|
Executive
Summary
Effective Instruction for Learning Disabled or At-Risk
English-Language Learners: An Integrative Synthesis of the Empirical
and Professional Knowledge Bases
Authors: Russell Gersten, Scott Baker, Susan Unok Marks,
Sylvia B. Smith - Eugene Research Institute
Background
and Purpose
The
last 25 years have seen the largest wave of immigration in the
history of the United States. Since 1983 alone, the numbers of
limited English proficient students in public schools, has more
than doubled (Macias, 1998).
As the number of English-Language Learners in schools increases,
this question presents a major concern. What is the best way to
teach these students? To answer this question, educators need
professional knowledge based on research about effective instructional
practices for English-language learners. The urgency of this need
is highlighted by NCES data indicating that the dropout rate for
Hispanics is double that of African Americans and whites. Furthermore,
an estimated one million students learning English in schools
also have a learning disability. Because of difficulties inherent
in distinguishing second language acquisition issues from disabilities,
however, many English-Language Learners are at risk of being misidentified
for special education or, on the other extreme, of not being appropriately
identified as needing special services.
Therefore, we conducted a synthesis of all relevant research on
effective instruction for English-language learners. The guiding
question for the synthesis was: What do we know about effective
teaching practices for English-language learners with disabilities
or those at risk for school failure in the elementary and middle
school grades (K-8)?
back
to top
Goals
of Research
Our
primary goal was to conduct a rigorous examination of existing
research to identify and understand those practices and instructional
principles that produced a positive impact on student learning.
Unfortunately, we found only a small number of empirical studies
(eight) that assessed the impact of specific instructional interventions
or learning outcomes. Therefore, we supplemented our synthesis
of existing research with additional research of our own. This
research included analyses of discussions from five professional
work groups made up of researchers and educators who work with
this population.
Our
second goal was to help educators better understand why some practices
are more likely to be effective than others. For this purpose,
we used a wide range of data sources including, the professional
work groups.
A
third goal was to draw inferences from an examination of studies
that met rigorous criteria for inclusion in the research synthesis.
Findings
-
Since
the number of studies was small, the findings summarized below
should be interpreted with some caution. Moreover, only two
of the eight studies looked at English-Language Learners with
disabilities. Nonetheless, a few apparent themes can be identified.
Teachers in these studies who practiced more traditional instructional
methods saw greater student academic improvement than those
who used more innovative themes. For example, quality and quantity
of the teacher's feedback to students was strongly linked to
their academic progress. The effectiveness of traditional instructional
practices like these was observed most markedly in reading and
math.
-
In
addition to the research studies, meetings and discussions with
educators generated some promising instructional practices for
teaching English-Language Learners. Among these are:
- Use
new vocabulary as a vehicle for teaching concepts
-
Focus on rich and evocative vocabulary words during lessons
so that students remain engaged and challenged
- Use
visuals to reinforce concepts and vocabulary
- Apply
cooperative learning and peer tutoring methods
- Allow
students' to use their native language at times when they
are floundering
- Provide
opportunities for students to practice speaking English in
both formal and informal contexts throughout the day
back
to top
Current
Challenges
-
Extensive
discussions with practitioners (including mainstream, Bilingual,
and special education personnel) revealed that many current
attempts to merge content area instruction with English language
development instruction are not well implemented. Current classroom
practice typically fails to provide sufficient time for teaching
English or sufficient opportunities for students to use oral
language or to develop English writing skills. There also appears
to be a tendency to over-emphasize conversational language use
and to devote insufficient effort into building students' command
of the abstract language required by many academic content-areas.
-
It
is important to distinguish between the separate goals of language
development and academic improvement. Our research indicates
that increased language use in the classroom does not necessarily
lead to increased academic improvement. In some studies, greater
use of sophisticated language constructions in content-area
classes was found to limit students' cognitive and academic
growth. Because of limited and inconclusive research, we do
not yet know which form of student engagement (e.g., speaking,
listening, reading, writing, content activities, or a combination
of these) is most beneficial for English-language learners.
Further research needs to help clarify the link between academic
growth and language learning. There are other issues that hinder
academic gains in content areas -- most notably cultural differences
and lack of background knowledge.
How
is research being used to guide practice?
We
found only eight valid experimental studies for all academic areas
in grades K-8. Currently there is a limited empirical research
base to guide practice. Although many articles and reports claim
to describe effective practice, few provide the type of data necessary
for firm conclusions.
back
to top
Recommendations
For
Practitioners
-
We
conclude that an effective English language development program
must include a balance of three components: (1) development
of proficiency in "natural" language or conversation, (2) traditional
emphasis on grammar and syntax, and (3) development of academic
or decontextualized language.
-
Teachers
should use instructional approaches identified in the effective
teaching research (e.g., Brophy & Good, 1986) and modulate them
for English-language learners
-
Educators
need to improve the way they merge content area instruction
with English language development instruction. It is important
to provide both sufficient time for teaching English (particularly
for students with disabilities) and sufficient opportunities
for students to use oral language and writing. Key instructional
practices for English language development include introducing
sets of no more than seven new vocabulary words per lesson,
using visuals for reinforcement, using cooperative learning
and peer tutoring, and making strategic use of the native language
by allowing students to organize their thoughts in their native
language before risking an English response.
For
Researchers
- The
greatest need in future research regarding English-language learners
(particularly in the area of special education) is for well-designed
and valid intervention research. Existing studies are vague or
unclear regarding how teaching methods were implemented, the level
of implementation achieved, the language of instruction, and many
other "context" variables that provide a rich picture
of intervention research.
Back
to top
|
