ESL/ELL topic likely will remain “very hot” for decades
As Jack Cassidy and Drew Cassidy reported in the lead story, “What’s Hot, What’s Not for 2007,” the political environment with respect to the topics of English as a Second Language (ESL), English-Language Learners (ELL) and other acronymic designations for those with limited language proficiency keeps the topic of second-language literacy “very hot.” Furthermore, the topic affects educators in many countries around the world.
In the United States the controversial No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)—which some pundits say may not be reauthorized until after the 2008 national election—sets the goal of full grade-level proficiency in reading and math by 2014. The Act’s provisions include all children, regardless of ethnicity or home language. The goal is noble and urgent, for without proficiency in English it will become increasingly difficult for immigrants and their children to share in the American dream.
According to Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth, chaired by International Reading Association President Timothy Shanahan, U.S. schools now serve more than 14 million children nationwide who come from households in which English is not the primary language spoken.
Many of these students do not do well on state-established tests of reading comprehension and drop out of high school at rates up to five times those of native English speakers. Some researchers estimate that by the year 2050, the percentage of children in the United States who arrive at school speaking a language other than English will reach 40%.
Not only do language-minority children face diminished economic opportunity, according to the national report, “U.S. economic competitiveness depends on workforce quality. Inadequate reading and writing proficiency in English relegates rapidly increasing language-minority populations to the sidelines, limiting the nation’s potential for economic competitiveness, innovation, productivity growth, and quality of life.”
One of the key findings of the report “is that the research on acquiring literacy in a second language remains limited.”
NCLB mandates that all federally funded educational programs—including those for ELLs—must be supported by research. To that end, the U.S. Department of Education, which appointed the National Literacy Panel, is working with states to develop what it calls a “Limited English Proficient (LEP) Partnership.” The partnership is charged with helping states develop assessments and providing technical assistance to continue measuring what ELLs know and how to teach them effectively.
The challenge of teaching English to language-minority students is daunting. According to Paul Boyd-Batstone, chair of IRA’s Second Language Literacy and Learning Commission, “Teachers in schools across the country are encountering that language-minority students are a heterogeneous group. One-size-fits-all approaches to teaching are inadequate to meet their needs.” Boyd-Batstone cites the work of the National Literacy Panel, which reviewed hundreds of existing studies on the topic, and one of its recommendations is that differentiated instruction be utilized in professional development.
“Differentiated instruction takes into account sociocultural and developmental factors that students bring to school; it uses standardized and authentic assessment to inform and accommodate daily instruction based upon the students’ language proficiency levels as well as their strengths and needs,” Boyd-Batstone said.
The IRA’s position on second-language literacy instruction underscores the need for professional development for literacy instructors. Like the national literacy report, IRA’s position statement also acknowledges that home language strengths tend to carry over to English-language acquisition and urges parents, teachers, and policy makers to become informed about educational options and express their preferences.
It also urges researchers to collaborate so that the “social, economic, political and instructional variables on second-language literacy learning can be understood and used to inform strong policy initiatives.” The position statement also recommends more funding for second-language literacy learning and instruction.
Moving language-minority populations off sidelines requires more research, funding. (February 2007). Reading Today, 24(4), 13.
Journals
Reading Today