Existing Models of ELL teaching: Which is the Most Effective?

Hey reader! I wrote a post preceding this one that discusses my take on the faults of the ELL program. You can check it out here, and I recommend reading that one before reading this one. Thank you so much for reading! :)

There are 4 types of ELL (English Language Learner) program models that schools integrate. I broke them down into these four because I feel like this encapsulates the principles a large variety of program designs are based on. The four are English Immersion, POPI, Sheltered Immersion, and Dual Language. What is the most effective method?

English Immersion

The English-Immersion design separates English Language Learners from their peers by placing them in a small EL-only classroom. There, they receive English and content instruction.

Pros:

• Helpful for elementary schoolers because they are new to the language, so this structure allows them to focus on the language rather than the content.

However; Cons:

• It is the most socially isolating.
• Ends up restricting chances of using language authentically with native-English students because of the separation.

POPI (English as a Second Language) model

PUSH IN

• ELLs and native-English speakers are put together in a classroom for content instruction (with Language specialists in classes to provide any necessary additional support)

then…

PULL OUT

• ELLs are pulled out of content classes and put into a separate EL only classroom to receive language instruction

Pros:

• The smaller class size can help the students to engage more with the material.
• If there is an appropriate level of funding (which, often, is a problem), then the school can hire the right amount of English Language specialists to make this model pretty effective (for language-focused teaching)

Cons:

• It’s not as effective for ELs later in their academic career who are focused more on content, rather than language learning. With this method, students miss out on learning content and language-in-context.
• Also, English Language specialists don't collaborate with the content teachers to ensure that the English language learners are absorbing the material to the same extent that native English speakers are.

Sheltered Immersion

“The term sheltered suggests that ‘such instruction provides refuge from the linguistic demands of mainstream instruction, which, unless modified, are beyond the comprehension of many English learners’”

The Sheltered Immersion model works in this way: Native English speakers get their version of a curriculum, and the English Language Learners get a diluted/simplified version of that same curriculum (taught in English).

This way, both sub-communities are learning the same content, but the ELLs are getting a better handle on the English Language without having to be burdened by any English language requirements that they are unable to meet while they are still learning language and content-area skills.

Pros:

• This design doesn’t devote all resources into language development; instead, it focuses on teaching various topics and actual content material in the curriculum in English, and with that immersion, English proficiency is achieved.
• More cooperation between English Language specialists and native English teachers on curriculum
• This model allows for a direct correlation between learning language and content. Like, language learning and content learning go on a date and are in sync the whole time. The earlier methods do a great deal of counterproductive separation between the two.

Cons:

• Most schools don’t seem to understand/make the connection between language learning and content learning because of the perpetuation of the idea that those are separate things.
• Finding sufficient funding for English Language specialists and content teachers is very difficult.
• Furthermore; finding funding to pay for training for English language specialists that would be vital for the Sheltered Instruction model to be effective has also proven to be a challenge.

Transitional Bilingualism/Dual Immersion

This design is the most inclusive ELL program design. It puts both English language learners and native English speakers at the same level. The goal of this program is to educate students to be bilingual (to be able to speak fluently in two languages), biliterate (to be able to read and write fluently in two languages), and have cross-cultural competence (definition: an emotional, behavioural, and cognitive range to be able to appropriately understand and interact with other cultures). Students attend class together in one language and switch later in the day. They learn from each other while supporting the other group’s language acquisition.

Pros:

• Each subcommunity’s native language is leveraged as an instructional tool, rather than a hindrance, which allows the students to learn better.
• Students engage with the material better because it is given in their native language and in the language, they are learning
• Students are less stressed because they aren’t starting completely from scratch. They can use their native language to contribute to learning in school in a new environment.

Cons:

• This model does value English over other languages in its teachings, but it is the most inclusive program design.
• This design is difficult to implement when there is a variety of English language learners who speak different languages. An ideal setting would be if there was a large sub-community of students who were native Spanish speakers, as well as the predominant community of native English speakers.

Which is the most successful? Let’s compare.

If we consider these program designs, the strongest one is dual immersion, as it is the most inclusive, and both English Language Learners and native English speakers are learning at the same pace. Most other designs treat ELL students as a separate community when they need to be integrated into a system that will allow them to have the same opportunities and resources as their native English speaking peers. But a large challenge is funding. As the program designs got more inclusive, funding was listed as a significant challenge faced when implementing said design. We must work to raise awareness about the English Learner education system and its weaknesses so that we can help overcome them.

Thank you for reading. :)