9/22 Readings

References: Anthology, Sec. 5, Chap. 10
"Making Content Comprehensible for English Language Learners: The SIOP Model" - Echevarria, Vogt, and Short

These two articles focused on the implementation of Content-Based Instruction (CBI) and the SIOP (Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol) model for lesson planning in the context of an English as a Second Language classroom environment.
In Chapter 10 of Anthology, CBI is described as "presentation of coherent and meaningful information, characteristic of well-organized content-based curricula, leads to deeper processing and better learning" and it incorporates "explicit language instruction...thereby satisfying students' language and content learning needs in context" (pg. 108). Basically, CBI is incorporating their content from other academic disciplines (math, science, history) into the ESL classroom and therefore making it an easier transition for the ESL students to go into a regular, mainstreamed English class with native speakers. It also emphasizes more project work as opposed to individual work, because "it represents a natural extension of what is already taking place" (pg. 109). It does have an element of task-based instruction to it in the amount of activities being done in the classroom and that project work is the culmination of learning. The book also describes various types of projects, like structured: "organized by the teacher in terms of topic, methodology, and presentation"; unstructured: "defined largely by students" and semi-structured: "in part by the teacher and in part by the students" (pg. 110). These projects should have some link to "real-world concerns" or socially relevant topics to the students, or something similar that is going on in the mainstream English courses at the school (pg. 110). It is up to the ESL instructor to converse and cooperate with other academic disciplines and work out lesson plans in order to keep the kids up to speed with their native speaker counterparts. I think that this method is an excellent idea; it is just appalling that they did not consider it earlier. I do not see as many problems as I do with task-based instruction, because CBI is not entirely comprised of "tasks"; it is a supplement to the actual curriculum and follows the standards that every other teacher is following. I think that it is important for ESL teachers to give the impression to the kids that they are learning the same things as native speakers, and then the kids will not fall prey to the self-fulfilling prophecy of ELL's that drop out because their needs are not being met.

Echevarria & co's article did an excellent job of describing the previous and current situation of ESL education in schools in the United States. According to Echevarria, Vogt, and Short, "while the number of LEP students has grown exponentially across the United States, their level of academic achievement has lagged significantly behind that of their language majority peers" (pg. 2). I suppose as most of us being pre-service teachers, we are well aware of this issue. Schools have been trying a plethora of different methods on ELL's, and it has been a process of trial and error as the years have gone on, but the disturbing thing about this whole education system is that ELL's are being expected to be 'proficient' (I use this term subjectively) in English in too short of an amount of time. These schools are "calling for all student to meet high standards and are adjusting national and state assessments as well as state graduation requirements to reflect these new levels of achievement" (pg. 3). As a result of these new high standards in education (due to our dear friend No Child Left Behind), students are being expected to have an accelerated ESL program to make up for it, even though the article says that normal amount of time expected to be proficient is 4 to 10 years depending on their familial and educational background. Schools are not even giving them that much time, and in my opinion, the United States is trying so hard to catch up with China and Japan who are literally blowing us out of the water in math and science, among other things, and this is being pressed on our students. There are many, many things they could do to combat this advancement, but that is not the issue here. Another large issue in this education gap is the lack of qualified teachers; "to compensate, principals hire less qualified teachers, use substitutes...ask teachers to teach outside their field of preparation" and these teachers "have not had appropriate professional development" (pg. 4) to teach these kids, which is a complete injustice to them. I think that it is definitely our job as TESOL students to keep encouraging this minor and certification process to other undergraduate students here at ISU so that these kids have qualified and prepared teachers. Every child deserves that.