Program Models

What different programs look like…

Program Models for English Language Learners

ESOL/ESL Models Mainstream Classes (Inclusion) Self-Contained ESOL Classes or Sheltered

Classes English as a Second Language Classes

Program Models Cont’d

Bilingual Models Two-Way Bilingual Programs Transitional Bilingual Programs Developmental Bilingual Programs

Dual: 1-way 2-way

Key Factors for Successful Inclusion

Teacher collaboration Common planning time weekly Comprehensive staff development

After students are placed To solve specific problems To modify curriculum and instruction to meet

student needs

Thomas and Collier’s 1997 Study

Years 1982 – 1996 with 700,000 student records

Thomas and Collier Studies

The Thomas and Collier 1997 national research study summary may be found at:

Thomas, W.P. & Collier, V.P. (1997a).  School effectiveness for language

minority students.  National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education (NCBE)

Resource Collection Series, No. 9, December, 1997.

http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/resource/effectiveness/

Thomas and Collier Recommendations - Notes

1. Don’t ‘water down’ instruction; don’t separate ELLS from mainstream instruction completely but support them in regular classrooms until they are ready to successfully compete with native English speakers

2. Provide opportunities for parents to support their children with native language interaction.

Thomas and Collier Recommendations

3. Provide continuing cognitive and academic development by use of native language instruction for part of the day.

4. Use current approaches to instruction, emphasizing interactive, discovery learning, avoid ‘drill and kill’ methods.

5. Improve the socio-cultural context of schooling (emphasize bilingualism as enrichment rather than remediation).

Thomas and Collier Recommendations

6. Move away from all English programs and toward stronger forms of bilingual education such as one-way or two-way programs)

7. If you must use an all English program use more effective methodologies that integrate content and language that include on-going staff development.

N.Y. Chicago Philadelphia St. Louis Boston

L.Majority 32 42 27 27 70

L.Minority 13 18 13 10 38

From: * Perlman, J.(1990). In Cazden, C. & Snow, C. (Eds.) The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. p.36. CA: Sage Publications

Arguments For and Against Bilingual Education 1. Sink or Swim Approach - “My Grandpa made it.”

Most likely Grandpa didn’t make it. Consider the following: On what kind of language did he succeed? Social (playground) language vs Academic language. Only recently has

that distinction been made, chances are Grandpa’s level of proficiency was overrated.

Consider turn-of-the-century data on high school entry rates in 1908 from the 5 largest cities in the U.S. at that time.

Arguments For and Against Bilingual Education

2. Reconsider criteria for success. Much higher levels of literacy are now needed for

social and economic mobility. 3. “It costs too much to serve all

language groups.” Krashen: If scientists discover a cure for one type

of cancer that cures 30% of all cancers sufferers but not the other 70% what would you do as a decision-maker? (Better some than none.)

Other arguments for and against?