Abstract In this study, variousmeasures of educational achievement of English languagelearners (ELLs) are compared to those of native English speakers (NS) who graduatedhigh school in Calgary and were admitted into first year studies at the University ofCalgary (U of C); and the literacy demands of university manifested in the readabilitylevels of first year textbooks are analyzed. Findings suggest ELLs are academicallycompetent, as reflected in the achievement outcomes of provincial high school diplomaexaminations in mathematics. The vast majority, however, are inadequately prepared forthe literacy demands of university and are at immediate academic risk. Suggestions aremade for policy, transitional programming, and the provision of services that may supportacademic achievement at university for this growing profile of learners on campus.

Keywords English language learners . Cognitive academic language proficiency.

Transitions . Academic achievement

Introduction

Canada is among the top 12 developed nations in the global economy, allstruggling with massive domestic demographic shift that necessitates unprece-dented large scale immigration to meet the human resource needs of the decade ahead(Jackson and Howe 2008; Chang 2009). The future quality of life of these nationsdepends on a vibrant, well-educated workforce increasingly comprised of immigrantsand the children of immigrants as the domestic population ages and retires.

H. Roessingh (*)EdT 710, Faculty of Education, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW,Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canadae-mail: hroessin@ucalgary.ca

S. DouglasFaculty of Education, University of British Columbia Okanagan, 3333 University Way, Kelowna,BC V1V 1V7, Canadae-mail: scott.douglas@ubc.ca

English Language Learners’ Transitional Needs from HighSchool to University: An Exploratory Study

Hetty Roessingh & Scott Douglas

Published online: 7 July 2011# Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Int. Migration & Integration (2012) 13:285–301DOI 10.1007/s12134-011-0202-8

Among those arriving in Canada, the vast majority speak a language other thanEnglish as their first language. The extent to which newcomers can be meaningfullyintegrated into the educational, economic, and societal institutions of their newlyadopted homeland will determine the health and well being of the country as a whole.Education is inarguably the deciding factor for the next generation in the eyes ofimmigrant parents as well as their children (Krahn and Taylor 2005; McAndrew 2009),and developing both communicative and academic language proficiency to engagewith the demands of school curriculum is the key to their longitudinal educationalsuccess. The literature describes these children as Generation 1.5, English languagelearners (ELLs), or English as a second language (ESL learner).1 They present aunique learner profile that has been under researched and in many ways,misunderstood (Harklau 2003; Goldenberg 2008).

Macro level data available from ministries of education (Alberta Education, 2009; BCMinistry of Education, 2009) and census files from Statistics Canada data banks (Abadaet al. 2008; Reitz et al. 2009) for example, as well as methods of reporting Englishlanguage proficiency may be masking the reality of the educational outcomes of ELLsupon completion of high school and the challenges they face in making the transitionfrom high school to university (Tooey and Derwing 2006; Grayson 2009). Large-endstudies undertaken in the US (Rumbaut 2004) similarly are based on census data andself reported measures of spoken English which may not represent the level of academiclanguage required for participation in advanced studies in post-secondary settings.

In the study at hand, a more refined analysis is possible given individual transcriptinformation of 128 ELLs and a comparison group of 120 native English speakers(NS) who were admitted to the University of Calgary (U of C) between 1996 and2002. Our overarching research question relates to the educational achievement ofthese students upon high school graduation in two academic subjects—Mathematicsand English—which involve provincial examinations; the link to academic languageproficiency; and finally the demands of academic language proficiency forsuccessful engagement with first year university level studies, noting especially thegap between the level achieved by ELLs and the level reflected in first yearuniversity reading materials that NS presumably do manage.

The section that follows provides the reader with further background informationto provide a context for our work and we review the relevant literature. We look atdemographic data which emphasizes the need to attract and to integrate into theeconomy immigrants who largely do not speak English as their first language. Moreimportantly, there is the need to ensure that their children succeed in their academicpursuits. Our conceptual framework follows and grounds our study in the extantresearch on this profile of learner. We then describe our study plan, discuss ourfindings, and make suggestions for policy, programming and provision of services tosupport the transitional needs of the growing numbers of ELLs who seek toparticipate in tertiary education programs.

1 ELLs and ESL learners are used interchangeably in this article. Alberta Education continues to use theterm ESL in its documents. The research literature has generally shifted to referring to these students asELLs, a term that is broader and more inclusive. Generation 1.5 is used in the literature pertaining to post-secondary learners who completed most or all of their education in the k-12 school system but whoselanguage learning profile reflects inadequate level of academic (English) proficiency to meet the demandsof advanced studies.

286 H. Roessingh, S. Douglas

Background Information

Alberta’s future economic prosperity, like that of all regions of Canada, is heavily tied to itsability to make the transition from an economy heavily dependent on natural resourceextraction to a knowledge economy (Alberta Advanced Education and Technology 2007).To this end, a strategic plan entitled Roles and Mandates Policy Framework for Alberta’spublicly Funded Advanced Education System has been developed by Alberta AdvancedEducation and Technology. Salient features of this plan include increasing theeducational levels of all Albertans; and strong collaboration between the K-12 schoolsystem and advanced education (these are represented by two separate ministries:Alberta Education, and Alberta Advanced Education and Technology) with seamlesstransition between the two identified as a key consideration (p.14). There is arecognition that a large proportion of the population performs below minimum literacystandards and that the education systems must be able to respond to changes inpopulation demographics. Immigration is identified as a variable of particular interestand concern. This strategic plan underscores the need for the work at hand. We begin byattempting to get a grip on the numbers.

Getting a Grip on the Numbers: Exponential Growth, Shifting Learner Profile

Data from Citizenship and Immigration Canada (2000, 2008) over the past decadereflect a steady growth in immigration numbers from 189,764 in 1999 to between240,000 and 265,000 projected for 2009. The top source countries continue to bewithin Asia—Pacific (China, India, Korea, Pakistan), together comprising nearly 50%of immigrants accepted. China and India, unchanged over the past decade, continue toprovide about 20% of the total immigration intake to Canada. This pattern is mirroredin local level data in Calgary: China and India again, providing the greatest numbers.The majority of immigrants apply under the Economic immigrant category andthey are either skilled workers or professionally prepared, with approximately35% holding a university degree. This is double the number of degree holdersamong the general population of Canada (approximately 17%), thus representingthe brain gain that Canada’s immigration strategy is targeting (Baxter 1999).These immigrants have high expectations for themselves and for their children intheir hopes for participating and contributing to Canada’s economic well being andfor integrating into the Canadian mainstream. Education is seen as the mediatingvariable that will ensure quality of life by way of participation in a professionleading to a well paid career (Krahn and Taylor 2005; Corak 2008). Some 85% ofimmigrants eventually seek citizenship status and intend to live the rest of theirlives in their new, adopted home (Citizenship and Immigration Canada 2008, p. 8).

These figures, however, mask the growth in ELLs identified by local schooljurisdictions for English language learning support. Increasingly, these are theCanadian born children of immigrants who arrive in kindergarten just beginning todevelop English language proficiency who would not be reflected in the Citizenshipand Immigration Canada data. Alberta Education (2009) records approximately50,000 students for ESL support. The Calgary Board of Education (CBE), Alberta’slargest school jurisdiction, is home to approximately 21,000 or 42% of these students(CBE 2008). These numbers reflect exponential growth over the past 15 years:

English Language Learners’ Transitional Needs from High School 287

approximately 4,600 ELLs in 1995 to 21,000 in 2007 while the overall enrolmentfigure of 97,000 students remained stable. ELLs therefore, represent approximately22% of the CBE total enrolment (21,000 of 97,000). While they are fairly evenlydistributed over the K-12 spectrum, increasingly the numbers are arriving atkindergarten age, and they are by and large Canadian born youngsters. Vancouverand metro Toronto school boards among other urban school jurisdictions identify theidentical trend in the demographic profile of their school enrolment data albeit on alarger scale (Duffy 2004).

Obtaining accurate figures for children who may be considered ELLs anddiscerning the educational success of ELLs’ by way of accountable outcomemeasures such as scores on provincial achievement tests in grades 3, 6, 9; diplomaexamination scores in Grade 12, retention rates, graduation rates, and participationrates in academic track subjects is notoriously difficult to ascertain. Despite longstanding calls for better tracking mechanisms (Dawson 1998) the manner in whichELLs are identified, coded and tracked through their K-12 schooling experiencesremains problematic both at the local jurisdiction level as well as at the Ministrylevel due to the structure and organization of the databases, policies, and proceduressurrounding data management. Once exited from ESL program support, for example,the student loses their ESL code and simply becomes one of the general mainstreampopulation. Retrieval of the files of ELLs is exceedingly difficult since the relevantdata for coding and funding, transcript details and provincial testing outcomes are allstored in separate data banks that are difficult to integrate. Other studies, similarly,have identified the lack of accurate recording, tracking, and access to data as afrustrating factor in research pertaining to the perceived educational risk ofGeneration 1.5 students (Tooey and Derwing 2006; Roberge et al. 2009).

In a small scale study of 60 ELLs in an academic high school Roessingh(2004, 2008) recorded a 78% retention rate (47) moving from grade 10 to grade 12.They were predominantly arrivals from the Pacific Rim, whose parents had appliedas Economic class immigrants to Canada. Over her 5 years of tracking, all 47 whomoved into grade 12 successfully graduated high school with English 30-1(academic English language arts requirement for university admission). The finalmark for subjects that involve a provincial diploma examination is comprised of 50% ofthe examination mark, with the other 50% assigned by the classroom teacher. All of thestudents in Roessingh’s study were also registered in (and passed) Mathematics 30(required for admission to the faculty of engineering). The vast majority of thesestudents stayed in Calgary, attended the U of C, and are included in the sample ofstudents in the current study. Roessingh’s findings are fairly consistent with averagegraduation rates of 72% reported by Tooey and Derwing (2006) from two Vancouverhigh schools located in high socio-economic neighborhoods of the city (N=376).Moreover, the average diploma examination score of 56% in English aligns with thosereported in Roessingh’s study: 59% for a similar demographic.

Various studies conducted at the Ministry level—notably British Columbia(BC Ministry of Education, 2009) and Alberta (Alberta Education, 2009), as well asstudies using national data bases (Human Resources and Development Canada, 2000;Abada et al. 2008) record similarly high levels of high school graduation for theprofile of learner of interest in our current study. While these outcomes appearoptimistic on the surface at least, it becomes important to understand the experiences

288 H. Roessingh, S. Douglas

of these students as they take their next steps on their educational pathway in makingthe transition to post-secondary studies (McAndrew 2009, p. 32). The study at handseeks to shed some light on this question.

More Numbers … From Grade 12 to University

The following information reflects our best efforts, based on triangulation ofavailable data from various sources, to develop a sense of ELLs’ educationalretention, achievement and participation through the transition from high school touniversity, for ELLs considered academically competent as reflected in theirenrolment in the diploma examination subjects of Mathematics 30 and English 30-1.

In the 2009–2010 school year, some 7,000 Grade 12 students in the CalgaryBoard of Education met the English language requirements for graduation from highschool. Approximately 75% of these students qualified for university entrance withEnglish 30-1 for an estimated total of 5,200 students (CBE, 2010). In addition, basedon enrolment data (Calgary Catholic School District 2010) some 2,500 students fromthe Calgary Catholic School District qualified for university entrance with English30-1. Thus, locally, 7,700 students may have qualified and sought entrance foruniversity level studies.

The U of C draws the bulk (70%) of its incoming first year students from the localarea. There has been a steady increase in first year enrolment from 5,500 in 2002, to6,500 for the 2009 academic year. In 2009, therefore, approximately 4,550 first yearadmissions were recruited from local schools (University of Calgary 2010). In additionto faculty-specific high school subjects and the minimum high school average foradmission to faculties of choice, at the time of this study first year admitted studentsreceiving less than 75% on the English 30-1 diploma examination were obliged to sitthe Effective Writing Test (EWT). Over time, a stable figure of 35% of incoming firstyear students had been required to sit this examination: the vast majority however, werelikely of an ELL background (Brent et al. 2002). In 2009, some 2,250 students wererequired to write the EWT, approximately 2,000 of whom were likely to have been ofan ELL background. ELLs from local high schools may represent as much as 44% offirst year admissions accepted from the local area (i.e. 2,000 of 4,550), although weestimate that perhaps only 50% of them would have been coded as such during theirK-12 schooling. The remainder of the first year admissions (i.e., approximately 1950 ofthe 6,500 admitted) arrive from the rural boards or may be transferring in from otherinstitutions, and may also include further numbers of ELLs which we are unable toidentify from the first year registration data. Table 1 below summarizes these figures.

Table 1 Summary of admissions to first year

Year Total admissions The number fromlocal area (70%)

The number whowrite EWT

Estimated number of ESL

2002 5,500 3,850 2,000 or 36% of totaladmission

1,800: 90% of 3,850; 46%of 3,850 locally admitted

2009 6,500 4,550 2,250 or 35% of totaladmission

2,000: 90% of 2,250; 44%of 4,550 locally admitted

English Language Learners’ Transitional Needs from High School 289

It would seem, then, that despite challenges ELLs may face in the K-12 system, theyare resilient and tenacious: at some 44% of first year admissions they are over-represented in the admissions data (given their overall numbers of around 21% of localK-12 school boards). This reflects once again on Canada’s immigration policy notedearlier which privileges high levels of education among immigrant parents and theconcomitant expectations of academic participation for their offspring. However, ELLswere also vastly over-represented among those who had to write the EWTand who webelieve remain at academic risk as a consequence of under developed academiclanguage proficiency and the threshold required for successful studies in university.Thus, while academic achievement in an advanced level high school mathematicscourse is a determining factor for university participation (McGrath 1996), not readingat grade level places students at academic risk (Butlin 1999). We account for thesevariables in our work and take this up in further detail in the methodology (findings)section of our work. While ELLs no doubt are possessed with social capital such asparental expectations and support from the larger ethnic community with consistentfocus on advanced education that are identified as key variables in their success in auniversity setting (Abada et al. 2008), as well as overall strength in mathematics, theseadvantages may not mitigate the effects of under developed academic languageproficiency (Fox 2005). We describe our theoretical framework next, situating ourstudy at the intersection of Cummins’ model (1981) of communicative and academiclanguage proficiency, and the emergent field of the Generation 1.5 learner.

Conceptual Framework: Generation 1.5 and Academic Language Proficiency

Over the past decade, various researchers working in college and university settingsprimarily in the US noted the appearance of increasing numbers of students of anELL background among first year admissions. Many of these students were requiredto upgrade their academic language proficiency before being permitted to enroll infull-time studies.

Harklau (2003) was among the first to describe these students, noting theirdistinct learning differences from international students arriving to study at collegelevel, or from students with limited English language proficiency. The commonfeature of this emerging profile of learner included having been schooled mostly, orentirely in the US in an English-speaking milieu; competent in daily communicativetasks but certainly challenged by the academic tasks of tertiary level studies.According to Thonus (2003:18), many of these students “have lost or are in theprocess of losing their home languages without having learned their writing systemsor academic registers. Unlike international students, Generation 1.5 students lack abasis of comparison in fully developed oral, written, or both systems of a firstlanguage.” “Generation 1.5”2 was coined as a term to describe this profile of learner

2 In fact Rumbaut (2004) coined this term in his earlier writings and refined this construct to includeGeneration 1.75, 1.5, 1.25, 2 to reflect differences in longitudinal adaptation outcomes, including languagelearning for different age on arrival groups. He advocates disaggregating the data on these lines especiallywhen the focus of study is related to language learning, but his measures are restricted to self reportedspoken English proficiency which the research consistently finds is not adequate for academic success athigher levels.

290 H. Roessingh, S. Douglas

who shares some of the features of first generation and second generationimmigrants described above. Current research also uses the term ELLs as a broader,more encompassing term to describe these students (Goldenberg 2008).

The construct of communicative and academic language proficiency wasoriginally posited by Cummins (1981). We adopt his framework for describing theunfolding language learning demands of daily social interaction and the academiclanguage and literacy required for the demands of content and curriculum associatedwith higher levels of education. While communicative language may be character-ized as “here and now”, everyday language for basic communication andconversational exchanges that may be accomplished with a vocabulary of 3–5,000words, academic language proficiency is characterized by abstract uses oflanguage that require language itself to interpret and comprehend: metaphor,symbolism, specialized, and technical uses of common words for example, that islargely found in books (Bailey 2006). An academically competent NS high schoolgraduate who aspires to university attendance is estimated to have a vocabulary ofabout 18,000 word families (Hazenberg and Hulstijn 1996), or some 85,000 words(i.e., a word family is a root word together with its inflected forms), and reads atwell above grade 12 level.

It is generally accepted that ELLs can develop communicative proficiency within2 years of their arrival and participation in an English-speaking school setting(Garcia 2000). Developing academic language proficiency, on the other hand, is along and gradual process.

Age on arrival (AOA) and by proxy, level of first language achievement—L1,and educational attainment and length of residence have long been recognizedas key variables in determining the eventual level of language achievement andby extension, educational achievement, in the second language—L2 (Twyford1987; Klesmer 1994; Hakuta et al. 2000; Thomas and Collier 2002). Studentsarriving over the age of 14 have many advantages: they have already crossed akey literacy threshold in their first language associated with the shift fromlearning to read to reading to learn—generally identified as Grade 4 equivalent(Roberts 1994; Lee and Schallert 1997), they have metacognitive awareness andcan deploy learning strategies independently, they have well-developed studyskills and they have encoded curriculum content, concepts and skills in keyacademic disciplines in the first language (Li 2004). Transferring this information,or mapping new language onto pre-existing cognitive frameworks is far lessonerous than having to ‘build from scratch’ in a language the child is only in thebeginning stages of learning—such is the challenge facing the younger arrival, or theCanadian born children of immigrant parents. Various studies suggest a 2-year languagegap by grade 6 (Klesmer 1993; Roessingh and Elgie 2009; August et al. 2005), with asuggestion in other studies that this gap only widens over time. Cameron (2002)recorded significant gaps in lexical knowledge at surprisingly low levels (i.e.,approximately grade 4) among young arriving ELLs (mean age on arrival=4 years6 months) even 10 years after having been immersed in English-medium instruction.

Roessingh (2008), in linking vocabulary and reading comprehension scores toachievement outcomes on the English 30-1 diploma examination, noted that botholder arrivals and younger arrivals could achieve marks in the range of 55–59% withapproximately a grade 9 reading comprehension score. Older arrivals, however,

English Language Learners’ Transitional Needs from High School 291

could achieve this outcome with a lower measured vocabulary than youngerarrivals–older arrivals presumably mediating the vocabulary gap by way of recourseto translation strategies to L1 where the corresponding lexical information wasalready encoded. She cautions, however, that older arrivals may nevertheless be atacademic risk in tertiary settings when they may have outgrown their ability to useL1 proficiency to make meaning in L2.

For all ELLs who graduate high school in Canada, therefore, the journey throughpost-secondary schooling is fraught. Younger arrivals may only face yet anotherenormous academic challenge upon arrival at university, and older arrivals may, atsome point beyond Grade 12 when the distance between these students’ level ofacademic language proficiency and the requirements of advanced academic study atuniversity becomes too great to mediate through the first language, invariably runinto academic difficulties as well (Jiang and Kuehn 2001; Fox 2005). It may be forthis reason that instructors at college and university level perceive all ELLs ateducational risk, regardless of age on arrival and collectively describe them asGeneration 1.5. Moreover, while ELLs were still in high school, it would beexpected that instructional scaffolding and differentiation might mediate the gapbetween their GE9 reading age and the materials written at grade. They are about toenter post-secondary schooling, where differentiated instruction and scaffoldedsupports are unheard of: students in large, lecture style class settings must have thereading threshold and strategies to access the materials independently.

The demands of university studies place a high premium on academiclanguage proficiency: advanced reading abilities, independent library and internetresearch, group work and presentations (Zappa-Hollman 2007), writing followingdiscipline specific genre conventions and expectations (reports, lab assignments,various types of essays, notes from lecture information). It is not only reading andwriting that matters, but the ability to engage with problem solving approaches tolearning that require the active and collaborative construction of meaning andunderstanding that challenges ELLs overall language and literacy levels. From aliteracy perspective, university students may be expected to read well above Grade12 level given the participation of the upper quintile of NS high school studentsamong those transitioning to university. Advanced reading materials are character-ized by a linguistic burden which we also consider in our inquiry. Laufer (1992)sets the threshold of vocabulary comprehension at 98% in order to make meaningof academic information. This is the key concern of our work that we describenext.

Study Plan

In the study at hand, we investigate levels of academic language proficiency byAOA cohort groups, recognizing from our review of the literature that all AOAcohorts, including the newly emerging profile of Canadian born ELLs may wellstruggle with the demands of university studies as a consequence of their underdeveloped linguistic resources. Our over arching research question pertains to thelevel of developed academic language proficiency that graduating ELLs demonstratein comparison to their NS peers, linking this to the demands of first year university

292 H. Roessingh, S. Douglas

course work as reflected in the readability levels of textbooks prescribed for firstyear courses in Canadian Studies and Business.

We examine the construct of academic language proficiency as it is reflectedin the English 30-1 diploma examination mark and the teacher awarded mark(each contributes 50% to the final mark for the course). Math 30 was selected asan indicator of general academic competence and again, the results are comparedfor ELLs and NS for the final course mark.

In this section, we describe the participants and our data; our methodology, andwe report our findings.

The Participants and the Data

At the onset of our research project in 2004, there was no mechanism at U of Cfor identifying ELLs among newly admitted first year students. Our database wasgenerated from the unique opportunity of identifying 128 ELLs attending U of C. Thesestudents were known to have received ESL support within the local (public) schoolboard and had participated in previous small scale studies by the research team(Roessingh and Kover 2003; Roessingh 2008). The vast majority of these studentsarrived from Pacific Rim countries: Hong Kong, Taiwan, Korea, and Mainland China.Their families immigrated mostly as Economic class immigrants, representing highSES backgrounds. As noted earlier, the students in this study resemble those in alarger study conducted in the Vancouver School Board (Tooey and Derwing 2006) andthus may be understood to reflect the general learner profile of this subgroup of ELLswho comprise a significant proportion of the diverse and increasing numbers of ELLsin the general school population transitioning to university. The sample includes74ELLs who arrived in Canada as adolescents (older arrivals aged 14+), and 54 ELLswho arrived as children (younger arrivals aged 6–13 years). This sample ofconvenience is recognized as a limitation of the work at hand.

The students’ names were submitted to the U of C Institutional Analysis workingunit, where personnel with the required level of security clearance for access into theregistrar’s database assembled the file information we requested. Individualcomputerized files were generated from the registrar’s database. A further sampleof 120 NS students was randomly selected from the registrar’s data base as a groupfor comparison. The dates of entry to the U of C for these students were from 1996–2002. The names of the students were masked for reasons related to Freedom ofInformation and Privacy legislation before the data were released to us for ourresearch purposes. Table 2 provides a summary of the data.

For the most part, SPSS 15.0 for windows was used to provide a simple analysisof variation (ANOVA), and the Scheffe Test when comparing the different groups ofstudents in order to find statistically significant differences. At other times, given theexploratory nature of this analysis, the methods used were graphical summaries ofthe data at hand.

Findings

In this section, we report our findings for the two different AOA cohort groups ofELLs: older arrivals and younger arrivals; and the comparison group of NS

English Language Learners’ Transitional Needs from High School 293

described above. Four different measures of educational outcomes are presented.This is followed by an analysis of first year textbook information that highlights thelevel of academic language proficiency required for successful engagement with thereading demands at university.

First, we examine the English 30-1 Diploma Examination and Math 30 outcomes.We begin with the Math 30 scores as a general indicator of academic competence.Figure 1 below includes the average Math scores for older arriving ELLs, youngerarriving ELLs and their NS counterparts.

A simple ANOVA and the Scheffe Test (P<0.5) show that while there is nostatistically significant difference between the Math 30 grades for older and youngerarriving ELLs, there is a statistically significant difference between the ELLs as awhole and their NS counterparts. These scores suggest that Math is an area ofrelative strength for the profile of ELLs who are the focus of this study.

To further establish Math 30 scores as an indicator of academic proficiency, acomparison of English 30-1 Diploma Examination scores to Math 30 scores wasundertaken. A simple ANOVA reveals a statistically significant difference (P<0.5)between the English 30-1 Diploma Examination scores and the Math 30 scores forboth the older and the younger arriving ELLs. However, there is no significantdifference between the English 30-1 Diploma exam scores and the Math 30 scoresfor our population of NS.

The next analysis investigates ELL’s achievements on the English 30-1 Diplomaexamination in comparison to their NS counterparts. A simple ANOVA and theScheffe Test (P<0.5) were used to determine that while there is no statistically

Table 2 Summary of data N=248

Student category Number of students

ELLs: older arrivals in Canada (aged 14+) 74

ELLs: younger arrivals in Canada (aged 6–13) 54

NS comparison group 120

English 3070.7

English 3058.2English 30

54.2

Math 3073.1

Math 3079.0

Math 3083.4

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Native SpeakersYounger ArrivalsOlder Arrivals

Fig. 1 A comparison of English30-1 Diploma examination andMath 30 blended grades

294 H. Roessingh, S. Douglas

significant difference between the English 30-1 Diploma exam grades for older andyounger arriving ELLs, there is a statistically significant difference between theELLs as a whole and their NS counterparts.

Next, we consider the overall failure rate for the English 30-1 Diploma exam forstudents entering U of C. Figure 2 displays this information.

ELLs fail the examination at much higher rates than their NS counterparts. Wereturn to this point in the discussion section, underscoring the linguistic vulnerabilityof ELLs that is reflected in these scores.

The next stage of the analysis of English 30-1 scores related to the difference betweenclass scores and the diploma examination scores. A simple ANOVA (P<0.5) reveals astatistically significant difference between the English 30-1 Diploma Examinationgrades and the English 30-1 teacher awarded grades for all three groups: older arrivingELLs, younger arriving ELLs, and their NS counterparts. Notice, however, that thedifference is much more pronounced for the ELLs (Fig. 3). We elaborate on this pointin the discussion.

Some Demands of First Year University Studies

To get a sense of the academic language demands of first year university studies, weprofiled various excerpts from textbooks and readings prescribed at first year level.While first year studies demand far more than simply reading textbooks (i.e.following lecture information, making presentations, working collaboratively ongroup projects), the underlying demand of university may best be reflected in thereading level expected. The excerpts below are analyzed for their readability grade levelusing the Flesh Kincaid formula and they are profiled for vocabulary levels using anonline profiling tool (Cobb 2009; Heatley and Nation 1994; Figs. 4 and 5).

We note especially the reading demand of first year text which is approximatelygrade level 20, far beyond the reach of the estimated Grade 9 reading level for ourELLs who achieved the marks we noted on the English 30-1 Diploma Examination(Roessingh 2008) and even more so for the significant number of ELLs who failedthe examination (Fig. 2). The second noteworthy finding relates to the density ofacademic word list and off-list words combined.

36.5

22.2

2.5

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Native SpeakerYounger ArrivalsOlder Arrivals

Fig. 2 English 30-1 Diplomaexamination fail rate

English Language Learners’ Transitional Needs from High School 295

In both excerpts, 18% of the text may be considered challenging. These wordsare in bold. Once again Laufer (1992) reminds us that readers must comprehend98% (i.e. only 2% of words can be unfamiliar) in order to make meaning. Thediscussion below elaborates on our findings.

Discussion

Our findings suggest that ELLs are academically competent young men and women.This is reflected in their Mathematics 30 scores. Older arriving ELLs outperformboth NS and younger arriving ELLs, but ELLs taken together as a group do betterthan NS. Other studies, similarly, point to ELLs relative strength in mathematics asan indicator of their academic competence (Tooey and Derwing 2006).

It is the results of the English 30-1 examination score for ELLs and thediscrepancy between this score and the teacher awarded mark that give cause forconcern. The pattern is consistent: teachers award higher marks than these studentsachieve on the examination. While we are unable to hazard guesses about the causes

CNST 231: Introduction to Canadian Studies (Stortz, 2001)

Like nationalists everywhere, the Canadian imperialists assumed that the people whose ideals they expressed possessed a distinctive national character which was the product of racialinheritance and social training, environment and historical experience. Running through their critique of republican society and their interpretation of the Canadian past was the belief that Canadians were pre-eminently a loyal and law abiding people not given over to the erratic and hectic behaviour of their neighbours. Scarcely less dominant in their image of the national character was the impression that the northern climate imparted to it a high degree of energy, vigour, and strenuousness. Urged on by the desire, natural to all nationalists, to conceive of a single people sharing common characteristics, some imperialists managed to accommodate the French Canadians into their composite image of the Canadian character far more easily than they were able to accept the strange immigrants from central, eastern, and southern Europe.

Flesch Kincaid Grade Level: 21.8

Web VP v3 (Cobb 2009) Vocabulary Profile: K1-K2 81.7 / AWL 7.19 / Off-List 11.11

Fig. 4 A first year Canadian studies text

Diploma70.7

Diploma58.2Diploma

54.2

Class75.1

Class68.6

Class69.1

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Native SpeakersYounger ArrivalsOlder Arrivals

Fig. 3 A Comparison of English30-1 Diploma examination andEnglish 30-1 class grades

296 H. Roessingh, S. Douglas

of this mark differential, other researchers point to the idea of “good will” marks,teachers’ unwillingness to play the role of gatekeeper—their honest perception thatthese students are far brighter than their marks reflect (Klesmer 1994). The failurerate for ELLs on the examination is another indicator of their linguistic vulnerabilityat university level. With 36.5% of older arrivals and 22.2% of younger arrivingfailing the examination, we conclude that some 30%, or 675 of the 2,250 ELLsadmitted to first year studies (2009 intake) and hundreds more who achieved onlymarginal pass marks in English 30-1 will struggle academically.

NS speaker marks in English 30-1 reflect an acceptable difference between theteacher awarded mark and the examination mark. The examination scores werewithin five marks of the teacher awarded mark, and the examination score was justas likely to be higher as lower than the teacher mark. The overall English 30-1 marksfor NS compared to ELLs (both younger and older arriving) reflects a statisticallysignificant difference that suggests that ELLs will be at educational risk in first yearuniversity. Among NS, only 2.5% present a failing mark on the examination.

When we consider the gap between ELLs’ estimated reading levels of Grade 9and first year reading materials written at a grade level 20, we can only conclude thevast majority of ELLs will be overwhelmed almost immediately by the readingdemands of their first semester of university studies. It becomes clear that this profileof learner has programmatic and service support needs that, if addressed, could havea tangible impact on their successful transition from high school to university.

In light of the findings of this exploratory study, a variety of initiatives need to beinstigated to respond to the needs of this recently identified but growing learnerprofile. It would seem that even with strong language learning support in the K-12system, many academically competent ELLs are not be able to “beat the academicclock”. From the perspective of policy, programming, provision of services muchattention needs to be directed to the plight of ELLs as they make their way from highschool into the academic milieu of university.

To begin, school jurisdictions and universities may be advised to moresystematically identify and track students at risk as a consequence of theirunderdeveloped English academic proficiency and implement a series of program-matic supports to address this gap beginning as early as kindergarten where theincrease in numbers of this profile is now appearing. ELLs with marks in range of55–60% in Grade 12 English 30-1 examination may benefit from intensive summer

BSEN 291: Introduction to Business (Pride, Hughes, Kapoor, & Canzer, 1999)

Canadian businesses that prosper in our communities share their prosperity with employees, investors, and consumers through the payment of salaries and wages, dividends, and the creation of a wider variety of products and services from which consumers can choose. Furthermore, prosperous Canadian communities contribute tax dollars to our governments in order to help pay for social infrastructures such as public education and health services that contribute to the quality of life we enjoy. In short, we are all inextricably linked together through business activity and rely on the mechanisms of our economic system to effectively and fairly distribute wealth, employment, and the products and services we both need and want.

Flesch Kincaid Grade Level: 20.2

Web VP v3 (Cobb 2009) Vocabulary Profile: K1-K2 81.82 / AWL 13.64 / Off-List 4.55

Fig. 5 A first year Business text

English Language Learners’ Transitional Needs from High School 297

programming targeting the development of academic language requirements forengagement with the demands of first year studies. More gradual integration intotheir faculties or programs of choice may also result in better long term academicoutcomes. At the high school level, sheltered and adjunct courses, and tutorialsupport, for example, with further attention paid to course sequencing and overallacademic load made a difference to the academic outcomes of many of the studentsinvolved in the current study (Roessingh and Field 2000; Roessingh 2004).Successful as those interventions had been at the time, however, it becomes clearthat developing academic language proficiency for success at university is a farmore demanding endeavor than most teachers, students, school administrators,parents or researchers imagine. Other models of transitional support areadvanced by Karp and Hughes (2008), however, the effects of these have notbeen fully investigated.

Post-secondary institutions including technical schools and college levelprograms need to work much more closely with their feeder high schools to planfor smoother transitions. The next generation of young ELLs just beginning theiracademic journey must be identified early (Roessingh and Elgie 2009), inkindergarten, and an array of interventions must be introduced at the onset of theeducational trajectory (Roessingh 2011) and tracked and sustained over time. Thisrequires rethinking pre-service teacher preparation programs, ongoing professionaldevelopment for entry level teachers and the professionalization of a core of leadteachers who will develop the academic background and research understandings totransform urban school jurisdictions and Ministry level personnel in a Pan Canadianresponse to providing for educational equity (McAndrew 2009). This concern needsto be understood beyond Canada’s borders: the majority of the world’s developedeconomies all must grapple with this challenge.

Future Research, Next Steps

Regardless of age on arrival ELLs struggle with their course work in university, afinding that is consistent with Fox’s study (2005) at an Ontario university. Thesefindings challenge and provide the impetus for rethinking theoretical models of secondlanguage development and academic proficiency at advanced levels beyond highschool. Our next research endeavor involves tracking the cohorts of students from thisresearch project through their university programs of study in order to gleanprecision of insight into their academic journey (Roessingh and Douglas 2010).Once again, macro level data may mask the academic struggle experienced bymany ELLs at university. Impressive numbers of these students graduated, just asthe media suggest (Proudfoot 2008); however, the quality of their educationalexperiences as reflected in length of time to completion of degree, failed coursesand courses from which students withdrew, and GPA over time lead us toemphasize the urgency with which we must commit educational resources andresearch attention to this learner profile.

Only when we understand the details of the educational pathway can we makemore considered programmatic supports that will maximize these students’ academicpotential and their next transition into the workplace.

298 H. Roessingh, S. Douglas

Acknowledgments This study was completed with the support of funds made available from the PrairieMetropolis Centre, 2008. We are grateful for having had the opportunity to complete this work. An earlierversion of this work was funded by the Cultural Diversity Institute, University of Calgary. We would alsolike to thank the reviewers who provided useful feedback and encouragement to make the revisions to ourwork. We further thank the editorial staff of the Journal of International Migration and Integration fortheir support in shepherding this manuscript to publication.

References

Abada, T., Hou, F. & Ram, B. (2008). Group differences in educational attainment among the children ofimmigrants. Statistics Canada. 11F0019M. No. 308. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11f0019m/11f0019m2008308-eng.pdf

Alberta Education (2009). Improving high school completion: Using school-based accountability data toinform educational research and policies. Presentation by John Burger, PhD and Anna Nadirova,PhD, Faculty of Education July Institute, 2009.

August, D., Calderon, M., Carlo, M. & Snow, C. (2005). Transfer of reading skills in bilingual children:Subproject 2 of Acquiring literacy in English: Crosslinguistic, intralinguistic and developmentalfactors.

Bailey, A. (2006). The language demands of school: Putting academic English to the test. New Haven:Yale University Press.

Baxter, J. (1999). Canada recruiting the educated: Policy creating ‘brain gain’ in sciences. Calgary Herald,Dec. 11, 1999, A15.

Brent, D. et al. (2002). Effective Writing Program Preliminary Report. Submitted to Dr. Kathleen Scherg,November 1, 2002. The University of Calgary.

British Columbia (BC) Ministry of Education (2009). The facts of ESL in British Columbia: Recordnumber of students in ESL graduate. Edufacts, April 2009. Retrieved from http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/news/edufacts/2009/0903_esl.pdf

Butlin, G. (1999). Determinants of post secondary participation. Education Quarterly Reviews, Ottawa,Stats Canada. Catalogue no. 81-003-XPB. Vol. 5, No. 3.

Calgary Board of Education (2008). Great beginnings: The positive impact of intake practices for ESLstudent achievement. Ppt presentation by Kelly Bobke, ESL specialist, Celebrating LinguisticDiversity Conference, May 1–2, 2008, Toronto District School Board.

Calgary Board of Education (2010). CBE Diploma Examination Results. Retrieved January 14, 2011 fromhttp://www.cbe.ab.ca/results/pdf_2010/09_10Table1_PAT_cohort.pdf.

Calgary Catholic School District. (2010). Calgary Catholic School District. Retrieved January 14, 2011from http://www.cssd.ab.ca/default.asp?V_ITEM_ID=240.

Cameron, L. (2002). Measuring vocabulary size in English as an additional language. Language TeachingResearch, 6(2), 145–173.

Chang, C. (2009). Japan’s demographic crisis: Aging, gender and immigration. Honours CapstoneResearch Conference, American University, Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://aladinrc.wrlc.org/dspace/bitstream/1961/7769/1/Chang,%20Christopher%202009S.pdf

Citizenship and Immigration Canada (2000). Canada …the place to be. Annual immigration plan for theyear 2000. Author.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada (2008). Annual report to parliament on immigration, 2008. Retrievedfrom: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english//pdf/pub/immigration2008_e.pdf

Cobb, T. (2009). Web Vocabprofile [accessed 2009 from http://www.lextutor.ca/vp/], an adaptation ofHeatly and Nation’s (1994) Range.

Corak, M. (2008). Immigration in the long run: The education and earnings mobility of second generationCanadians. IRPP Choices, 14:13, 4 – 30. http://www.irpp.org/choices/archive/vol14no13.pdf

Cummins, J. (1981). Bilingualism and minority language children. Toronto: OISE.Dawson, D. (1998). Administrators warned to keep track of ESL results. Calgary Herald, January 7,

1998, B2Duffy, A. (2004). Why Canada’s schools are failing newcomers. Toronto Star, September 27, 2004.

Available online.Fox, J. (2005). Rethinking second language admission requirements: Problems with language –residency

criteria and the need for language assessment and support. Language Assessment Quarterly, 2(2), 85–115.

English Language Learners’ Transitional Needs from High School 299

Garcia, G. (2000). Lessons from Research: What Is the Length of Time It Takes Limited English ProficientStudents to Acquire English and Succeed in an All-English Classroom? NCBE Issue Brief No. 5.National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education, September 2000.

Goldenberg, C. (2008). Teaching English language learners: What the research does—and does not—say.American Educator, Summer 2008, 8 – 23, 42 – 44.

Grayson, P. (2009). Language background, ethno-racial origin and academic achievement of students at aCanadian University. International Migration, 47(2), 33–67.

Hakuta K., Butler, Y. & Witt, D. (2000). How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency?ERIC Document, ED 443275

Harklau, L. (2003). Generation 1.5 students and college writing. ERIC Digest EDO–FL-03-0J. October,2003. Retrieved from http://www.cal.org/resources/Digest/digest_pdfs/0305harklau.pdf

Hazenberg, S., & Hulstijn, J. (1996). Defining a minimum second language vocabulary for non-nativeuniversity students: An empirical investigation. Applied Linguistics, 17(2), 145–163.

Heatley, A. & Nation, P. (1994). Range. Victoria University of Wellington, NZ. [Computer program,available at http://www.vuw.ac.nz/lals/.]

Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) (2000). Youth in transition survey (YITS): Projectoverview. Retrieved from http://www.pisa.gc.ca/pdf/t-00-5e.pdf

Jackson, R. & Howe, N. (2008). The graying of the great powers: Demography and geopolitics in the21rst century. Centre for Strategic and Internal Studies, Washington, DC. http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/080630_gai_majorfindings.pdf

Jiang, B., & Kuehn, P. (2001). Transfer in the academic language development of post-secondary ESLstudents. Bilingual Research Journal, 25, 417–436.

Karp, M., & Hughes, M. (2008). Supporting college transitions through collaborative programming: Aconceptual model for guiding policy. Teachers College Record, 110(4), 838–866.

Klesmer, H. (1993). ESL Achievement Project. Development of English as a Second Languageachievement criteria as a function of age and length of residence in Canada. A special leave projectfor the North York Board of Education. North York, Ontario.

Klesmer, H. (1994). Assessment and teacher perceptions of ESL student achievement. English Quarterly,26(3), 8–11.

Krahn, H., & Taylor, A. (2005). Resilient teenagers: Explaining the high educational aspirations of visibleminority youth in Canada. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 6(3–4), 405–434.

Laufer, B. (1992). How much lexis is necessary for reading comprehension? In P. J. Arnaud & H. Béjoint(Eds.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics (pp. 126–132). London: Macmillan.

Lee, J., & Schallert, D. (1997). The relative contribution of L2 language proficiency and L1 reading abilityto L2 reading performance: A test of the threshold hypothesis in an EFL context. TESOL Quarterly,31(4), 713–739.

Li, Y. (2004). Learning to live and study in Canada: Stories of four EFL learners from China. TESLCanada Journal, 22(2), 25–43.

McAndrew, M. (2009). The educational pathways and academic performance of youth of immigrantorigin: Comparing Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver. Final report. Canadian Council on Learning,and Citizenship and Immigration Canada. http://www.ccl-cca.ca/pdfs/OtherReports/CIC-CCL-Final12aout2009EN.pdf

McGrath, S. (1996). Correlates of post-secondary participation. In B. Galaway & J. Hudson (Eds.), Youthin transition (pp. 189–198). Toronto: Thompson.

Pride, W. M., Hughes, R. J., Kapoor, J. R., & Canzer, B. M. (1999). Business (Canadianth ed.). Toronto:Houghton Mifflin.

Proudfoot, S. (2008). Immigrants’ kids outpace native-born at university: StatsCan study shows childrenof Chinese immigrants most likely to graduate. Edmonton Journal, September 23, 2008, A5.

Reitz, J., Zhang, H. & Shida, N. (2009). Comparisons of the success of racial minority off spring in theUnited states, Canada and Australia. Conference Presentation, The economics of immigration:Children of immigrants and temporary migration. Vancouver, BC. May 11–12, 2009. http://mbc.metropolis.net/assets/uploads/files/Reitz.pdf

Roberge, M., Siegal, M. & Harklau, L. (2009). Generation 1.5 in college composition. New York, NY:Routledge

Roberts, C. (1994). Transferring literacy skills from L1 to L2: From theory to practice. Journal ofEducational Issues of Language Minority Students, 13, 209–221.

Roessingh, H. (2004). Effective high school ESL programs: A synthesis and meta-analysis. The CanadianModern Language Review, 60(5), 611–636.

300 H. Roessingh, S. Douglas

Roessingh, H. (2008). Variability in ESL outcomes: The influence of age on arrival and length of residenceon achievement in high school. TESL Canada Journal, 26(1), 87–107.

Roessingh, H. (2011). Family Treasures: A dual language book project for negotiating language, literacy,culture and identity. Canadian Modern Language Review. January 2011, in print.

Roessingh, H. & Douglas, S. (2010). ELL students at university: Loss of educational capital, a pilot study.Canadian Journal of Higher Education, in review.

Roessingh, H., & Elgie, S. (2009). Early language and literacy development among young ELL:Preliminary insights from a longitudinal study. TESL Canada Journal, 26(2), 24–45.

Roessingh, H., & Field, D. (2000). Time, timing, timetabling: Critical elements of successful graduation ofhigh school ESL learners. TESL Canada Journal, 18(1), 17–31.

Roessingh, H., & Kover, P. (2003). Variability of ESL learners’ acquisition of cognitive academic languageproficiency: What can we learn from achievement measures? TESL Canada Journal, 21(1), 1–21.

Rumbaut, R. (2004). Ages, life stages and general cohorts: Decomposing the immigrant first and secondgenerations in the US. International Migration Review, 38(3), 1160–1205.

Alberta Advanced Education and Technology (2007). Roles and mandates policy framework for Alberta’spublicly funded advanced education system. Edmonton, AB: Author

Thomas, W. & Collier, V. (2002). A national study of school effectiveneness for language minoritystudents’ long term academic achievement. (September 1, 2002). Center for Research on Education,Diversity & Excellence. Final Reports. Paper 1. Retrieved Aug. 18, 2009. http://repositories.cdlib.org/crede/finalrpts/1_1_final

Thonus, T. (2003). Serving Generation 1.5 in the university writing centre. TESOL Journal, 12(1), 17–24.Tooey, K. & Derwing, T. (2006). Hidden Losses: How Demographics Can Encourage Incorrect

Assumptions About ESL High School Students’ Success. Working paper No. 06–11. VancouverCentre of Excellence, Research on Immigration and Integration in the Metropolis.

Twyford, C. (1987). Age-related factors in second language acquisition. National Clearinghouse forBilingual Education., Focus No. 2, Winter. ED296581.

University of Calgary. (2010). University of Calgary Fact Book 2009–2010. Office of InstitutionalAnalysis.

Zappa-Hollman, S. (2007). Academic presentation across post-secondary contexts: The discoursesocialization of non-native speakers. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(4), 455–485.

Dr. Hetty Roessingh is a long term ESL practitioner with research interests in longitudinal studies thatfocus on educational success for ELLs.

Dr. Scott Douglas is an Assistant Professor at the University of British Columbia Okanagan with aresearch interest in the vocabulary demands of undergraduate studies.

English Language Learners’ Transitional Needs from High School 301