Educating English Language Learners: Theory and Practices

Content  Overview of Language Acquisition  Two Main Strategies:  Immersion  Bilingualism  Conclusion

Overview of language acquisition strategies and theories Grammar-translation approach Originally used to teach Latin or Ancient Greek, this method became the way to teach modern languages by the late 19 th century. It focuses on learning conjugation and grammar rules and does not develop any kind of communicative skills. Direct method Developed in the early 20 th century, this method focuses on oral communication and particularly on vocabulary acquisition. Students are encouraged to think in the second language. It is however very teacher centered and requires very motivated students.

Audio-lingual method Very popular in the 50s and 60s, it is still used today. This method is a derivative of the direct method and is therefore focused on oral communication. It however emphasizes grammar over vocabulary. Time-on-task Theory that says that the more students spend time on a given subject, the more proficient they will become. This theory is often used by advocates of immersion methods to emphasize the importance of time spent learning English.

Immersion Immersion has many facets and ranges from submersion to Sheltered Instruction. It is the most common strategy used to teach ELLs

Submersion Submersion, sometimes called the sink-or-swim strategy, offers no assistance of any kind to English Language Learners. ELLs are expected to “pick up”the language in class during instruction. This method was very popular in the United States from the early 20th century up until That year, ruling in Lau vs. Nichols, the Supreme Court outlawed submersion and entitled the Chinese-speaking children to special assistance in school. “There is no equality of treatment merely by providing students with the same facilities, textbooks, teachers and curriculum; for students who do not understand English are foreclosed from any meaningful education.” Supreme Court

Pros: -Cost effective Cons: - ELLs receive no support - Teachers have no training regarding ELLs - Creates frustration and anxiety - Completely ineffective regarding English acquisition and academic performance Submersion

ESL Pullout / Submersion plus ESL ESL pullout can be considered a variant of the submersion method. ELLs attend classes taught exclusively in English and are pulled out of the classrooms to receive English tutoring or sometimes native language support 30 to 40 minutes a day. While being one of the most common strategies of English instruction, it is also one of the least efficient. Indeed, the time allowed for English acquisition is minimal and the instruction itself is often done out of context and therefore rarely helpful with class work. Furthermore, students being actually pulled out of their classes contribute to their stigmatization among native students and take time away from content teaching. On the other hand, this method is easy to incorporate and allow to support learners from different linguistic backgrounds.

Pros: - Cost effective Cons: - Stigmatizes students enrolled in the program - Takes time away from content teaching - Leaves students in sink-or-swim situations most of the day - Not sufficient to provide adequate English instruction and lead to academic success ESL Pullout / Submersion plus ESL

Sheltered Instruction Sheltered Instruction appeared in the early 1980s and consists in teaching content using a level of English adapted to that of the learners. While considered an immersion strategy, sheltered instruction implies that ELLs be taught in separate classrooms rather than mixed with native speakers. According to Crawford, the Sheltered Instruction model is more successful with intermediate language learners than beginners. With the latter, the curriculum must be dramatically simplified to be understood by the learners and is therefore not on par with that of native students. The SIOP Model is based on the principle of Sheltered Instruction.

Pros - Allows ELLs to learn English and content at the same time - Has produced much better results than other immersion methods with intermediate students - Allows to teach ELLs from multiple linguistic backgrounds together Cons - Separates ELLs from native speakers and may therefore encourage segregation and stigmatization (except with SIOP model) - Rather ineffective with beginners Sheltered Instruction

Bilingualism Bilingualism is the other main trend in English Learners Education. In bilingualism, and contrary to immersion, instruction is provided both in English and the ELLs' native language. One the main advantages of this method is that it allows ELLs to have access to the same, unmodified curriculum as native speakers, therefore reducing the chances of falling behind. As with immersion, there are several forms of bilingualism that use different levels of English input.

Transitional Bilingual Education (TBE) / Early-Exit Bilingual Education The goal of this strategy is to enable ELLs to move on to regular classes as soon as possible while maintaining good academic standards. With TBE, English is the primary language used in class and the ELLs’ native language is mostly used for clarification. The ratio English/Native Language varies with the proficiency of the students. Indeed, beginners will receive more instruction in their native language than intermediate and advanced learners. This program usually last 2 to 4 years or as soon as the learners become proficient, hence the name Early-Exit Bilingual Education. According to Crawford, while more efficient than any immersion program, TBE remains inferior to other types of bilingual programs.

Pros - Allows students to acquire proper academic skills and to keep up with native speakers Cons - Requires bilingual teachers - Does not necessarily differentiate between BICS and CALP and may send children into submersion too early. - Requires ELLs to be from the same linguistic background Transitional Bilingual Education

Developmental Bilingual Education (DBE) / Late-Exit / Gradual Bilingual Education With DBE, students receive a strong curriculum instruction in their native language and are gradually transitioned to English classes. For instance, in kindergarten and 1st grade, English is used only 10% of the time and progressively becomes predominant by 5th grade. According to Crawford, 6th grade students in DBE are more likely to overcome the achievement gap than their counterparts in TBE. On the other hand, as with all bilingual methods, a large group of students with the same linguistic background is necessary to implement this method. Furthermore, this strategy is designed mostly for elementary schools and seem to work well for students entering the school system at an early age but is not practical for students arriving in the country later in life.

Pros: -Students learn the curriculum as well as native speakers. -Students learn both English and their native language -Students are not rushed into submersion -Parents are more involved in their children’s education Cons: -Requires specially trained teachers -Hard to implement after elementary school -Requires ELLs to be from the same linguistic background -Requires students to enter the school system at an early age Developmental Bilingual Education

Two-Way Bilingual Education Two-Way Bilingual Education (TWBE) was first started in 1963 in Coral Way School in Miami as a way to integrate to growing Cuban population. With TWBE, both foreign and English speakers receive bilingual education, following either the 50/50 model or the 90/10 model. With the 50/50 model, students receive instructions in both languages throughout the entire curriculum. With the 90/10 model, students start off by using the minority language most of the time and gradually transition to a 50/50 model by grade 5 or 6.

Contrary to DBE, students in TWBE attend on a voluntary basis and both foreign and English speakers are part of the same classes. Efforts are made to keep an equal numbers of children from both communities. According to Crawford, there are several advantages to this method. First, both groups have the opportunity to learn from each other and are exposed to each other’s culture. Additionally, native English speakers have the opportunity to become truly fluent in another language, something that is very rare with regular foreign language instruction. Finally, according to a study by Lindholm-Leary and Howard (2008), both native Spanish Speakers and English Speakers enrolled in TWBE performed as well or better than their peers educated in other types of programs. Two-Way Bilingual Education

On the other hand, one must remember that this method, as with other bilingual methods, requires highly qualified teachers. Furthermore, while this model works very well at the elementary level, it is hard to implement at the intermediate and high school levels. Finally, this strategy cannot accommodate districts with multiple linguistic backgrounds. Two-Way Bilingual Education

Click on the picture and watch a video about a k-5 Two-Way Bilingual School in Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Pros: -Allows foreign students to maintain and reinforce their native language skills. -Allows Native English speakers to learn another language efficiently. -Allows for cultural exchange between communities and facilitates integration -Proven to be an efficient way for ELLs to learn English Cons: -Requires specially trained teachers -Requires ELLs to be from the same linguistic background -Requires students to enter the school system at an early age -Hard to implement after elementary school Two-Way Bilingual Education

It is hard to know which of the two strategies is the most efficient as researchers have presented studies in favor of both sides. According to Calderon et al. (2011), there is indeed “considerable controversy among policy makers, researchers, and educators about how best to ensure the language, reading, and academic success of English Learners”. It seems that both trends have advantages and inconveniences and that school districts should adopt one or the other depending on their needs. Calderon et al. (2011) explain that what truly matters is the quality of the instruction (p. 107). Finally, it seems that recent policies tend to favor immersion over bilingualism as current obligations towards standardized tests do not encourage native language instruction. Immersion or Bilingualism: what is the most efficient method?

References Calderón, M., Slavin, R., & Sánchez, M. (2011). Effective Instruction for English Learners. Future Of Children, 21(1), Crawford, J. (2004). Educating English Learners: Language Diversity in the Classroom. Los Angeles, CA: Bilingual Education Services. Lara-Alecio, R., Galloway, M., Irby, B. J., Rodriguez, L., & GÃ3mez, L. (2004). Two-way immersion bilingual programs in Texas. Bilingual Research Journal, 28(1), Lindholm-Leary, K., & Howard, E. (2008). Pathways to Multilingualism: Evolving Perspectives on Immersion Education. T. Fortune & D. Tedick (Ed.). Towanda, NY: Multilingual Matters Ltd.