Single Sythesis paper (2)

ELL Performance inReading, Literacy, andSocial Sciences
EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
1
Overview
Over the years, there have been many debates about to what degree school
systems should go to in order to educate ELL students. There has also been a lot of
discussionabout the way in which students are taught reading, writing ,and social
sciences. One can find many methods that are supposedly tried and true, but then
fall out of fashion. There has also been much debate over when and how one
should test ELL students in the age of high stakes testing. Research such as
methods in which students are taught literacy and social sciences, and trends in
testing data will be explored in the three or so topics in this paper.
ELL Students’ Performance in SocialSciences
Background
The ELL population has increased dramatically in the last eleven years.
From the 1993-1994 school years to the 2004-2005 schoolyears, the ELL
population has increased by 68%. (Misco & Costaneda, 2009). According to the
court case Lau vs. Nichols (1974); all students are entitled to participate in a
meaningful education, regardless of their first language. Additionally, according to
the court casePlyer vs. Doe (1982), all students, regardless of their immigration
status are entitled to an education and all the protections of the 14th amendment.

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
2
Therefore, even though ELL students find social sciences difficult, educators are
obligated to offer these courses to ELL students in a meaningful manner.
Challengesof Social Sciences for ELLs
Social studies, otherwise known as social sciences, is difficult, even for non-
native speakers, because of the nature of the text (Brown, 2007). In order to
understand social studies, students must gain a conceptualunderstanding of
historical events, geographic positions, and the impact of events on society.
Although ELLs can rapidly pick up conversational or social language, it takes
between 5 and 7 years for ELLs to reach grade level in academic language. Also,
there are little cues such as facial features, intonation, or gestures to help ELLs
understand the text. Likewise, there is not a predictable sequence oftentimes in the
text used in social sciences. Equally important is the fact that many ELLs lack
background knowledge, and if there is background knowledge, it is often
mismatched with the topic of discussion. (Brown, 2007).
Other problems that could cause barriers in ELLs performance in social
sciences include the fact some ELLs may have had no formal schooling and the
fact that the background knowledge ELL students do have is oftentimes not valued
by their schools. Also, teachers may not be familiar with students’ cultures within

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
3
their rooms, so the y do not know how to incorporate ELL students’ culture into
the curriculum (Weisman & Hansen, 2007).
According to Brown, The text that is used in social sciences is often difficult
to read as well, especially for ELL learners. There is often unfamiliar vocabulary
embedded in the text. The sentence structure is also oftentimes confusing. There
are complex sentences, and sentences with dependent clauses. There are also series
of facts, ideas, and concepts within one sentence, which can be confusing as well
(2007).
Strategies to Increase ELL’sAchievement in Social Sciences
Although ELLs do have a difficult time comprehending information
presented in social sciences, there is research to supportstrategies that could help
ELLs better understand the subjects that fall in this category. Brown suggests the
use of content maps and having students outlining units. The author continues by
suggestion the use of guiding questions, simplifying text, and assisting with
reading complex text (2007).
Misco and Castaneda state that educators should respond to four main areas
of concern when teaching social sciences. These areas of concern are building

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
4
empathy for the difficulties associated with learning a new language,
understanding how a second language is acquired, adapting curricula to students’
language needs, and employing literacy skills in the discipline. A strategy the
authors advise using is the reverse chronological approach.
The reverse chronological approachtakes on a thematic approachto social
sciences. This approach towards teaching social sciences starts with what the
student is familiar with and works backwards. It naturally facilitates the use of
primary sources, supplementary reading and cooperative inquiry, avoiding many of
the problems that can arise from textbook based teaching. By starting with the
most current and working backwards, students can make connections within
themes within social sciences (2009).
Although these strategies seem to work with ELLs thus far, there is very
little research available in regards to ELLs' performance in the social sciences.
More research is needed to determine if these strategies do indeed increase an
ELL’s achievement in this area of academia.

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
5
Trends in Testing Data of ELLs in Language Arts
Using Data to Determine Achievement
One set of data many people look at to determine if we are meeting students’
needs when it comes to instruction is that of standardized testing. It is assumed that
if students’ scores remain the same, they are not learning, therefore we must be
doing something wrong. States are beginning to look at these data more critically
to determine money districts receive, teacher pay, and various correction actions
that need to be made to be sure that schools tests scores improve. Although there
is much to learn about educating ELL students, determining where these students
are and what they have learned may not be best assessed using high stakes tests
data.
Since the implementation of NCLB (No Child Left Behind) in 2001, states
have put more and more emphasis on students’ performances on high stakes
testing. Horn, the white 13 year old white students were achieving at about the
level of 17 year old African Americans while the Hispanic students continue to
underperform based on the 1996 NAEP test. It is noted that the ways ELL students
and students with disabilities are rated are different from their white, African

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
6
American, and not disabled counterparts; therefore one must be careful when
looking at these data. High- stakes testing can also be linked to a higher dropout
rate among Hispanics. Analysis of these test results also show that without
appropriate accommodations, ELL students typically continue to underperform.
Research supports that even with a student’s increased performance in high stakes
testing, there is not necessarily evidence to supportthat there is increased learning.
Also, increases in these high-stakes tests often do not carry over from one year to
another. These trends are nationwide. In Massachusetts, students are given a test
called MCAS (Massachusetts Comprehensive AssessmentSystem). On this test,
only 52% of ELL students scored needsimprovement or higher while 88% of white
students scored needsimprovement or higher. This article concludes by suggesting
that the trends in the high- stakes testing do not necessarily reflect the learning
being done of the ELL student (Horne, 2003).
Why ELLs Do Not Perform as Well
Scores from NAEP of ELL learners from 2005 were compared to those who
were not ELL students. Seventy-one percent of ELL students scored below basic
on the reading portion of the test compared to only 27 % of the non-ELL students.
This research focuses on how to help these students perform better on reading.

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
7
Lack of background knowledge, the use of idiomatic expressions and little
knowledge of US history could all be barriers that show ELL students’
performance is not increasing on these tests over time. It is concluded that
although there may be many reasons ELL students do not perform as well on high
stakes tests, it is still the nation’s goal to educate all students, including ELLs.
(Alliance for Excellent Education, 2007).
Jamal Abedi and Patricia Gandara state that each subgroup is faced with its
own set of challenges when testing (2006). It is emphasized that ELL students do
perform below average compared to non-ELL students in Reading, but they are
performing close to the same in Math as well. It should be noted that it is common
practice among states to have ELL students take the Math portion of the high
stakes tests even if the ELL students are not required for a couple of years to take
the reading portion. The authors remind readers that students take time to acquire
the skills they need in order to be able to perform well on high stakes tests. By
definition, ELL students do not have a strong command of the language. Thus,
standardized tests that are designed to challenge non-ELLs are even more difficult
for ELL students. Because of awkward workings in the tests, they do not
accurately reflect what ELLs truly know. However, because of the NCLB Title I
accountability requirements, ELL students are required to be assessed with the

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
8
same tests that are developed and field tested with native speakers of English.
Abedi and Gandara (2006) determine that the reason that ELL students consistently
rank lower on these tests, and it looks like there is no growth of ELL students, is
that ELL students are rarely used to give the baseline for the score, or used in field
tests. Also, student’s linguistic and cultural factors may hinder a student’s ability to
fully understand materials in a way in which they will do well on assessments.
Since ELL students are affected by many different factors, it is not possibleto
present a clear picture of all the issues involved in the educational experiences of
ELL students; nor is it possible to accurately judge what ELL students are learning
using the same measure as is used for non-ELL students.
In summary, there seems to be a consensus that high-stakes standardized
testing is not the bestway to judge what an ELL has learned, or what he or she
knows. There are many factors, such as linguistic and cultural factors that may
make it hard for ELLs to do well on tests designed for non-ELL students. It can
also be concluded that just because it appears that ELL learners are not achieving
in literacy, or any subject at levels of non-ELL students, these students are not
learning the material.

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
9
Barriers of ELL Students when Learning Literacy
ELL learners are facing many barriers when learning literacy in English.
According to Deapua and Marshal (2010), ELL struggle because they lack a strong
academic background in their own language. This is specifically true of English.
These students often lack a proficiency in English as well.
Also, other cultures often have a strong supportstructure in their schools.
These cultures are more nurturing to students whereas schools in the United States
tend to be more individualistic. Forexample, cultures suchas those in Mexico and
Central America often promote a familiar relationship with educators and students.
Similarly, in the Hmong culture teachers are considered “second parents.”In
contrast, US systems encourage a gradual separation of students and encourage
them to become more independent.
Another barrier, according to Musanti and Pence (2010) suggest ELLs have
to learning literacy is the fact that ELLs cover up what they do not know. They do
not want to appear dumb; therefore they act as if they understand concepts.
Research supports the fact that if you cover up not knowing a concept, it makes it
more difficult to learn it.

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
10
A third barrier that ELL students have in learning literacy is the fact that
there is a difference in the social language structure and the academic language
structure (DeCapua & Marshal, 2010). Because these language structures are
unique to their place in society, it is confusing to the ELL who is just learning the
language. It takes between five and seven years for an ELL to acquire academic
language at grade level. Also, becausethe social language structure is easier for the
ELL students to grasp, many teachers misinterpret these students’ knowing this
language and assume they should be able to do well in school.
To overcome these barriers, some schoolsystems have implemented
Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL). Although many schools see this
as a solution to an ever increasing problem, it actually has many barriers as well.
Some of these barriers include the fact that many ELL students may come to this
country with little or no technology skills. Also, this program proves to be very
costly. Funding is an on-going problem to keep this program in the schools. Lastly,
the ELL may not accepttechnology, even if he or she is able to learn it. (Shao-
Chieh Lu, 2006).
Along with many other barriers, ELLs have a challenge when learning
English. There is research to supportthat ELLs’ difficulty in acquiring academic

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
11
language is legitiment. Culture is instrumental in shaping one’s views of the world
and how he or she organizes and processes information (DeCapua & Marshal
2010). Thus, schools should understand these barriers and work around them.
Teacher attitudes can also be a barrier ELLs have when learning literacy.
Research is mixed about how teachers feel about ELLs. Most research, however,
points to a more negative feeling towards these students, especially if you ask
teachers about having ELLS in their classrooms.
According to research conducted byKarabenick and Clemens (2004), only
43% of teachers said they would like to have ELLs in their classroom. Also, 45%
of teachers believe that if an ELL student is not able to express himself, it is
because he or she does not understanding. Likewise, 63% of teachers believed that
ELLs take more of their time in the classroomthan non-ELL students. Most of the
teachers also favored emersion to other methods of instruction for ELL students.
Overall, teachers in this study were positive when questioned about ELL students,
though they were more comfortable with ELLs at their schoolthan in their
classrooms.

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
12
According to Youngs and Youngs (2001), mainstream teachers’ attitudes
toward ESL students are likely to affect what ESL students learn. Teachers’
attitudes and expectations of students often lead to students behaving or learning as
expected. Teachers influence their students, even if they are unaware that they are
communicating these expectations.
Attitudes not only in the classroom, but also in society have become
increasingly negative in the pastfew years (Walker, Shafer, and Liams, 2011).
Evidence to supportthe fact attitudes are increasingly negative include the fact that
referendums have been passed banning bilingual education and have negated ELL
instruction to a single year of structured immersion in California, Arizona, and
Massachusetts.
Additionally, in a study by the authors, the overall attitudes of teachers
towards ELLs appear to be neutral to strongly negative. Only 18% felt that ELLs
perform well and school. Also, 16% of those surveyed felt that ELL students came
from places where education was inferior. Equally important, 70% of mainstream
teachers were not actively interested in having ELLs in their room. In the same
way, 25% of the mainstream teachers felt it was the responsibility of the ELL
learner to adapt to the American culture to learn.

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
13
Strategies forInstructing ELLs in Literacy
Background
Much research has been conducted to determine what should be done to
increase ELLs’ performance in literacy. In order to effectively increase these
students’ achievement in this area, one must know how students in general read.
According to Cumming (2010), there are two basic components of reading which
are conceptually distinct; these two components are word level and text level.
Cummings suggests that there should be a balanced approachto reading instruction
that combines the provision of ample opportunities for literacy engagement.
A background of how ELLs learn is also important to know when
considering strategies to instruct ELL students. Teachers should understand the
patterns of reading development among ELL students as well as language
acquisition of ELLs. The order that ELL students acquire a new language
generally follows this sequence, according to the author: 1) conversational fluency
2) discrete language skills 3) academic language proficiency. It is important that
educators do recognize that conversational fluency comes much earlier than
academic fluency. Forexample, ELL students typically acquire conversational

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
14
fluency within one to two years. On the contrary, ELLs usually take between five
and seven years to gain academic fluency at grade level. In order for ELLs to catch
up within six years, the author states that an ELL student must make 15 month
gains each 10 month schoolyear. The average native speaker only gains about 10
months of academic gain in a 10 month schoolyear.
Linguist estimate that in order for a student to get by in conversation, he or
she needs to know about 2000 word families, which is why ELLs are able to grasp
conversational language much earlier than academic language. Additionally, there
are many clues to conversation that facilitate in the ELLs understanding of
conversation. Examples of clues that are included in conversational language
include eye contact, gestures, facial expression and intonation. Since academic
language is oftentimes more formal and abstract, ELLs have a difficulty
understanding it (Cummings, 2010).
Strategies
Because ELL students do struggle with academic language, it is important
that educators learn strategies that can aid in these students better understanding it.
In the same way, it is important that teachers are aware of these strategies when
teaching literacy. Some of the strategies include including writing strategies as

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
15
reading and writing are closely related, building literacy skills in the first language,
increasing background knowledge, and using translations.
One approachthat many schools in California and Texas have tried is
bilingual education (Cheung, 2005). In both studies mentioned by the author, the
schools that incorporated the bilingual model were more successfulthat similar
schools in the same area that did not incorporate bilingual education. Although this
approachis not widely used in much of the country, research does supportthe fact
that bilingual education is successful.
If bilingual education is not an option, using an ELL’s first language still is a
good strategy to use. For example, teachers can incorporate cognates and use
students who share the same first language to translate (Vacca-Rizppoulos &
Nicoletti, 2009). Also, according to Vacca-Ripzppoulos & Nicoletti, incorporating
bilingual flip books is a good strategy. A flip bookhas the words or lessons in
English on one side and the native tongue on the other side. Additionally, if a
student has a higher functioning ELL classmate in the class, this student can act as
not only a translator, but later one who clarifies concepts that are difficult to
understand in English.

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
16
Another strategy one should incorporate when teaching ELL students is to
incorporate visual cues. To illustrate, one may bring in real examples of new
vocabulary words. (Vacca-Rizopoulos & Nicolettie, 2009). Also, conceptmaps,
mind maps, and word maps help students to visually see how words connect in
english.
In addition to the afore mentioned strategies, one must also build an ELL’s
schema, or background knowledge to make what he or she is reading more
meaningful (Stotte, 2001). According to Stotte, the reading process involves
identification of genre, formal structures and topics. Some students’ difficulties in
reading may be problems brought on because of insufficient background
knowledge. There are many ways one can build this background knowledge. Some
ways an educator may work to build and ELL’s schema include lectures, the use of
visual aids, demonstrations, and real live experiences such as field trips.
Additionally, the use of discussion and role play can help with building an ELL’s
background knowledge. It is also important to include text previewing and
discussionof new vocabulary terms.

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
17
References
Abedi, j, & Gandara, Patricia. (2006). Performance of english
language learners as a subgroup in large -scale assessment:
interaction of research and policy. Educational
Measurement: Issues and Practice, (winter), 36-46.
Alliance for Excellent Education. (2007). Urgent butoverlooked: The literacy
crisis among adolescent English LanguageLearners. Washington, DC:
(Available at: http://www.all4ed.org/files/UrgentOver.pdf)
Horn, Catherine. (2003). High-stakes testing and students:
stopping or perpetuating a cycle of failure ? Theory into
Practice, 42(1), 30-41.
Brown, C. (2007, September/October). Strategies for making social studies texts
more comprehensible for english language learners. TheSocial Studies, 185-
188.
Perez, D, & Holmes, M. (2010). Ensuring academic literacy for ell students.

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
18
American Secondary Education, 38(2), 32-43.
Misco, T., & Castaneda, M. (2009, Spring). "Now, what should i do for english
language learners?" reconceptualizing social studies curriculum design for
ells. EducationalHorizons, 182-189.
Stott, N. (2001). Helping esl students becomebetter readers: schema theory
applications and limitations. TheInternet TESL Journal, 7(11).
(available at http://iteslj.org/articles/stott-schema.html)
Weisman, E., & Hansen, L. (2007, December). Strategies for teaching social
studies to elementary level ells. TheEducation Digest, 61-65.
The Oyez Project, Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982) available at:
(http://oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1981/1981_80_1538)
Intercultural Development Research Association, Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563
(1974) available at (http://www.idra.org/mendezbrown/lau_case.html)

EDCI 636
BethCsiszer
19
I pledge nmyhonor that I have neithergivennor
receivedunauthorizedaidonthiswork,andI am
unaware of any violationof the StudentConduct
Code by others

Single Sythesis paper (2)

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (16)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (15)

Similar to Single Sythesis paper (2)

Similar to Single Sythesis paper (2) (20)

Single Sythesis paper (2)