1

Author: Hellendrung, Angela, M. Title: English Language Learners: Effective Teaching Strategies, Classroom

Environment and Technology Tool Use The accompanying research report is submitted to the University of Wisconsin-Stout, Graduate School in partial

completion of the requirements for the

Graduate Degree/ Major: M.S. Education

Research Advisor: Judith Gifford, M.S.

Submission Term/Year: Summer, 2013

Number of Pages: 30

Style Manual Used: American Psychological Association, 6th edition

I understand that this research report must be officially approved by the Graduate School and that an electronic copy of the approved version will be made available through the University Library website

I attest that the research report is my original work (that any copyrightable materials have been used with the permission of the original authors), and as such, it is automatically protected by the laws, rules, and regulations of the U.S. Copyright Office.

My research advisor has approved the content and quality of this paper. STUDENT:

NAME Angela M. Hellendrung DATE: August 1, 2013

ADVISOR: (Committee Chair if MS Plan A or EdS Thesis or Field Project/Problem):

NAME Judith Gifford DATE: August 1, 2013

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This section for MS Plan A Thesis or EdS Thesis/Field Project papers only Committee members (other than your advisor who is listed in the section above) 1. CMTE MEMBER’S NAME: DATE:

2. CMTE MEMBER’S NAME: DATE:

3. CMTE MEMBER’S NAME: DATE:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This section to be completed by the Graduate School This final research report has been approved by the Graduate School.

Director, Office of Graduate Studies: DATE:

2

Hellendrung, Angela M. English Language Learners: Effective Teaching Strategies,

Classroom Environment and Technology Tool Use

Abstract

This paper is designed to identify effective teaching strategies, classroom environment

improvements, and effective use of technology in early childhood classrooms containing English

language learners (ELL). With the increasing ELL population in the United States and the

momentum for achievement in education, especially with the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001,

teachers must bridge the achievement gap for students in their classroom. Current teaching

strategies are discussed in regard to methods of implementation within early childhood

education. Along with implementing effective teaching strategies, creating a classroom

environment that promotes learning for ELL students is critical. An important component

overlooked in regard to classroom environment is family involvement with ELL families and

ways to incorporate them in the learning community. An overview of different technology tools,

both common and those more costly, used in the classroom environment to help promote English

language learning are identified and elaborated upon. Future direction and suggestions of

strategies to achieve educational goals for ELL students and teachers are addressed.

3

Acknowledgements

First I would like to thank my thesis advisor, Judith Gifford, for her support, guidance,

and direction during the process of writing my thesis paper. I appreciate her enthusiasm and

understanding of the topic I have chosen to write and learn about so I may implement what I

have gained knowledge in to help young ELL learners. Second, I’d like to thank the various

friends, colleagues, and children who gave me support and determination to start and finish the

Master’s Program in Education. I particularly want to thank the one little boy who came into my

preschool room without the ability to speak or understand any English. After one semester, you

were singing your ABC’s, counting to 10 and speaking simple commands to your friends.

Finally, I’d like to thank my family for their never-ending support in my education career, both

as a student and as a teacher. It seems like completing my Masters has been a never-ending

career but I am proud to say that I have finished!

4

Table of Contents

............................................................................................................................................. Page

Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 2

Chapter I: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 5

Statement of the Problem ................................................................................................. 6

Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................ 6

Research Questions ......................................................................................................... 7

Definition of Terms ......................................................................................................... 7

Assumptions and Limitations ........................................................................................... 9

Chapter II: Literature Review .................................................................................................... 10

No Child Left Behind Act..………………………………………………………………10

Classroom Environment………………………………………………………………….12

Teaching Strategies for English Language Learners………….…………………………15

Incorporating Technology………………………………………………………………..18

Chapter III: Summary, Critical Analysis and Recommendations………………………………..21

Summary………………………………………………………………………………....21

Critical Analysis and Recommendations………………………………………………...22

References………………………………………………………………………………………..24

5

Chapter 1: Introduction

During a school day, language and communication are used continuously between

teachers and students. Imagine two scenarios. In the first scenario, a young child who spoke a

different language other than English started in a new school with a new teacher and new

peers. The young child has cried continuously for the first hour after the parent dropped him off

at school, the teacher had no knowledge of the student’s language to even try to console him, and

his involvement with peers was limited. In the second, the teacher had a new student join the

class and the student had no English speaking skills. The teacher had no knowledge or

experience using the student’s native language. In both scenarios, the problem with the ability to

verbally communicate with the student is a huge barrier.

The linguistic composition of students in the United States is changing (Seo & Hoover,

2009). According to the data from the 2007 U.S. Census, of the 281.0 million people ages 5 and

older, 20% spoke a language other than English at home (Shin & Kominski, 2010). It is

suggested that by the year 2025, 40% of the nation’s population will be made up of people

speaking different languages from all around the world. Many minority people moving into the

United States speak limited English, or have no skill of speaking English. Approximately 5.1

million PreK-12 students enrolled in public schools in the United States are English language

learners and make up more than 350 different language backgrounds (National Clearinghouse,

2007). In the state of Wisconsin there are 128 identified languages, including a category of “Not

on List” (Wisconsin DPI, 2011). According to the 2010 public school census, 52,100 Wisconsin

pupils enrolled in pre-kindergarten through grade 12 were classified as limited-English proficient

students. Of the 52,100 students, .5% (271) were pre-kindergarten students and 38.7% were

Kindergarten through third graders. The population of minorities is growing five times faster

6

than the rest of the population (Lapp & Flood, 1994). Between 1991 and 1999, the population of

language minorities grew from 8 million to 15 million (Smith-Davis, 2004). It has been

projected that by the year 2025, there will be 42 million first-generation immigrants in the United

States (Martin & Midgley, 2006). Students attending a K-12 school that are classified as

Limited-English-Proficient (LEP) increased from 5.3 million to 10 million. Numbers do not

include children who are in an educational setting prior to Kindergarten. In the state of

Wisconsin, the total for all LEP students is 52,100. More specifically, 271 students were at the

Pre-K level and 20,181 students were from the K-3 level. This means over 39% of students

identified were early childhood students, six weeks to age eight. There is an increase in ELL

students entering general classrooms at earlier stages of the development of English language

(Lake & Pappamihiel, 2003).

Statement of the Problem

Education in the United States continues to grow with students who speak little or no

English. With the diverse languages presented within the schools, it is nearly impossible for

teachers to speak each and every language to assist in teaching content and communicating with

the child and the child’s family. Under the No Child Left Behind Act, teachers must obtain a

high quality education to achieve the requirements in public schools. Including Limited English

Proficient students into assessments is required. The problem is how Early Childhood teachers

can effectively teach ELL students in the mainstream classroom so the achievement gap is closed

and ELL students are provided with a positive and successful education.

Purpose of Study

The purpose of this literature review is to identify different teaching strategies to promote

learning of ELL student in a regular, early childhood classroom. More specifically, this study

7

will address ways to enhance the classroom environment, teaching strategies to use with ELL

students, and identify different technology tools to use in the teaching process.

Research Questions

There are five research questions that this literature review will address. They are:

1. Who are ELL students?

2. What role does the No Child Left Behind Act play in an English language learner’s

education?

3. What strategies can be used in creating a classroom environment to include English

language learner students?

4. What are effective teaching strategies teachers can implement in an early childhood

classroom?

5. What are some ways technology can be effectively incorporated into teaching English

language learners in an early childhood classroom?

Definition of Terms

Within this section you will find a list of terms and definitions to help understand this

study. They are as follows:

Dual Language Learners. “Dual language learner is a term used to describe children

who are growing up with two (or more) languages” (Nemeth, 2012, pg. 3).

English as a Second Language. A term “formerly used to designate ELL students; this

term increasingly refers to a program of instruction designed to support the ELL” (NCTE, 2008,

pg. 2).

8

English Language Learners. “A broader term used to describe any K-12 student for

whom English is not the first language and who requires language support in the classroom in

order to access instruction content” (Ballantyne, Sanderman, & McLaughlin, 2008, pg. 10).

Natural Approach. According to Krashen & Terrell (1983), “The natural approach

divides the stages of second language acquisition into preproduction, early production, speech

emergence, and intermediate fluency” (Facella, Rampino & Shea, 2005, pg. 211).

Total Physical Response. “Total physical response, a well-known technique in the field

of teaching English as a Second Language, involves active participation of students who learn

new action words by watching and imitating as the teacher says and physically demonstrates

each word; this facilitates more rapid comprehension and better retention of vocabulary”

(Schunk, 1999, pg. 113).

Direct Method. While using this method “material is first presented orally with actions

or pictures. The mother tongue is never, never used. There is no translation. The preferred type

of exercise is a series of questions in the target language” (Mora, 2012, para. 2). “Correct

translation is to be of the most importance” (Galant, 2009, para.1).

Audio-lingual. This method “focuses on practicing drills and memorizing dialogue.

Often implemented in a language lab, this “drill and kill” method consists of repetition, positive

reinforcement for correct repetition, and explicit error correction” (Ballard & Tighe, 2011,

para.1).

Cooperative Learning. Bruffee (1984) states “Cooperative learning is a form of indirect

teaching in which the teacher sets the problems and organizes the students to work it out

collaboratively” (Tennessee Department of Education, sec. 5.12).

9

Assumptions and Limitations

One aspect not taken into consideration is training teachers have had prior to teaching in

a classroom with ELL students. Schools where there are a greater percentage of diverse

languages may require incoming teachers to have a required ESL class or training.

Within the state of Wisconsin, ELL differs in locations. Schools and teachers in a

heavily populated ELL area may have an established curriculum or resource person that assists in

teaching students and teachers.

Data is not collected for teachers who teach children from infancy through five years of

age within a preschool and child care setting. This data could impact the percentages of ELL

children identified within the state of Wisconsin.

There are many teaching techniques used within the classroom setting to teach content to

Early Childhood ELL students. Some strategies may not have been discussed, but are ways in

which educators present information to ELL students.

10

Chapter II: Literature Review

This chapter will cover the following topics regarding English Language Learners and

approaches to enhance their education: 1) Role No Child Left Behind Law plays into an ELL’s

education; 2) Enhancing the classroom environment to promote learning; 3) Using effective

teaching strategies to promote learning for ELL students; and 4) Identifying and utilizing

technology tools to promote learning.

No Child Left Behind Act

On January 8, 2001 President George W. Bush signed the No Child Left Behind (NCLB)

Act, which was a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (Education

Week, 2004). The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was first enacted by

President Lyndon B. Johnson in order to place focused funding on poverty schools with low

achieving students (Jorgensen & Hoffmann, 2003). The ESEA underwent several

transformations and additional laws attached over the course of time, all of which targeted a

child receiving the best education possible No Child Left Behind Act declares each “child must

be given a fair, equal and significant opportunity to attain a high-quality education and reach, at

minimum, proficiency level on challenging state academic standards and assessments” (U.S.

Department of Education, 2004, Sec. 1001) No Child Left Behind Act punctuated power of

assessments for those invested in the American Educational system. It was designed to bring

clarity to the value, use and importance of achievement testing for kindergarten through high

school students. The NCLB Act ultimately focuses on four areas: accountability, local control,

parental involvement and funding. A year after being signed by Congress, civil rights advocates

commended the NCLB Act for its emphasis on improving education of children with color,

English learners and students with disabilities (Darling-Hammond, 2007). Title III of the NCLB

11

Act focuses on students who are English language learners. The NCLB Act contains two major

breakthroughs: first, by highlighting the longstanding inequalities in school and recognizing the

needs of students; and secondly, it required all teachers be highly qualified to teach, especially in

poverty level communities where teacher turnover is high.

The Department of Education anticipates the new changes and expectations made

regarding this act (NCLB), Limited English Proficient (LEP) students will have higher

expectations set for them along with new teaching approaches used to help meet their needs

(Zehler, Adger, Coburn, Arteagoitia, Williams & Jacobson, 2008). The law defines an LEP

student as an individual between the age of three and nineteen; is enrolled in an elementary or

secondary school; is not a U.S. born citizen or whose native language is not English; and whose

English proficiency denies him or her the ability to reach a proficient level on state tests in an

English-led classroom (Learning Point Associates, 2007).

Another stipulation under the NCLB Act requires all public school teachers teaching core

content between grades K-12 to receive high quality training by the end of the 2005-06 school

year (Education Week, 2011). A highly qualified teacher is a teacher who can demonstrate

subject knowledge and skills in math, reading, writing and other basic subject areas (Wrightslaw,

2013).

School districts may submit waivers to be exempt from the NCLB Act. In February of

2012, President Obama announced 10 states were exempt from the requirements of NCLB (“No

Child”, 2012). In order to be exempt from the guidelines, each individual state

must demonstrate and show a plan preparing children for college and careers, set targets for

improving achievements, reward the best performing schools and help struggling schools.

12

Classroom Environment

The definition of classroom environment is as follows: intellectual, social, physical, etc.

within or exogenous to a classroom which influences the learning situation (Glossary of

Education, 2013). From this definition it can be determined there are many characteristics which

make up a classroom environment: physical features, educator’s responsibilities and also home-

school connections with family.

The classroom environment can be enhanced in a variety of ways by the educator to meet

the needs of ELL students. The overall physical set-up of a classroom can play an important role

for ELL students. Teachers who teach in the early childhood setting suggest to have a theme

intertwined thought the classroom in different areas, such as: blocks, library, dramatic play, etc.

(Macrina, Hoover & Becker, 2009). A common theme throughout the classroom helps reinforce

concepts and language the teacher wants all students, including ELL students, to attain.

Background noise can make it difficult for dual language learners to hear the spoken English

word. Although some local fire and health codes may prohibit this, soft furnishings can help

absorb some of the excess noise. Another aspect to classroom environment is the seating

arrangement. English language learner students should be seated in a place where English

language can be clearly heard and they are able to see. ELL students can feel more relaxed with

a strong and predictable classroom routine. A daily routine will help the student know exactly

what is going to happen throughout the day, even if the student is unable to understand verbal or

written English words. Pictures posted with the schedule provide visual cues. Environmental

print and key pictures are important to include around the classroom to help ELL students

visually see and connect meaning to the English word. Pictures of the children and their names

can be added to cubbies and lockers to aid in showing where belongings need to go. New

13

languages can be added to functional labels that include the phonetic spelling throughout the

room to label objects and toys.

It is also essential to provide a positive classroom community for ELL students as the

emotional climate helps foster academic success (Williams, 2001). A two-year study conducted

in 18 urban classrooms focused on the transition years for linguistically diverse students

(Gersten, 1996). From the study, it was observed that teachers who treated their students as

individuals and extended conversations through repeating and modeling could “think out loud”

for the students to see language in action. Educators need to devise unique ways to provide

multicultural experiences to include the child’s background, as this is important to the English

language learner’s academic, social and identity development (Ghiso, 2013). One way to do this

would be to incorporate materials from the cultural background, such as books and pictures

(Colorin Colorado, 2007).

The responsibility of the teacher is to have background knowledge of students in a variety

of areas. For ELL students, understanding which languages are spoken in a child’s home is

critical for every educator, assistant, administrator and social worker to know. Every day pencil

and paper surveys do not always capture the complete picture. To enhance understanding,

additional interactions such as meetings, visiting homes, and phone conversations may provide a

better understanding of the home environment and language. With the use of background

knowledge, the teacher can then support individual growth of each ELL child through developed

opportunities for interaction with other children and adults (Pence, Justice, & Wiggins, 2008).

Individual plans can be developed to incorporate a variety of teaching strategies to meet the

needs of ELL student’s during every day learning. Parents become invaluable partners, both in

and out of the classroom. A family shapes the expectations of a learning child while facilitating

14

the influences of school, culture, and language (Panferov, 2002). As educators, understanding

the challenges faced by parents in ELL homes by parents is critical to fostering parental

involvement in an ELL student’s school experiences and, ultimately, supporting ELL students’

academic success (Panferov, 2010). Research identifies how language and culture may be seen

as barriers to parent participation in children’s schooling (Souto-Manning, 2010). A study was

conducted regarding two different families that addressed: (a) How ELL parents view literacy

and their own literacy practices, (b) literacy practices at home with children, and (c) what issues

specific to parent-child and parent-school interactions and communications might contribute to

school success. This study determined a positive learning environment in the home helps close

the home-school gap (Mace-Matluck, Alexander-Kasparik & Qeen, 1998). Within the learning

environment maintained at home, three important factors are needed: access to books and/or

technology, structured study time, and regular exposure to reading and writing. There are

several issues discussed that can contribute to school success. Most importantly, school

communications should be regular, communicated in both written and spoken forms, and ideally

offered in the parents’ first language. Parents need opportunities to observe the class in action so

they can understand and explain routines and procedures to their children (Ashworth &

Wakefield, 2004). Each family should be invited to share their culture, such as song, dance,

costumes and food. Another way to help promote home-school connection is allow ELL parents

to volunteer within the classroom or at school events. Parents of ELL students will promote a

child’s home language and transfer a positive attitude to ELL children in regards to their learning

experiences.

15

Teaching Strategies for English Language Learners

There are a variety of teaching strategies teachers learn from numerous sources. Many strategies

focus on teaching content to students in the early childhood classroom. Some strategies work the

same as another, but simply are labeled differently. The key phrase noted in a study conducted

regarding effective teaching strategies states, “Providing teachers with adequate tools and

techniques to support these learners is essential” (Facella, Rampino, & Shea, 2005). Reality is

that it takes an ELL student two to three years to become proficient in a communicative

language.

Six common teaching theories have been identified. These theories include Direct

Instruction, Total Physical Response, Grammar-Translation, Audio-Lingual, Natural Approach,

and Cooperative Learning. Within each of these theories are teaching strategies used to help

teach content to the ELL child.

Within the Natural Approach Theory there were several teaching strategies identified.

There are also strategies specific to a given area, such as emotional connection and language.

Some examples of strategies used in general include using gestures/signs/visual cues, repetition

and numerous opportunities for learning, using real objects or props, direct teaching, providing

multisensory approaches, small group instruction, and using peers to help role model. The

Natural Approach is divided into different stages: preproduction, early production, speech

emergence and intermediate fluency (Krashen & Terrell, 1983, as cited in Lake & Pappamihiel,

2003). An ELL’s first language development occurs in stages, too. Those stages are crying,

cooing, babbling, first words, single words, two words and finally language explosion (Nemeth,

2012). Research has shown that overwhelming young children with a new language doesn’t

produce faster results. A child’s second language will be more successful with support of the

16

first language. This support and continued use and development of the child’s home language

aids them to have full use of what they know in that language while they are also building

concepts and connections in English. Research (Epinosa, 2010) has also shown early literacy

skills developed in the home language can be easily transferred to the new language.

Cooperative learning is a teaching strategy used in a classroom as a social system in

which control is delegated to a group by the teacher and the group is held responsible for their

own learning; the students work together to acquire knowledge (Cohen and Lotan, 2004).

Cooperative learning has been found effective for ELL students because the activities allow them

to practice and engage in content and language opportunities with peers (Caldaron, 1998).

Total Physical Response (TPR) is a method requiring active participation of students and

teachers (Schunk, 1991). The students watch and imitate what the teacher is saying and

physically demonstrating. Developed by an American Professor of Psychology, James Asher,

TPR is based on the theory that memory is enhanced by association of physical movement

(Bowen, 2004). This method has been shown to be successful because it assumes students can

understand language before it can be produced (Asher, 2000). Receptive language precedes

expressive language. Total Physical Response is beneficial to beginning ELL students because it

doesn’t require an oral response until they have fully comprehended the meaning (McCloskey &

Nations, 1998). There are seven basic steps to TPR: 1) Setting up; 2) Demonstration; 3) Group

live action; 4) Written copy; 5) Oral repetition and questions; 6) Student demonstration; and 7)

Pairs.

The Direct Instruction method only uses the target language and the learner is not

allowed to use his or her primary language. Focus of direct instruction is clear, accurate

pronunciation of words, rather than grammar rules (Shoebottom, 2013). Material is first

17

presented by the teacher orally with pictures of actions without being translated (Mora, 2012).

The state of California created a law in 1998 to immerse ELL students in an environment with

just English language and has found negative results (Harris, 2012). Prohibiting a child’s first

language and only allowing the target language is thought to encourage the child to use the

English language. The state of California is now considering the use of dual language method.

Children’s language is as much a part of them as their name, their home, their family traditions,

and their connections to parents and siblings. When children grow up with a non-English

language as part of their identity and then participate in a program or school where that language

is not used, they may feel that a part of them is neither valued nor liked. Every young child

should see some oral and written representation of their home language and culture in the place

where they spend so many hours away from home (Nemeth, 2012).

Audio-lingual approach is based on the theory that language is habit forming. It is

taught by having the ELL first hear the language; then he or she is extensively drilled before

visually seeing the written form. This approach was the dominant teaching approach in the mid

1900’s to teach foreign language in the United States. A key principle in the audio-lingual

approach is that the language teacher should provide the students with a native-speaker-like

model (Kifuthu, 2002). The expectation of the students is to mimic the model.

A study was conducted through an interview to determine effective teaching strategies

used by teachers in two school districts with diverse demographics, including a high population

of ELL students (Facella, Rampino & Shea, 2005). The goal of the study was to find out what

strategies were being used and which strategies the teachers found to be most effective. The

sample was a group of 20 teachers (ten teachers from each school district) ranging from grades

prekindergarten through second grade. Facella, Rampino, and Shea asked the given sample of

18

teachers’ two questions: “1) What strategies have you found to be effective in promoting

language acquisition with the ELL students? and, 2) Why do you believe those teaching

strategies were successful?” (pg. 210). From the study, there were 28 different teaching

strategies mentioned that they believed were effective in teaching ELL students. The teachers

also noted they found a higher rate of success when they varied their strategies. The teachers

selected strategies that would best meet the needs of each individual child. From the list

compiled by the teachers, the strategies fell into three main categories: strategies for engaging

learners emotionally, strategies for teaching language specifically, and strategies for general

teaching. An essential finding from this study was the importance of understanding language

development, particularly second language acquisition. The stages of language development are

mentioned earlier under the Natural Approach. By identifying at which language stage the ELL

student is performing, a teacher can implement a variety of teaching strategies that are

developmentally appropriate for each child.

Incorporating Technology:

In today’s teaching world, teachers are using more forms of technology to support their

work and engage young children in learning content (Shillady & Parikh, 2012). Prior research

on English language learners shows that integration of technology into classroom instruction can

strengthen positive self-concept, support both English and native language proficiency, boost

motivation, encourage positive attitudes toward learning, increase academic achievement, and

nurture higher level thinking skills (Meskill, Mossop, & Bates, 1998). The use of technology in

ELL classrooms can provide multiple opportunities for students to develop language skills

(“Technology-Enhanced Instruction”, 2010). Together with academic goals, use of technology

allows students to take control of interpretation and pair it with development of language and

19

thinking. It’s important for teachers to have a variety of tools available for them to use to help

ELL students (Nemeth & Simon, 2013). Technology can be in many different forms:

camera/video camera; voice recorder; internet; tablet; interactive white board; smartpen or digital

pen; music player; computer; smartphone; printer; smart table; video monitor. A school

psychologist with the Orange County Department of Education (California) noted that the iPad

can be customized to reach a variety of skills for individual students in the classroom (“iPad-

Breaking”, 2010). One student could have an application to work on letters and shapes, while

another student can use it to answer yes or no questions. Whichever tool selected, careful and

intentional planning will help the teacher make the most of the technology used and help to make

sure the tools fit into the curriculum goals – meaning the technology tools should match the

students’ needs. Donna Clovis (1997), an ESL teacher in Princeton, NJ, used the closed

captioning feature as she showed a video on the television. Along with showing a video, she

incorporated the TPR teaching strategy to build and retain key vocabulary. Another aspect to

consider about technology tools utilized is the extent to which they can be used. In two school

districts, District 214 and Cormal Independent School District, the teachers chose to use iPads

and iPods because they can be utilized in and out of the school setting by the students (Demski,

2011). In Demski’s article Sandra Shelton, Director of Technology at Cormal IDS, stated “It’s

not just about learning in the school, especially with ELL students. It’s about that time when

they are on the bus, participating in after school activities, or at home, when they can be

continuing their development of these new language skills.” A key component for all educators

to remember is technology should be developmentally appropriate. It should be responsive to

the ages and developmental levels of the children, to their individual needs and interests, and to

their social and cultural contexts” (McManis & Gunnewig 2012). The definition of

20

developmentally appropriate practices has recently expanded to include: 1) known strengths,

interests, and needs of each individual child; 2) what is known about the development and

learning for the child; and 3) knowledge of the cultural and social contexts each child lives in

(Bredekamp & Copple, 1997).

21

Chapter III: Discussion

The following chapter will begin with a summary of the reviewed literature, discussing

the main points and key findings. A critical analysis of the review will be discussed, followed by

recommendations for future research on effective teaching strategies and tools to be used in the

Early Childhood classroom setting to enhance the learning of ESL students.

Summary

Increasing numbers of children entering schools who have limited or no English language

speaking skills is on the rise. A projection has been made by the US Census Bureau that by the

2030s, an increase from 22% to 40% of children in the school-age population will have a home

language other than English (Crouch, 2007). Many of these children are of immigrant families

and U.S. born children lack proficiency in their first language of English. The education system

is being held accountable by the No Child Left Behind Act, signed by President Bush, to ensure

that each child receives an education that will help him or her succeed at the highest potential.

With the mainstreaming of English Language Learners (ELL) into classrooms, teachers have had

to reflect upon and adapt their teaching styles to incorporate strategies that cater to the diverse

learning styles of all individuals in the room. Educators and school professionals share different

beliefs on the best way to teach ELLs (Tissington & LaCour, 2010). Evidence from studies have

shown that immersing young dual language learners in a room where language is highlighted is

much more effective than simply teaching isolated skills in small rooms or tutor sessions

(Freeman, Freeman & Mercuri, 2004). Programs addressing the needs of ELL students vary.

These variations require educators to provide an efficient and meaningful environment for

learning to meet the needs of ELL students. Building a strong connection with families helps to

enhance the language development of ELL students and the overall success of their learning.

22

Critical Analysis and Recommendations

Most research on this topic is for children ages five through nineteen within the public

school system. The focus of this paper was to find effective teaching strategies, create a

classroom environment and to integrate technology tools into the early childhood classroom.

The lack of research in infant children through age five may significantly alter the statistical

population of ELL students and research compiled regarding teaching strategies, technology use

and classroom environment.

Many viewpoints and stances exist on the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. Standards

have been set in place for educators to meet the needs of all children receiving an education. The

teacher must seek out what the state mandates for ELL instruction and assessments. If the state

is exempt from the No Child Left Behind Act, then the teacher should become aware of the

state’s plan is to ensure all children receive a high quality education. Familiarity with national

and state guidelines will give a better understanding to the teacher in expectations of teaching

diverse learners in a mainstream classroom. Children who speak English or another language

may not be proficient in the language and will need assistance in obtaining the necessary skills to

proficiently speak and understand the English language.

A necessary early step to be taken is to arrange a meeting time with the ELL student and

his or her family prior to entering the classroom or within the first week. This meeting will

begin to facilitate a home-school connection between the teacher and family and gain a better

understanding of the native culture and background. Building a strong home-school connection

is essential in the teaching outcome of ELL students. To further enhance the home-school

connection, invite families to share cultural customs with the classroom and school. This will

also help the teacher learn more about the diverse cultures in the room.

23

Although there are multiple teaching strategies used in teaching ELL students, there is no

one specific strategy better than the other. Teachers should observe and pre-assess each student

to determine at which stage he or she is in language development, whether it be first language or

second language. The teacher should implement strategies individually and developmentally

appropriate for each child. The teacher should track the progress on individual ELL students

within the classroom and observe the behaviors and response of the students regarding individual

teaching strategies. The teacher can then identify strategies that appear to be stronger than others

by the students and may want to alter approaches for teaching with a specific strategy.

To aid in higher academic performance by ELL students, yearly workshops must include

training on how to use technological tools within the classroom. Schools must also utilize staff

development opportunities in developing ELL curriculum to coincide with the curriculum

already set in place for the school. Finally, schools must provide teachers with specific ELL

language workshops.

24

References

Asher, J.J. (2000). Learning another language through actions: The complete

teacher’sguidebook (6th ed.). Los Gatos, CA: Sky Oaks Productions.

Ashworth, M. & Wakefield, H.P. (2004). Teaching the world’s children: ESL for ages three to

seven. Toronto, Ontario, CAN: Pippin Publishing Corporation.

Ballantyne, K.G., Sanderman, A.R., & McLaughlin, N. (2008, November). Dual language

learners in the early years: Getting ready to succeed in school. Washington, DC: National

Clearinghouse for Language Acquisition. Retrieved February 8, 2013, from:

www.ncela.gwu.edu/

Ballard & Tighe. (2011). Esl glossary. Retrieved January 6, 2013, from: www.ballard-tighe.com/

Bowen, T. (2004). Teaching approaches: Total physical response. Retrieved January 12, 2013,

from: www.onestopenglish.com

Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (Eds; 1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early

childhood education programs (Rev. ed.). Washington, DC: The National Association for

the Education of Young Children.

Bruffee, K. (1984). Collaborative learning and the conversation of mankind. College English, 46,

635-652

Calderon, M. (1998). Cooperative learning for bilingual instruction: Manual for teachers and

teacher trainers. El Paso, TX: MTTI.

Clovis, D. (1997). Light, television, action! Educational Leadership, 55, 38-40.

Cohen, E.G., & Lotan, R.A. (2004). Equity in heterogeneous classrooms. In J.A. Banks, &

C.A.E. McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education,. (pp.

736-752). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

25

Colorin Colorado (2007). How to create a welcoming classroom environment. Retrieved March

1, 2013, from: www.colorincolorado.org

Crouch, R. (2007). The United States of Education: The changing demographics of the United

States and their schools. Retrieved February 24, 2013, from:

www.centerforpubliceducation.org

Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). Evaluating No Child Left Behind. Nation, 294(20), 11-18.

Demski, J. (2011, May). ELL to go. T H E Journal, 38(5), 28-32.

Education Week. (2004, August 4). No Child Left Behind. Retrieved January 10, 2013, from:

www.edweek.org/ew/issues/no-child-left-behind/

Epinosa, L.M. (2010). Getting it RIGHT for young children from diverse backgrounds: Applying

research to improve practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Facella, M.A., Rampino, K.M., & Shea, E.K. (2005). Effective teaching strategies for English

language learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 29(1), 209-221.

Freeman, Y.S., Chen, D.W., & Sin., S. (2010). Dual language essentials for teachers and

administrators. Portsmouth, HN: Heinemann.

Galant, P. (2009, June 16). Second language learning methods – direct method [Web blog post].

Retrieved from http://blog.innovativelanguage.com/2009/06/16/second-language-

learning-methods-direct-method-berlitz/

Gersten, R. (1996). Literacy instruction for language-minority students: The transition years.

The Elementary School Journal, 96(3), 227-244.

Ghiso, M. P. (2013, March). Every language is special: Promoting dual language learning in

multicultural primary schools. Young Children, 22-26.

26

Glossary of education: Classroom environment. (2013). Retrieved March 15, 2013, from:

www.education.com

Harris, R. (2012). Caught between two languages. Education Digest, 78(2), 57-62.

iPad – breaking new ground in special education. (2010, November/December). District

Administration, 16.

Jorgensen, M.A., & Hoffmann, J. (2003). History of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001

(NCLB). San Antonio, TX: Pearson Education, Inc.

Kifuthu, S. (2002). Background and characteristics of the audio-lingual method. Retrieved

February 6, 2013, from: www.tcnj.edu/

Krashen, S., & Terrell, T. (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom.

New York: Pergamon Press.

Lake, V., & Pappamihiel, N.E. (2003). Effective practices and principles to support English

language learners in the early childhood classroom. Childhood Education, 70(4), 200-

203.

Lapp, D. & Flood, J (2004, November). Are we communicating?: Effective instruction for

students who are acquiring English as a second language. The Reading Teacher, 48(3),

260-264.

Learning Point Assoiciates. (2007). Understanding the No Child Left Behind Act “English

proficiency”. Retrieved from: www.learningpt.org/

Mace-Matluck, B., Alexander-Kasparik, R., & Qeen, R. (1998). Through the golden door:

Educational approaches for immigrant adolescents with limited schooling. McHenry, IL:

Delta Systems and Center for Applied Linguistics.

27

Macrina, M., Hoover, D. & Becker,C. (2009, March). The challenges of working with dual

language learners: Three perspectives: supervisor, mentor, and teacher. Young Children,

27-34

McCloskey, M.L, & Nations, M.J. (1998). English everywhere: An integrated curriculum guide.

Atlanta, GA: Educo Press.

McManis, L.D., & Gunnewig, S.B. (2012). Finding the education in education technology with

early learners. Young Children, 67(3), 14-24. Retrieved from:

www.naeyc.org/yc/article/finding-education-in-educational-technology

Meskill, C., Mossop, J., & Bates, R. (1998, April). Electronic texts and learning of English as a

second language. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational

Research Association, Sand Diego, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.

ED 436 965)

Mora, J.K. (2012). Second language teaching methods: Principles & procedures. Retrieved

January 10, 2013 from: www.moramodules.com/ALMMethods.htm

National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational

Programs. (2007). The growing numbers of limited English proficient students 1994/5 to

2004/5. Washington, DC: U.S., Department of Education, National Clearinghouse for

English Language Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational Programs, Retrieved

March 4, 2013, from www.ncela.gwu/edu/stats/2_nation.htm

National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE). (2008). English language learners: A policy

research brief. Retrieved March 5, 2013, from: www.ncte.org/

28

Nemeth, K.N. (2012) Basics of supporting dual language learners: An introduction for

educators of children from birth through age 8. Washington, DC: National Association

for the Education of Young Children.

Nemeth, K.N., & Simon, F.S. (2013, March). Using technology as a teaching tool for dual

language learners in preschool through grade 3. Young Children, 48-52.

No Child Left Behind Exemptions. (2012, March). Congressional Digest, 91(3), 83. Retrieved

January 18, 2013, from: http://CongresionalDigest.com

Panferov, S. (2002). Exploring the literacy development of Russian and Somali ESL learners: A

collaborative ethnography. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, the Ohio State University,

Columbus. Retrieved from: www.ohiolink.edu/etd/view.cgi?0su1028234878

Panferov, S. (2010). Increasing ELL parental involvement in our schools: Learning from the

parents. Theory Into Practice, 49,106-112. doi: 10.1080/00405841003626551

Pence, K., Justice, L., & Wiggins, A. (2008, July). Preschool teacher’s fidelity in implementing a

comprehensive language-rich curriculum. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in

Schools, 39, 329-341.

Schunk, H.A. (1999). The effect of singing paired with signing on receptive vocabulary skills of

elementary ESL students. Journal of Music Therapy, 36(2), 110-124.

Seo, K., & Hoover, J.H. (2009). Navigation a strange culture: Nurturing new English learners.

Reclaiming Children and Youth, 18(3), 58-61.

Shillady, A., & Parikh, M. (2012, May). New tools and strategies for teachers and learners.

Young Children, 67(3), 10-12.

Shin, H.B., & Kominksi, R.A. (2010, April). Language use in the United States: 2007 American

community survey reports, ACS-12. U.S. Washington, DC: Census Bureau.

29

Shoebottom, P. (2013). Language teaching methodologies. Retrieved from: esl.fis.edu

Smith-Davis, J. (2004). The new immigrant students need more than ESL. Education Digest,

69(8), 21.

Souto-Manning, M. (2010). Family involvement: Challenges to consider, strengths to build on.

Young Children, 65(2), 82-88.

Technology-enhanced instruction for English as a second language (esl) and bilingual

education. (2010). Retrieved from: www.p12.nysed.gov/

Tennessee Department of Education. English as a Second Language Guide. Retrieved from:

http://www.fentress.k12tn.net/ESL/ESLProgramGuide.pdf

Tissingston, L., & LaCour, M. (2010, Fall). Strategies and content areas for teaching English

language learners. Reading Improvement, 47(3), 166-172. Retrieved from:

www.projectinnovation.biz/index.html

U.S. Department of Education. (2004, September 15). Title I: Improving the academic

achievement of the disadvantaged. Retrieved January 11, 2013, from:

www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg1.html

Williams, J.A. (2001, May). Classroom conversations: Opportunities to learn for ESL students

in mainstream classrooms. Reading Teacher, 54(8), 750-758.

Wisconsin Department of Instruction. (2011). March 2010 census of limited English proficient

pupils in Wisconsin by district. Retrieved February 22, 2013, from: http://ell.dpi.wi.gov/

Wrightslaw. (2013). Facts about teacher quality, training and certification: Are we destroying

one child at a time? Retrieved March 1, 2013, from: www.wrightslaw.com/

Zehler, A.M., Adger, C., Coburn, C., Arteagoitia, I., Williams, K., & Jacobson, L. (2008).

Preparing to serve English language learning students: School districts with emerging

30

English language learner communities (Issues and Answers Report, REL 2008-No. 049).

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences,

National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational

Laboratory Appalachia. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs