoming content lesson (to categorize, hypothesize, explain, etc.)

Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE) techniques,

Effective instruction includes instructional feedback, such as: Frequent, clear, and supportive feedback of efficacy with specific direction on next

instructional steps – what I will do, what you will do Partnership in regular data analysis of their own work using quality work criteria

(e.g., rubrics) for self-assessment

Students who are behind need to learn more in less time. Successful interventions are focused & accelerated


BLUEPRINT FOR TEACHING ENGLISH LEARNERS THROUGHOUT THE DAY

Regardless of the type of program in which an English Learner is enrolled, each must receive: Instruction in English at his or her level of English proficiency, and Meaningful access to grade-level academic content (Castañeda v Pickard, 1981)

The Blueprint below takes a comprehensive view. It suggests a model that maximizes the effectiveness of instruction by ensuring English learners are taught appropriately throughout the day. English as a second language is taught through a dedicated subject area devoted to Systematic ELD. Additionally, English is taught in the context of each subject area through Frontloading Language. This language instruction is driven by the need of the content – that is, the content teacher’s task is to identify the language that enables students to think, discuss, read and write about the topic at hand. Finally, Comprehensible Delivery of Content ensures that content instruction is clear, sequential, and scaffolded. The arrows indicate the iterative nature of language and content instruction – sometimes attention is focused on the language needed to express thinking; other times it is focused on the content itself. In this way students can focus attention on one new chunk of learning at a time and more quickly and effectively develop “knowns” onto which to map “unknowns”. This instruction must be provided within an inclusive, bias-free learning environment, which recognizes and builds upon the value of the language, culture, and experiences of each student.

Systematic

ELD

Purpose Build a solid language foundation

Content Follows scope and sequence of language skills in functional contexts

Reading/

Lang. Arts

Math

History/ Soc. Sci.

Science/ Health

PE

Art

Comprehensible Delivery of Content Purpose Teach content using instructional strategies and techniques to

make content comprehensible Content Grade level subject matter

Frontloading Language for Subject Matter Instruction Purpose Equip English Learners for upcoming content instruction by

teaching the requisite language Content Language needed for upcoming lesson: sentence structures and

vocabulary of target content skills or concepts (functional mortar)


Systematic English Language Instruction

A vertical slice of the curriculum, Systematic ELD follows a developmental scope and sequence of language skills (see ELD Standards), building basic and general utility vocabulary, and moving from simple to complex grammatical structures. It is taught in the context of a range of both everyday and academic language functions. It is time dedicated to specifically teaching English by targeting student level of English proficiency and occurs on a regular basis. While this is a separate content area, it is linked to Reading/Language Arts. It may be taught as one part of a multi-period literacy course for English Learners. By itself, an ELD course is not sufficient to ensure English learners have full access to the curriculum.

Frontloading Language for Subject Matter Instruction

This occurs throughout the day as a horizontal slice of the curriculum, across all subject areas. The purpose is to teach needed language preceding a sheltered or mainstream content lesson. Critically important to comprehensible content instruction, frontloading language is an up-front investment of time to render the content understandable to the student. It enables students to participate more fully in content lessons.

We analyze the language demands of the upcoming lesson and determine what general vocabulary and sentence structures are essential for students to be able to participate through listening, speaking, reading, and writing. It does not replace the topic specific vocabulary instruction that is part of content instruction. Instead, it teaches the words and phrases English learners may not know so that they are prepared for the content instruction to follow. General vocabulary English learners may need ahead of time might include words like behavior, event, frozen, valley. Before teaching a lesson using the concept of cause and effect or hypothesizing, a helpful structure would be: If… might/will. Taught using everyday or familiar (previously taught) topic (If I forget to water the plant, it might die; If an animal is deprived of water, it will die), English learners have the opportunity to attend to the language and will be familiar with it when they encounter it in the lesson.

Frontloading language is brief in most cases, but must include opportunities for students to practice the new language they will be using. Effective content instruction switches back and forth from focus on language to focus on content, and back to language, enabling students to focus their attention on one new thing to learn at a time. Comprehensible Content Instruction

All subject matter instruction should build on what students know, tapping and developing prior knowledge and helping students connect new learning to what has been previously learned. The conceptual goal of the lesson is kept clear, key vocabulary is taught and practiced, textual materials are used for both learning and validating/reviewing what has been taught.


Sheltered and SDAIE strategies are used. However, English learners may also need frontloading language instruction to ensure they are prepared to participate in the content lesson.

Levels of Proficiency

There are five levels of English proficiency as measured by the annually administered California English Language Development Test (CELDT): Beginning Early Intermediate Intermediate Early Advanced Advanced

The California Reading/Language Arts Framework for Grades K-12 (1999), describes ELD instruction as systematic, explicit and “assist students in learning the specific vocabulary, background knowledge, and language structures needed to succeed.” (p. 234)

Effective Use of CELDT Data

While the CELDT includes measures of listening/speaking, reading, and writing, it does not measure academic achievement. Thus, it is possible for a student to score:

Overall CELDT 4 (Early Advanced), and Basic or far below basic on the CST (California Standards Test)

This could be the result of a high score listening/speaking portions of CELDT and low scores on the reading and/or writing portions. This would suggest that while the student has developed fluent oral language skills in English, reading and/or writing skills are lacking.

In order to make good use of CELDT data, decision makers (counselors, teachers) must have the most complete information possible for each English Learner: scaled scores for listening/ speaking, reading, and writing over as many years as data has been collected. Detailed analysis will provide a more complete picture of progress and help identify instructional needs more accurately than a single overall CELDT score.

While standardized measures (CELDT and CST) provide valuable information on student progress, local assessments are needed to gain a more complete view.

L a n g u a g e s u p p o r t e q u i p s s t u d e n t s w i t h t h e l a n g u a g e r e q u i r e d t o e x p r e s s t h e s o p h i s t i c a t i o n o f t h e i r t h i n k i n g .


VARYING INSTRUCTIONAL NEEDS AMONG ENGLISH LEARNERS

English Learners are not a monolithic group and should receive differentiated instruction according to identified strengths and needs. Instructors should find out as much as possible about a student’s educational background as well as carefully use assessment data. Assess Newcomers in their primary language and in content areas before making placement decisions. For students who have been in American schools, use ALL available data from previous coursework, local and standardized assessments. Such commitment will help ensure students receive an effective ELD and/or Intervention program and move into the mainstream instructional program and academic success as quickly as possible. It also helps ensure that English Learners are not placed in remedial or low level content classes based on their knowledge of English, but rather at the highest level course possible based on their instructional level in that content. The following descriptions suggest program considerations based on four common English Learner profiles.

I. High Literacy & Content in Primary Language and Little or No English

Some English Learners are new arrivals to the United States who have well-developed literacy and content knowledge in their primary language, and little or no knowledge of English. These students bring a great deal of content, reading, writing, and language knowledge to English learning and tend to advance quickly when provided with well-designed, accelerated instruction. An appropriate instructional program for students fitting this profile would be a Newcomer Program that includes intensive ELD and orientation to American cultural practices, along with content instruction at the appropriate level of difficulty that builds on existing knowledge.

CONTENT - These students are not struggling students, but are simply new to English. They should be placed in grade-level content courses with as much primary language support as possible. Whatever the language of instruction, support can be provided through content materials in the primary language, bilingual dictionaries, labeling of pertinent diagrams, charts, equations, and so on, and tutoring with a bilingual peer.

LITERACY – While English Learners with this profile will probably place in the reading intervention program for English Learners (High Point) because of a lack of English knowledge, they are not new to reading. Their biggest challenge is learning English. They are likely to be able to move quite quickly through High Point Basics. Course placement should be flexible so as to allow students to move through the series of ELD/Reading Intervention Courses as rapidly as possible. To maximize what literate English Learners bring, they need accelerated instruction in vocabulary, syntactical and text structures, comprehension strategies and written composition to bridge what is known (literacy in the primary language) to what is new (English). Also helpful is developing awareness of transferable skills and contrastive analysis of grammatical elements, cognates, and discourse styles between English and the primary language in English


II. Low Literacy & Content in Primary Language and Little or No English

Other newly arrived English Learners have had little opportunity to develop academic skills in their home country and arrive with low literacy development, little content knowledge, and little or no English. These students benefit from a Newcomer Program with intensive English Language Development and orientation to American cultural practices, along with accelerated content instruction at their instructional level. While older students with little prior schooling require a carefully designed intensive and accelerated program, they are not necessarily cognitively unsophisticated and should not be treated as slow learners.

CONTENT – Students lacking competence in mathematics and little knowledge of English are best served by an intensive foundational mathematics class taught in the primary language or with strong daily primary language support from the teacher, paraprofessional or tutor. It is recommended that grade level courses be preceded by an additional “shadow” mathematics period that prepares students for the mathematics content of the upcoming class. The “shadow” class should backward map from core mathematics standards teaching the prerequisite mathematical skills and the language of the math concepts. That is, teach the associated vocabulary and sentence structures students will encounter in the upcoming class. Ideally, this class links the primary language to English, so students are able to learn both the concepts and the labels and constructions in English, paving the way for a transition to the core mathematics program. Note: Some schools accommodate this additional course by temporarily reducing social studies and science to one semester each. Whatever the language of instruction, support can be provided through content materials in the primary language, bilingual dictionaries, labeling of pertinent diagrams, charts, equations, and so on, and tutoring with a bilingual peer.

LITERACY – For students who are not literate in their primary language, they will be learning to read for the first time using High Point and will probably test into the first or second placement points based on both English language and reading. They have the double challenge of learning English and learning to read and write. Students with this profile need extensive practice in producing language, direct instruction and extensive practice applying reading and writing skills taught. There has been success teaching older students to read in their primary language while simultaneously teaching ELD and transferring newly acquired literacy skills to English. If it is not possible to provide a foundation in literacy in the primary language, it is important to take every opportunity to link student’s prior knowledge to a context-rich literacy program, such as High Point.

II. Literacy & Content Knowledge in Primary Language and Strong Oral English

English learners that fit this profile may have had schooling in their home country or received primary language instruction in American schools and have lived in the United States for several


years, giving them the opportunity to develop oral English through daily interactions at school, in the community and through the media.

These longer term English Learners may be proficient in social, “every day” language, but lack sufficient academic English language proficiency to accomplish academic tasks. They may be struggling readers.

CONTENT – Strong oral English helps students participate more fully in content courses, but may mask gaps in content knowledge or a lack of language with which to express understanding. It is helpful to provide this type of student with option of texts in two languages. These students also benefit from explicit instruction in the language of the content. That is, teaching the English vocabulary and sentence structures used in the discipline being studied, including key phrases that enable comprehension and expression of academic constructions, such as, “In order to ____ we must ____”, “…equally important to ____”, “During the time of ___” or “____ and ___ share several characteristics____”

LITERACY – Students who are orally fluent in English and literate in their primary language benefit from developing meta-cognitive awareness of transferable skills between the home language and English. Their challenge is to learn academic English and advanced literacy skills. They require explicit instruction in academic uses of English, with a focus on comprehension, vocabulary development (e.g. word derivations), and the advanced grammatical structures needed to comprehend and produce academic language. Appropriate instruction includes intensive study of genres, writing formats, meta-linguistics, contrastive analysis of written and spoken forms of English, and structured academic dialogues with sentence frames. They are likely to be placed in the higher levels of High Point or other intervention program.

III. Low Literacy and/or Content and Strong Oral English (English Dominant)

A large group of California’s English Learners is made up of long-term residents who have had most or all of their schooling in the United States. They bring a great deal of oral English fluency, but many are struggling readers and writers. They have often had ineffective or inconsistent instruction in language arts and/or ELD, and sometimes interrupted schooling as a result of moving a great deal, perhaps being switched back and forth from one type of instructional program to another (e. g. primary language instruction to English immersion).

While not English Learners, some second generation speakers of English, African-American English speakers, and others share characteristics and instructional needs with English dominant EL. There may be commonalities in the general profile: strong oral English - often a variation of Standard English - and low literacy skills. These students benefit from instruction that builds on what they bring through explicit instruction in how Standard English works and contrastive analysis of home language and standard academic English.


Some English dominant students may be unaware or unconvinced of the value and role of high levels of literacy and may need inspiration to believe its merit. Included in a broad range of texts for study must be relevant texts that reflect students’ lives, captivate their attention, and motivate their use of increasingly varied language. CONTENT – Students with below grade level content skills should be assessed and placed in content classes based on skill level. It is recommended that students lacking competence in mathematics receive an additional period that serves as a “shadow” class, preparing them for the mathematics content of the upcoming class. The “shadow” mathematics class should backward map from core mathematics standards teaching the prerequisite mathematical skills and frontloading language (this is, teach the associated vocabulary and sentence structures students will encounter in the upcoming class). Consequently, students will be better prepared to comprehend the content and language of instruction and equip them to express understanding of concepts taught. Note: Some schools accommodate this additional course by temporarily reducing social studies and science to one semester each. LITERACY – Provide intense academic intervention based on specific reading assessments, rather than teaching all struggling readers the same way. For instance, while it is likely that students will place in the higher levels of Basics, orally fluent English speakers may place in “Lakeside” because of a lack of basic letter-sound knowledge. In that case, teachers should skip the lessons on language at this level and focus on reading instruction. (Orally proficient students do not need to learn numbers, classroom objects or how to ask for directions.) Using that instructional time to target reading needs increases efficacy and prevents disengagement. The key for struggling readers is to ensure they spend a great deal of time practicing what they need to learn.

The focus of literacy instruction should be on mastering letter-sound patterns for decoding first single syllable then multi-syllabic words, written forms of expressions, discrete content vocabulary, reading longer sentences, and reading a great deal of varied text to increase ease and accuracy. Struggling readers must move from getting the “gist” of a text to understanding the details and nuances and increase their accuracy in reading (reading fluency, word knowledge, less high frequency words.)


Instructional Reading Level & Allocation of Instructional Time

The California Reading/Language Arts Framework (page 227-228) identifies the following three levels of reading intervention for which schools must provide differentiation: benchmark, strategic and intensive. Recent California mandates identify the types of intervention identified in the chart below:

Degree of Need Type of Intervention & Allocation of Time

Benchmark Intervention

Generally doing well

May score at the Basic or even Proficient level on CST

May score CELDT 4 or 5

On track for passing CAHSEE* and A-G track, but minor difficulties must be addressed quickly to prevent falling behind.

Provide re-teaching and extra practice within class, tutoring, and as homework with support materials from adopted Reading/Language Arts program.

For English Learners, this must include instruction in the grammatical, syntactical and discourse rules of English, plus additional attention to vocabulary instruction.

Strategic Intervention

Grades 4-8 = Performing up to 1.9 years below grade level

Grades 9-12 = 6th grade standards and above

May score Below Basic on CST

May score CELDT 3, 4 or 5

Require focused attention to gain skills to achieve in the mainstream program (passing CAHSEE*, getting on A-G track)

Use diagnostic assessment to determine areas of strength/need.

Fully use intervention components of adopted Reading/Language Arts program and other intervention materials, as needed, during additional period of language arts (“shadow” class) that prepares student for the skills, concepts and (frontloads) language of the upcoming lesson.

For English Learners, explicit English language (ELD) instruction in vocabulary and structures must be added.

Intensive Intervention

Grades 4-8 = Performing two or more years below grade level;

Grades 9-12 = Not yet meeting 6th grade standards

May be Far Below Basic CST

May score CELDT 1 – 3 (or possibly 4 - 5)

Require intensive, accelerated intervention in order to bring to 6th grade level within two years. Goal to get to strategic quickly

Students receive intensive reading intervention program instead of ELA program for up to two years as needed.

Course placement is determined by diagnostic test, not CST, CELDT or other standardized measure.

English Learners receive explicit English language (ELD) instruction in vocabulary and structures in addition to reading and writing intervention. (High Point is currently the only California state-adopted reading intervention program for English Learners Grades 4-8)

*California High School Exit Exam RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CONTENT & LANGUAGE ACHIEVEMENT


The graph below shows a few of the many possible relationships between content achievement as measured on the California Standards Tests and level of English Proficiency as measured on the California English Language Development Test. English Learners may place at different places along the XY axis. The goal is to move them both over (to “advanced” level of English proficiency), and up (to “proficient” in content areas).

CST Literacy in L1

Little or No English Literacy in L1 or L2 Oral English Low literacy, Oral English

Low literacy Low literacy, Little or no English Oral English

RATIONALE FOR COURSES OF STUDY

Courses of Study should be more than simple course descriptions. They should provide classroom teachers, counselors, and administrators with a detailed outline for each course in a series designed to move English Learners from:

Beginning to Advanced levels of English proficiency as measured by the CELDT, and Far-below grade-level reading and writing skills to profiency in sixth grade English

Language Arts standards, at which point students move out of a sequence of ELD/Intensive Reading Intervention courses to strategic reading/language intervention, putting them on the course toward the High School Exit Exam.

These courses must weave two distinct, but related, instructional goals: 1) Teach the English language, including academic and social uses for a wide range of purposes, to non-native English speakers, and 2) Provide targeted, intensive, and accelerated reading/language arts intervention to struggling readers who are English Learners.

Advanced

Proficient

Basic

Below Basic

Far Below Basic

1 2 3 4 5 Beginning Early Inter. Intermediate Early Adv. Advanced

CELDT


WHAT SHOULD COURSES OF STUDY INCLUDE? Brief course description and goals, ELD and ELA standards to be taught, with examples of oral and written output

expectations, Placement criteria based on both standardized and curriculum or other standards-based

assessments, Pacing Guide and criteria for monitoring progress during each coarse, Recommended instructional materials (both core and support), Exit criteria

It is recommended that courses last one semester to allow for flexibility and accuracy in placement. Students enter the sequence of courses based on assessed reading and language levels. The sequence should allow variations for English Learners who are orally proficient, but lack academic language, reading and writing skills versus newcomers.

ON WHAT SHOULD COURSES OF STUDY BASED?

State ELD (English Language Development) Standards, State English Language Arts Standards, Local assessment measure of language proficiency

Scope and Sequence and Assessment Handbooks from adopted instructional materials

POSSIBLE SEQUENCE OF COURSES

Our goal is to successfully move students as quickly as possible into the mainstream academic program. In order to accomplish this, instruction must be based on identified instructional needs, build on both content and language strengths, and progress through a well-defined, yet flexible, sequence of courses. All English Learners do not progress through the sequence of courses in the same way. Depending on a student’s level of literacy and English proficiency, students may move quickly or need additional instructional time and practice to achieve full proficiency in English. Placement in ELD/Reading Intervention Courses is based on criteria outlined in Courses of Study and progress is monitored with extra support provided as needed to ensure students meet exit criteria so they are prepared for the next course. The pathways in the chart on the following page are ambitious. They are based on guidelines from the State Board of Education for intensive reading intervention with the intention of closing the achievement gap by accelerating learning. They depend on 2.5 to 3 hours per day of focused instruction with ample practice devoted to accelerating both English Language Development (vocabulary, grammatical features, sentence structure, accurate and fluent use of language for a wide range of purposes) and literacy skills (oral language, decoding and word analysis, reading comprehension of literary analysis and expository text, writing composition and mechanics).


References California Department of Education (1999). Reading/Language Arts Framework for California

Public Schools: Kindergarten through Grade Twelve. Sacramento, CA. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second

language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47. Dutro, S., Moran, C. (2003). Rethinking English Language Instruction: An Architectural Approach. In G. Garcia (Ed.) English Learners: Reaching the Highest Level of English Literacy. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. High Point (2001). Carmel, CA. The Hampton-Brown Company. McLaughlin, B. (1992). Myths and Misconceptions about Second Language Learning: What

Every Teacher Needs to Unlearn. ERIC Identifier ED350885. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics.

Scarcella, R. C. (1996). Secondary education and second language research: instructing ESL

students in the 1990’s. The CATESOL Journal, 9, 129-152.

what's lang got · some myths & realities of second language learning one institutional...

Documents