Beyond Language - The Many Dimensions of an ESL Program

8/13/2019 Beyond Language - The Many Dimensions of an ESL Program

1/20

http://www.jstor.org

Beyond Language: The Many Dimensions of an ESL Program

Author(s): Gisela Ernst

Source: Anthropology & Education Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 3, Alternative Visions of Schooling:

Success Stories in Minority Settings, (Sep., 1994), pp. 317-335

Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the American Anthropological Association

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3195849

Accessed: 17/08/2008 04:30

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the

scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that

promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3195849?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3195849?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/20

Beyond Language:The Many Dimensions of anESLProgramGISELAERNSTCollegeof EducationWashingtonState UniversityThisethnographic tudy investigatedone English-as-a-second-languageESL)program or elementarystudents with as manyas 20 native languagesrepre-sented. The article outlinesdifferentdimensionsof this languageprogram hatareconducive olanguage-minoritytudentslearninghow tosucceed nschools.Segmentsofconversationsand narrativevignettescollectedduringayear-longethnographictudy illustratethepedagogicalassumptions, nstructionalgoals,andorganizational rrangements fthis ESLprogram.ESL,LANGUAGE-MI-NORITYSTUDENTS, CLASSROOMTALKIn the past decade, classrooms across the United States have radicallychanged. The influx of immigrants from Asia, Latin America, Arabicnations, and, most recently, Russia have painted our classrooms withnew multicultural tones. Schools are challenged with having to providemore and improved services for this increasing sector of the population.Yet, the lack of studies addressing the needs of language-minoritystudents (Ellis 1984; Hakuta 1986; Wong-Fillmore and Valadez 1986),'the absence of organizational and programmatic guidelines (Crawford1989), the inadequacy of assessment procedures (Cummins 1982, 1984;Flores et al. 1991; Mehan 1981), the stubborn persistence of teachingmethods that focus on separate language skills (Cummins 1986;Edelsky1986), the pervasive utilization of teacher-centered classrooms(Chaudron 1988; Long and Porter 1985; Mehan 1979;Nunan 1989), therecurring implementation of a transmission model (Barnes 1976;Cum-mins 1986; Freire 1970), and the use and abuse of repetitive skill-basedexercises and worksheets (Allen 1989; Flores et al. 1991) all have posedserious problems to the already difficult quest of improving educationalservices for ESLstudents.The widespread school failure among students for whom English isnot a first language is still persistent, and the overrepresentation of thesestudents in classes for the learning disabled is evident throughout theUnited States (Cummins 1984, 1986; Ortiz and Yates 1983;Padilla et al.1991). There are, however, many isolated examples of programs inwhich students, against all odds, are not failing (Lucas et al. 1990;Ramirez et al. 1991; Suarez-Orozco 1991). Thus, it becomes clear that a

Anthropology& Education Quarterly 25(3):317-335.Copyright ? 1994, AmericanAnthropologicalAssociation.317


3/20

Anthropology EducationQuarterly Volume 25,1994

starting point in improving educationalprogramsfor students of di-verse linguisticand culturalbackgrounds s to exploreparticular raitsof successfulprograms.And this is what this articleattemptsto do.Thisarticleaddressesthe issueof the traitsof successfulESLprogramsby focusingin depth on one elementaryESLprogram-an analysisofwhat works and thereasonsforcertainprogramelements' effectiveness.Students are exited from theprogramby the thirdyear and areplacedin mainstreamclassrooms.By the fourth year students are, on theaverage, among the top third in theirclassrooms,with severalof themmaking the honor roll. Conversationalsegments, narrativevignettes,anddescriptiveaccountsof selectedphysical, nstructional,and interac-tionalfeaturesof thisprogramwill aid intheexplorationof fiveprogramcomponents that support students learning a second language andlearninghow to succeedin a new school system.2ResearchMethodology

Thestudy reportedhere is partof a largerstudy (Ernst1991) n whichdatawere gatheredduringone school year,throughparticipant-obser-vation;examinationof students'work;and audio- and videotapingofstudents' interactions n differentschool settings (i.e.,ESLclassrooms,cafeteria,homeroom classrooms).Fieldnotes, transcriptionsof inter-views, audio- and videotapes,maps,and otherrecords(i.e.,schedules,students' work and files)constitutethe bulk of the data.Based on the analysisof macrofeatures, veryday events in the con-versationalESLclassroom(e.g.,writing, story reading,discussion,talk-ing circle)were identifiedandvideotaped. Microanalysisof videotapeswas grounded in recent workin the analysisof face-to-face nteraction(Bloome 1987;Cazden 1988;Cazden and Mehan 1989;Erickson1987;Green1983;Greenand Wallat1981;Gumperz1982;Philips1983;Truebaet al. 1981;Weadeand Green1989).The system provided a principledapproach for freezing, reconstructing,and analyzing students' andteachers' nteractionswithin theESLclassroom.The Social Context

Arthur ElementarySchool, located in an economically depressedneighborhood n a midsizedcity in Florida,houses one of the two ESLelementaryprograms nthe district.3 achyear,of the600to650studentsenrolledin the school,approximately70 to 85 attendthe ESLprogram.TheESLprogram s housed in two classrooms.While the focus in oneclassroomis on conversationalEnglish(ESL1), the focus in the otherclassroom s on content area nstruction ESL2). Arthur'sESLprogramuses a pulloutmodel. That s, studentsatallgradelevels receive nstruc-tion in Englishfromregularclassroom eachers,and supportand indi-vidualized instructionn thecontentareasfromtheESL taff.Everyday,most of the students enrolled in the program spend three 45-minute

318


4/20

Dimensions fan ESLProgram

periodsin theirESLclassrooms.Instructionn allclassrooms akesplacein English.ParticipantsStaff. The ESLstaff consists of a programcoordinatorwho is also theconversational ESL teacher, three content-area ESL teachers, andGrandma, half-timeteaching aide. Two of the teachers,althoughfluentin English,arenonnativeEnglish speakers;one teacher s mono-lingual (English),and the program coordinatoris a native Englishspeaker, fluent in Spanish. Two teachers are full-time and two arepart-time.

In addition to the staff, the ESLprogramworksclosely with a localsenior citizencenter. Several membersof this centerareregularvolun-teers in the ESLprogram.These Grandmas nd Grandpas omeonce a week, at differenttimes, to work with students on a individual-ized basis. The advantages of this partnershipare multiple. First,formoststudents,havinga venerablefigurearound s important incetheyleft theirgrandparents n theirrespectivehome countries.Second,stu-dents benefit from having individualized attention and instruction.Inaddition,participating eniorcitizens,ESL eachers,and school staff allfeel thattheirexperiences nthe school are enhanceddue to thisarrange-ment. As one Grandpatestified, Everyweek I look forwardto comingto this class. Even when I wake up and my kneesand backarehurting,I still want to come. By the time I get here and see these kids and seethese faces,I feel great.Students. Duringthe 1989-90schoolyear,82 students from30differentcountries,speaking 20 different languages, were enrolled in the ESLprogram. Although most of these students have been in the UnitedStatesfor one year,there are some who haverecentlyarrivedand otherswho are completing their second year. Studentsin this programhavevaried educationaland socioeconomicbackgrounds.Some are childrenof studentsin a nearbyuniversity,some have fled theirhomecountrieswith partof their families as war refugees, and some emigratedwithparentsand siblingsin hopes of findingbetterjobsoreducation. Thesestudentsspokeat home one of the following 20languages:Spanish(23),Chinese(14),Korean(10),Portuguese(8),Vietnamese(4),Croatian 3),Arabic 2),Hungarian 2),Polish(2),Sinhala 2),German 2),Lao(2),andeightotherlanguage groups representedby a singlestudent:Chichewa,Farsi,Hindi,Hmong, Indonesian,Luvenda, Russian,andTagalog.A Day in the SchoolLife ofan ESLStudent

Intheprocessof learninga second language,ESL tudents mustkeepup with a demandingprogramof studies.Inadditionto,and as a resultof, theirlinguisticand academic asks,ESL tudentsmust also learn howto functionaround a very complex timetable.Becauseeach ESLchild

Ernst 319


5/20

Anthropology& EducationQuarterly Volume 25,1994comes to Arthur with a unique set of characteristics and needs (e.g.,English-language proficiency level, literacy development, linguistic andcultural backgrounds, schooling experiences), an individualized pro-gram of activities is tailored by the ESLstaff for each new student. Fora new ESLstudent this individualized timetable, although designed toprovide support in required areas, can in effect add more pressure andcomplexity to an already busy set of tasks. Further, it can lead to feelingsof marginalization and neglect, because in fact, with the exception of theESL staff and the student, no one else in the school is able to keep upwith the constant changes sustained by students' individual schedules.Hyun-Tae, a fifth-grade Korean student completing his second year inthe United States, reflects on his initial troublesome experience of learn-ing when, and how, to go from one classroom to another:

Yeah, it was like, wow, all messy. Sometimes I really forgot about thosedifferent times and, when I firstgot here,didn't even know those words;Ionly knew words like hi and hello. f I forgot something,Ijust sat thereandsomeonein theESLhad to comeandget me.4But once Hyun-Tae learned his schedule and how to move throughoutthe different events of everyday life at Arthur, this is how he describeda typical day in school:

At 7:05I wait forthebus at the village,I ride bus number8,andI directlygoto the mediacenter-I mean,to the cafetorium-to eat breakfast.And thenIgo to my post because I am a patroluntil 8 o'clock,and then I go to myclassroom,do spelling,and thenat9 o'clockIgo toESL.Well,onWednesdayIhave to go to ESL,on Thursday have to go to art clubat 9:40afterreading,andevery day I have to go to someplacelikeSpanish,computer,PE,at9:40,until 10:00o'clock.Like,PEonTuesdaysandThursdays,butThursday don'tgobecauseIhave artclub.Ihavelunch at11:47everyday and itendsat12:21.Well,on Mondays,Tuesdays,andFridays, go andThursdays oo Igo toESLformaybe[oneperiod]to Mrs.Seleca'sclass.And afterthatI have togo tomypost againin the afternoon,and then I go backto my home with the bus. Iusuallyhaveto do math fastbecause,peopleinmy classroom, heydo it from1 o'clock'til the end of the school,and I have to go to ESLuntil 1:30;so Icouldn'tdo it [otherwise]. onlyhave,like,15minutesto do it;I have to do itfast.

Hyun-Tae's account graphically describes some of the complexity of hislife as an ESLstudent in a North American school. The point here is notthat Arthur's ESLprogram organizes ESLstudents' learning experiencesaround exhausting timetables-although that may be the case. Rather,that in order to understand the academic, social, and emotional chal-lenges encountered by these students, we need to look at the wholeensemble of experiences.

320


6/20

DimensionsfanESLProgramFive BasicComponentsof Arthur'sElementaryESLProgram

One important aspect of Arthur's ESLprogramis its multidimen-sional character. n order to address the multiple needs of its studentpopulation, Arthur'sESLprogram has five basic components: (1) aconstructedcurriculum hat incorporatesstudents' languagesand cul-tures;(2) an orientationprogramto help new students, theirparents,and the staff who will be working with the newly arrivedstudents;(3)a monitoring procedure that begins with the assessment of a newlyarrived student and continues even after the student has exited theprogram; 4)a languagecomponentin which the maingoal is to addasecondlanguagetostudents'linguisticrepertoireand not toreplaceheirnative language with English;and (5) a content-areacomponent thatmainlytargets hespecificneeds of studentsin readingandmath.Whileeach of these components fulfills a specific set of needs, they are notindependent entities. Rather,they are integratedand interrelateddi-mensions of one programthat,forheuristicpurposes,arepresentedasseparateparts.Inorder to explorewhat a flexible,tailor-made econd-language programmight look like,a discussion of five importantcom-ponents of the ArthurelementaryESLprogramfollows.A Constructed urriculum hatIncorporatestudents'LanguagesndCultures

TheArthurESLprogram s exemplaryin its promotionof a learningcommunitythat allows students to integratetheirbackgrounds, nter-ests, strengths,and priorknowledge of languagewith sound strategiesthat promote second-languageand literacydevelopment. Several as-sumptions held by ESL teachers at Arthur underlie the constructednatureof instructional ctivities n thisESLprogram.Theseassumptionsprovide a frameworkfor understanding the instructionalgoals andorganizationalarrangementsof this ESLprogram.5Focusing nStudents'Strengths. In orderto enhance theschooling expe-riences of all students,ESL teachers at Arthurtake into account whatstudentsbringwiththem. Arthur eachersacknowledgethat thecultureand language of children's homes have majoreffects on their worldviews, and thus they createopportunitiesfor students to perceive thesignificanceof what they have and know with what their new school,language,and cultureoffers them.Constructingnd Sharinga ClassroomCulture. ESLteachersat Arthurbelieve thatreadinga story, taking a field trip, sharingan account,orviewing a filmallows ESLstudents,who do not come to school with aset of joint encounters,to experiencea sense of shared culture.Whenstudents can participate n the discussion because they have just ac-quiredthebackgroundknowledge and the necessaryvocabulary, heirsense of competenceand theirdesire to communicate ncreases.

Ernst 321


7/20


8/20


9/20

Anthropology&EducationQuarterlyresults.Therearesome tests outthere, hey-Hmm.... Yeah,Ithink tisbettertolet thechild come to theprogramand observehim,see whathappens,andaskand talk with his homeroom eacher.After the initial assessment of newly arrived students done at thedistrict office, ESL teachers at Arthur seek opportunities to assess stu-dents in their native language to determine the levels of language andacademic functioning and to obtain thorough histories about their stu-dents. From this point onward, ESL teachers will keep monitoring theirstudents even after they are exited from the program. This way ofassessing and tracking students' development is an integral part of theESL program. As explained by the ESL program coordinator, the pur-

pose of this monitoring procedure is twofold: first, to become moreknowledgeable about what students learn and how they learn, andsecond, to gather data over time as the basis for decision making aboutstudents' growth, planning instruction, and placement recommenda-tions.Exit Criteria. The same instruments used for placement purposes areused for exiting students from the ESLprogram. ButESLteachers do notnecessarily rely exclusively on test results to exit a student. Sometimes,as expressed by one of the ESLteachers, tests are administered becauseyou need a number in the student's file, and not because teachers findit necessary to assess students' progress. Some teachers, like the ESLprogram coordinator, have no doubts that informal assessment by class-room teachers can provide reliable measures:

Youknowwhenkidsareready.Youdon'thave togive thema test or evaluatetheirEnglish;you justhave to listento whattheysay when kids arereadytogo. I don't know thatI have ever released a kid thatI knew was not ready,andpartof whattheydo is either tellyou the samestorybecausethey pickedit up entirelyfrom their classroomteacher;or the other thing is they startasking:Do Ihaveto come to ESL?Do Ihave to cometoday?Myclass is doingsuchandsuch;Idon't want to comeany more.And at firstIwas crushed...my ego wasjustcrushed.Ms. Seleca's belief that there might be other ways of assessing stu-dents' progress, especially in language-related areas, is not unusual. Inthe past decade there has been a resurgence of literature suggesting thatmethods of informal assessment should be gathered for final interpre-tation, placement, and recommendation procedures. This body of litera-ture does not suggest that standardized instruments be eliminated

completely but rather that informal procedures be used to augment datagained through the use of tests (Cummins 1984; McLaughlin 1982;Padilla et al. 1991). These authors assert that traditional assessmentprocedures, which rely on standardized tests, often misidentify cultur-ally and linguistically different students as learning disabled. Becausethe vast majority of tests are not designed to evaluate whether low

324 Volume 25,1994


10/20

Dimensions fan ESLProgram

performance is due to sociocultural factors or disability, ESL studentsare overwhelmingly misplaced in special classrooms. The dangers oflabeling ESLstudents as learning-disabled or as low achievers, throughuse of formal assessment procedures that are external to the child andclassroom, is clearly illustrated in Ms. Seleca's recount of Bouzid's case:

Bouzid is sittingin a third-grade lassroomand has been lost for two weeks.He came two weeks ago, and he was the one that Kay,the speech teacher,[brought]n, sayingthat he was going to be put in a specialschool,and [we]found out thatEnglishwas his secondlanguage.But because all the paperscame from London,the secretaryat the county office wrote Englishas hisnativelanguage.WellthenI talkedto thepsychologistwho testedhim. All ofthis was happeningon Friday.... And thenon Mondaythe schoolpsycholo-gist from[thespecialschool]was calledover to test the child and she did somenonverbalWISCtestingand talkedtoKay,andshe hadnoteven heardaboutanESLprogram,didn'tknow there was one in thecounty,had no idea therewas one at Arthur.Ourguidancecounselorhadbrought t to the attentionofthepsychologist.So it was ratherweird. But aftershe found out there was anESLprogram,she agreed with Kay... to put this child in ESE[ExceptionalStudentEducation]nourschool,combinedwithESL.Sothe schoolpsycholo-gist thoughtthat was good. So then next day I was backin the office,and Isaw the schoolpsychologistcomingout with Bouzidagainand she said shewas called back to do furthertesting.I was thinkingwhen are they going tocome out with the resultsand with a placementfor this student?So I testedhim during my lunchtime. He scored 13 out of 22 and 10 out of 16,and ourkids scoreperfectwhen they exit the programor maybe20 out of 22. So helooks like he is rightin the middleof some proficiencycontinual.So then,ofcourse,when Iwas [testing]him,I thought why do Ihave to wait to staffhimin my programwhile they are waiting for some kind of decision. So I ampickinghim up tomorrowat8:15,and I amgoing to tryto holdhim so he canworkwith thesecondgroup.WhenIwent to hisclassroom, heteachers-shewas, Oh, hankGod.

Because of the pervasive emergence of this type of problem whenassessing ESL students, it is not surprising that the ESL staff at Arthurhave mixed feelings when they have to send one of their students forpsychological assessment. But Ms. Seleca and her team of ESL teachersare not alone when facing this type of dilemma. In a thorough study, inwhich psychological assessments of over 400 minority language stu-dents were analyzed, Cummins found that bilingual and ESL teacherswere reluctant to send their students to the psychologist (1982). Eventhough these teachers suspected that some of their students were havinglearning disabilities and could benefit from appropriate diagnosis andremediation, they refused to send students for psychological assess-ment. In Cummins's words, the teachers know that the students willreturn with a permanent label and a one-way ticket to a monolingualEnglish special education class (1982:1).Placements. The ESLstaff at Arthur makes exceptional efforts in organ-izing each student's schedule so that ESL classes would not interfere

Ernst 325


11/20

Anthropology&EducationQuarterly Volume25,1994with the students'participationn the full academic ifeof the school.Inorder to supportstudents'academic,social,and emotionalexperiencesin the school, placement decisions are made taking into account thefollowing factors:English-languageproficiency level, literacy skills,languagebackground,specialneeds (i.e.,a studentexperiencingdiffi-culty duringtheinitialadjustingperiod,exceptionalities), nd schedulerequirements(i.e., articulationwith other content areas). In order toensurethat thesemultipleissues areaddressed,ESL eachersat Arthurconformto the following procedures:? With the help of school personnelor translators, eachersobtainedthoroughhistoriesabout studentsand families.* Studentswere assessed in multiple settings and through multiplemeasures.* Continualobservation, nteraction,and record-keepingnstruments(e.g., anecdotal records, profiles, checklists, samples of students'work, mainstream eachers'comments)provided reliablemeasuresof students'progress.* Frequent nteractionswith parents,older siblings,and mainstreamteachersaided ESL eachers n their decisions.

A LanguageProgramOneof themainobjectivesof the conversational omponentof theESLprogramat ArthurElementary s to provide opportunities or learnersto interact n English.When asked about the main goals for this class,Ms. Seleca,the programcoordinatorand teacher,answered, Tohelpkids learnEnglish,to encouragethem to talk to communicateas much,to communicatewith others. In their classrooms,poor guys, in theirclassroomsthey are quiet all the time. Further comments from Ms.Selecaindicatehow eager her studentsare to speakout : Whenourkids come here,they are dying to talk.You can see it in theirfaces;sohere-everything here is to encourage them to communicate.Every-thing we do is becausewe want to help them talk,to communicate, otell us wheretheyare and what they need.Although the focus of this ESLcomponent is on conversation,stu-dents work on a variety of activities that include reading, writing,computerliteracy,and art, among others. Forexample, in relationtowriting activities,studentswork on creativewriting,journals,poetry,letter writing, composition,and publishing. In termsof reading,stu-dents practicereading and telling stories, poems, myths, tales, andlegends.Otherclassroompractices nclude the use of permanent earn-ing centers, such as the computer and listening centers, as well asfloating centersfor art projects,writing, and games. Plays, skits, androle-playingarealso recurrentactivities n this classroom.For the mostpart, the majorityof activities in the conversationalESLclassroomrequirethat studentswork in pairsand smallgroups.

326


12/20

Dimensionsofan ESLProgramIn this classroom,one recurrent ommunicativeevent that facilitatedtalk and interactionbetweenteachersand studentsandamongstudents

is the talkingcircle. This is a totalgroup activitythatgenerallytakesplace at the beginning of the 45-minuteconversationalEnglish class.Almost every day teacherand studentsgatherin talkingcircleto shareand discussexperiences,anecdotes,news, specialevents,or introduceanew topic. Althoughthe teachermight open the discussionby suggest-ing a general topic, the overriding assumption is that talking circleprovides a place and an audience for students to discuss anything ofinterest to them. Thepurposeof this everyday event is, as statedby theteacher, tohelp childrentalk.As documented elsewhere (Ernst1994),salient featuresof this com-municativeevent are many, including these: students talk more thanteachers;speakersare more concernedwith conveying meaning thanwith presentinglinguisticallycorrectinformation;speaking turns arefrequentlyextendedandalways negotiated; opicsaremostlycontrolledby students;topicsdiscussed deal with personalexperiences; ontribu-tions to the talk often take the form of narratives experiences arereconstructedin order to share them; and teacher talk provides aninteractional caffoldby listeningand promptingstudents to continuetalkingor by solicitingsome clarification. ncommunicativeevents likethe talking circle,where interactions are promoted and collaborationamong participants ncouraged,students'opportunitiesforusing andpracticinganew languageforcommunicativereasonsare enhanced.Thefollowing exampleillustrateshow a fourthgraderfrom Koreawho hasspent less thaneightmonthsin the UnitedStateshas theopportunitytoextend and elaborateher own speech as she shares her experienceofgoing swimming. She begins by narratingone anecdotein Korea, nwhich she is swimmingand the waterwas toohigher (i.e.,toodeep).6222 Teacher JI-HAE223 Ji-Hae you know I'm I swi Iumm in Korea224 Teacher UM-HUH225 Ji-Hae I'mgoing to the swimmingpool226 theyhavemanypeople227 butmaybe maybe we228 Hyun-Tae not thepool228a Teacher YEAH229 Hyun-Tae we don'tgo pool we went beach230 Teacher TOTHEBEACH231 Ji-Hae um-huh232 too too233 Teacher SHALLOW234 Ji-Hae too higher (handsone on top of the other235 within a one feet distance)236 Teacher UM-HUH237 Hyun-Tae too deep238 Ji-Hae theyI Iknow how to swim right

Ernst 327


13/20

Anthropology& EducationQuarterly239 Teacher YES240 Ji-Hae and Icango to the too higher241 it's too higher augh242 brotherbrotherhelp me243 Borui [ ]244 Ji-Hae my brother s going to swim245 andmy brother s going to pushme like that{moves handsas she246 were pullinga rope}247 Teacher OHH248 Students /laughs/249 Teacher AND IT250 Ji-Hae you know what I did251 Teacher YESWhat followed after line 251 is Ji-Hae's second recount. In this instance,she went to the swimming pool and found out that her swim sweater(i.e., bathing suit) was too small.As evidenced in the above segment, these young ESL students arecontributing freely from their own experiences. As Ji-Hae narrates herstory, Hyun-Tae, her brother, extends or clarifies the information pro-vided (lines 228, 229, 237). The teacher supports students' interactionsby listening and acknowledging children's comments (lines 224, 228a,230, 233,236, 239). Furthermore, by acknowledging students' messages(e.g., um-huh, yeah ), repeating ( to the beach ), or extending pre-vious comments (e.g., shallow ), she indicates to students that sharingpersonal experiences is of value. Thus, one important characteristic hereis that students have ownership of the topics discussed. Because they areencouraged to freely share their own experiences, students have achance to try out recently acquired vocabulary, to discover new ways ofdeploying their communicative resources, and to explore how the newlanguage sounds as they speak it.

Talking circle also provided opportunities for teachers to find outabout their students' feelings and concerns, as in the following segment:480 Teacher BORUIAREYOUOKAY481 AREYOUOKAYBORUI482 Borui I ugh ugh Ipointsat his chin}483 Teacher WHATHAPPENEDTOYOURCHIN484 Borui eh it's485 in my father'scaris pow486 Teacher OHYESIN YOURFATHER'S AR487 Borui um-huh488 Teacher AND WHATHAP AND ISYOURFATHEROKAY489 Borui me is wrong my father'scar s pow (jumps rom his chair}490 Teacher OHMYGOODNESS491 WERETHERETWOCARSBORUI492 Borui no493 Teacher ONECARUM-HUH

Volume25,199428


14/20

Dimensions fan ESLProgramIn the above segment, Borui, a first grader from China with less than fivemonths in the United States, made several attempts to explain whathappened to his chin. But teachers are not always able to understandstudents' messages. When this happens, students can often support theirpeers' conversational efforts, as evidenced in the continuation of theprevious account, where Licheng translates Borui's explanation.496497497a498499500501502503504505506507

Licheng Oh I know teacher taftertalkingwith BoruiI know teacherTeacher YEAHLicheng his fatherridesa no cara bikeAnita oh a bikeTeacher OHHHLicheng he Boruino fatherTeacher ONLYBORUIA ALONELicheng he say he hasa rock herethe bicyclehas the wheel wheelinto the um rockJaime pow powLicheng thebike brokedown and Boruisay he hurt after

inChinese}

In this excerpt, when Licheng was speaking, all others were listeningattentively, as illustrated by Anita's acknowledgment that it was a bikeand not a car(line 499) and Jaime's accompanying sound effects of theincident (line 506). Furthermore, with the teacher as an interested lis-tener and occasional prompter (e.g., lines 500, 502), Licheng is encour-aged to further explain Borui's account and to try out new linguisticmeans without the fear of being wrong.It is clear that in this communicative event students have ampleopportunities to use their new language and to practice how to taketurns, interrupt, help others, and listen actively. They are encouraged topractice how to hold back the more talkative members and how to drawout the shy ones. They learn how to request clarification, how to ask forrepetitions, how to slow down, and how to explain. In sum, in thisclassroom, talk and interaction between students and teachers andamong students are not only encouraged but carefully orchestrated,scaffolded, and monitored by teachers. It is through talk and interactionthat students are able to demonstrate their developing oral languageskills and, by doing so, they are using language to learn about them-selves, about each other, and about their new culture. Most importantly,they are using language to learn language.A Content-AreaProgram

The focus of this component of the program is threefold: first, to helpstudents develop and enhance their problem solving skills; second, tohelp students acquire the cultural knowledge and specialized languageand skills needed to succeed in the content areas; and third, to help

Ernst 329


15/20

Anthropology& EducationQuarterly Volume25,1994students deal with some of the mechanicalaspects of reading andwriting. Everydaymost ESLstudents in this school attend two 45-min-ute classes of ESLcontent-areanstruction.In this classroom,studentswork with one of the threeESL eachers n all content-areas, speciallyin readingand math.Averagesize for instructionrangesfromone-to-one instructionto groups of four to six students. Typically,studentsattend this ESLcomponentforless thantwo years.Studentsaregener-ally exited once theyreachtheirgradelevel and when teachers canbesure thattheywill finishtheyearat the same level as theirclass. Becauseof this criteria,once students areexited, they generallydo very well indifferentsubjects.Studentsappearedto be able to recognizethe valueof having ESLcontent-areanstruction,as expressed by YanSunwhentalkingaboutMs.Romero,herESLmathteacher:

Ms.Romero,she [has]beenteachingme math so much so I'mgood atmath,betterthanmy class. It'sgoodmath because thereMs.Romero ells me to dosomething,and we cango faster thanmy class. That'swhat I like.Thishigh motivation to succeedin math,and to do it faster and betterthantheirEnglish-speaking eers,hasbeen discussedbyothers(Guthrie1985;Ramirezet al. 1991). One argument supporting this need forsuccessis provided by Aswinwhen he says, Theysay Iamdumb;theysay I don't speak English.Iknow good math;I'mfast,they slower.One other important unction served by this componentof the ESLprogramhas to do with helpingstudentscope with mechanicalaspectsof reading and writing. Because many students come from diverselanguage groups (such as Persian, Chinese, or Arabic), they are notalways familiarwith the Latinalphabet.Theirwriting system may becompletely different(i.e., ideographic,pictographic, ogographic); helanguagemaybe writtenfromrightto leftandtoptobottom; ettersmaybe writtento extend both above and below the line;or lettersmay notbe joinedand punctuationnot always precise.Formany ESLstudents,transition o the Latinalphabetcauses considerableconfusion.In thesecases,students'specificneeds are addressedduringone-to-oneorsmallgroup readingandwritinginstruction.Conclusions

Briefdescriptionsof (a) setting, (b) characteristicsof teachersandstudents,and (c)a discussionof selectedday-to-dayroutines,pedagogi-cal assumptions,and organizational program features in this articlepresenta generalview of thisprogram.Throughout hisgeneralexplo-ration,orwhatSpradleycallsa grand our of theprogram 1980), hreepoints stand out. First,due to the heterogeneous composition of thestudent population at Arthur'sESLprogram-in terms of fluency inEnglish,gradelevels,linguistic, iteracy,andculturalbackgrounds-theorganizationof learningexperiencesfor language-minority tudentsis

330


16/20

Dimensions fan ESLProgrammediated by a carefully orchestrated set of school and classroom pro-cesses.

Second, the fact that the consequences of not being able to communi-cate appropriately in English go beyond a linguistic realm is recognizedand addressed. The inability to communicate in the new language is avery obvious cause of stress in students. At the same time, students aredetached from emotional support and friendship, a factor that is themost openly avowed cause of unhappiness mentioned by students:Idon't have any friends.I can'tplay with anyone,talk to anyone,and Ihaveto sit in my desk anddo nothing'causeIdon't know how to do my work.Sothefirstyearsarereallyboring'causeIcan'tdoanything.See,whensomebodyhit me or something,I can't tell my teacher; can't communicate hen. Yousee,when I firstcame to school,I was very shy. I couldn'ttalkto anyonebutIcould talk with Ms.Seleca; could communicatewithMs.Seleca.If it wasn'tforher,Iwouldn'tunderstandanything.I was almostto cry;yeah,Iwas sad'causeIdidn't understandEnglish.I alwayscried at homewhen I went backfromschool.

In order to help ESL students cope with these feelings of isolation andto encourage them to participate as much as possible in the whole arrayof school experiences, the ESLstaff carefully design a plan of study foreach student. The result of this attempt of accommodating both the ESLand the content-areas courses is a very complex timetable that, paradoxi-cally, can increase those feelings of isolation. Teachers thus are con-stantly coordinating efforts to guard against a fragmented and conflict-ing delivery of services.Third, and closely related to the above, the ESLstaff at Arthur playsan important role in providing a supportive system, or a scaffold, inwhich ESL students' whole array of linguistic, academic, social, andemotional needs can be bolstered and integrated. The typical scaffoldused by construction workers when erecting buildings is a useful meta-phor to explain this important function of the ESLprogram at Arthur.In Greenfield's words:

Thescaffold,as it is known in building construction,has five characteristics:itprovidesa support; t functionsas a tool; t extends therangeof theworker;it allows the worker oaccomplisha task nototherwisepossible;andit is usedselectivelyto aid theworkerwhere needed. [1984:118]Continuing with this metaphor, the role of Arthur's ESL program isfundamental because it (a) provides instructional support for languageminority students in conversational English and content-area instruc-tion; (b) functions as a hub around which students' schooling experi-ences are organized; (c) extends and enhances students' learning expe-riences in a second language and culture by providing a context whereintheir previous native language and culture experiences are valued; (d)allows students to appropriately participate in everyday events by

Ernst 331


17/20

Anthropology& EducationQuarterly Volume25,1994

helping them learn the social and communicative demands of everydaylife in a North American school; and (e) supports students' academic,social, and emotional needs whenever needed. Ultimately, programslike Arthur can themselves serve as scaffolds for policymakers andprogram coordinators as they strive to meet the needs of ESL studentsin U.S. schools.

Gisela Erst is an assistantprofessor n theCollegeof EducationatWashingtonStateUniversity,whereshe alsodirectsthe Bilingual/ESLEducationProgram.

NotesAcknowledgments.arlierversions of this article were presentedat the 1991AnnualMeetingof the AmericanAnthropologicalAssociation n Chicago,andthe 1994AnnualMeetingof theAmericanEducationalResearchAssociation nNew Orleans.I wish to thank the teachersand studentsin the ESLProgramatArthurElementary chool.Theirnames,but nottheirwords,havebeenchangedin the text. Special thanksto CatherineEmihovich for her supportand kindcomments,and to MaryHenry,KerriRichard,ElsaStatzner,andHenryTruebafor theiruseful commentson earlierdrafts.1. Throughoutthis articlethese childrenare referred o as ESLor language-minority tudents.These terms,although problematicas they are,have beenchosenbecause they lack the more seriousdrawbacksof alternativessuch aslimitedEnglish roficientorLEP),which areinappropriate ecausetheyfocus onapparentdeficiencies.2. Althoughthe supportive unctionof thisESLprogram s quitevisibleandalthoughit is cleartoo thattheseESL eachersare successfulin constructingacontextthatcanbolsterandintegrateESL tudents'experiences, t is notsoclearhow suchan interactional ontextgets constructed.Successfulorchestration fthese students'everydaylives in schoolseems to requiremore than a groupof

willing teacherswho arewell prepared n planning,organizing,andmanaginga multidimensionalESLprogram.To thateffect,I have elsewhereexploredandidentified selected not-so-visiblepatterns of social interaction(Ernst1994).However, because the purpose of this article was to explore the differentdimensionsof one ESLprogram,imitedconsiderationwas giventothesuppor-tiveroleplayedby these ESL eachersn the school andby the students' amiliesat home.Thusthisshortcomingsmorethe resultof a limitation ntermsofspaceand focusrather han in terms of paradigmaticnarrowness.3. Thename ArthurElementary choolis a pseudonym,as are thenames ofparticipantsn this ESLprogram.4. Thequotationsused in this articleare most oftenverbatimtranscriptions.Onoccasions,however,conversationalillersand holders(e.g., um-huh, uh )havebeen eliminated orease of reading.5. For a discussion of how these assumptions translate nto instructionalpractices, ee Ernst1994andErnstandRichard,n press.6. Elsewhere Ernst1991,1994), havereportedon theinsightsderivedfromthe microethnographic nalysesof selectedvideotapedevents (froma pool ofover100hours of videotapedface-to-facenteractionsn this ESLprogram).For

332


18/20

Dimensions fan ESLProgramthis section,ratherthan statingESLteachers'perspectivesabout theirrole aslanguageteachersordescribing heirtheoreticalassumptionsabout oraldevel-opment and second-language teaching and learning,I opted for presentingsegmentsof teacher-studentonversations hat can better llustrate hesuppor-tive natureof classroom alk n this ESLcomponent.Theintentionhere is not toprovidea detailedanalysisofoneorseveralevents,buttoprovideinstances hatillustrate the type of reciprocalnteraction-orientedpedagogy, as opposed totransmission-orientedCummins1986)thatpermeates hisprogram.References CitedAllen,Virginia1989 Literature s a Supportto LanguageAcquisition. nWhenThey Don'tAll SpeakEnglish.PatRiggand VirginiaG. Allen,eds. Pp.55-64. Urbana,IL:NationalCouncilof Teachersof English.Bares, Douglas1976 FromCommunication o Curriculum.New York:Penguin.Bloome,David,ed.1987 Literacy nd Schooling.Norwood,NJ:Ablex.Cazden,CourtneyB.1988 Classroom Discourse: The Language of Teaching and Learning.Portsmouth,NH: Heinemann.Cazden,CourtneyB.,andHugh Mehan

1989 Principlesfrom Sociology and Anthropology:Context,Code, Class-roomandCulture. nKnowledgeBasefortheBeginningTeacher.MaynardC.Reynolds,ed. Pp.47-57.Oxford:PergamonPress.Chaudron,Craig1988 Second Language Classrooms. Cambridge:Cambridge UniversityPress.Crawford,James1989 BilingualEducation:History,Politics,Theory,and Practice.Trenton,NJ:Crane.Cummins,Jim1982 Tests,Achievement,and BilingualStudents.Focus9:1-8.1984 Bilingualismand SpecialEducation: ssues in Assessment and Peda-gogy. SanDiego,CA:College-HillPress.1986 EmpoweringMinorityStudents:A Framework or Intervention.Har-vardEducationalReview 56:18-36.Edelsky,Carolyn1986 Writing n a BilingualProgram:Habia unaVez.Norwood,NJ:Ablex.Ellis,Rod1984 ClassroomSecondLanguageDevelopment.Oxford:Pergamon.Erickson,Frederick1987 Transformation ndSchoolSuccess:The PoliticsandCultureof Educa-

tionalAchievement.Anthropologyand EducationQuarterly 8(4):335-356.Ernst,Gisela1991 Talkingand Learning n an ESLProgram:An EthnographicAnalysis.Ph.D.dissertation,Departmentof InstructionandCurriculum,Universityof Florida.1994 TalkingCircle:Conversationand Negotiationin the ESLClassroom.TESOLQuarterly28(2).

Ernst 333


19/20

Anthropology&EducationQuarterly Volume 25,1994Ernst,Gisela,and KerriJ.RichardIn press Readingand WritingPathwaysto Conversation n the ESLClass-

room. TheReadingTeacher48(3).Flores,Barbara,PatriciaTeftCousin,andEstebanDiaz1991 TransformingDeficitMythsaboutLearning,Language,and Culture.LanguageArts68:369-379.Freire,Paulo1970 Pedagogyof theOppressed.New York:Seabury.Green,JudithL.1983 Researchon Teachingas a LinguisticProcess:A State of the Art. InReview of Researchin Education.E. Gordon,ed. Vol. 10. Pp. 151-252.Washington,DC:AmericanEducationalResearchAssociation.Green,JudithL.,andCynthiaWallat1981 Ethnographyand Languagein EducationalSettings.Norwood, NJ:Ablex.Greenfield,PatriciaM.1984 A Theoryof the Teacher n LearningActivities of EverydayLife. InEverydayCognition:Its Development n SocialContext.B.Rogoffand J.Lave,eds. Pp. 117-138.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Gumperz,John1982 DiscourseStrategies.London:CambridgeUniversityPress.Guthrie,GracePung1985 ASchoolDivided:AnEthnographyf BilingualEducationnaChineseCommunity.Hillsdale,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.Hakuta,Kenji1986 The Mirrorof Language.New York:BasicBooks.Handscombe,Jean1989 A Quality Program or Learnersof Englishas a SecondLanguage.InWhenThey Don't All Speak English.PatRiggand VirginiaG. Allen,eds.Pp.1-14.Urbana, L:NationalCouncilof Teachersof English.Long,Michael,and PatriciaPorter1985 GroupWork,InterlanguageTalk,and SecondLanguage Acquisition.TESOLQuarterly19:207-228.Lucas,Tamara,RosemaryHenze,andRubenDonato1990 Promotingthe Success of Latino Language MinorityStudents:AnExploratoryStudy of Six High Schools. Harvard Educational Review60(3):315-340.McLaughlin,Barry1982 Children's Second Language Learning.Washington,DC: CenterforAppliedLinguistics.Mehan,Hugh1979 LearningLessons.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.1981 Ethnography fBilingualEducation.nCultureandtheBilingualClass-

room:StudiesinClassroomEthnography.H. T.Trueba,G.P.Guthrie,andK.H. Au,eds. Pp.36-55.Rowley,MA:NewburyHouse.Nunan,David1989 UnderstandingLanguageClassrooms.London:PrenticeHall.Ortiz, Alba,andJamesR. Yates1983 Incidenceof Exceptionalityamong Hispanics: Implications or Man-power Training.NABEJournal7:41-54.

334


20/20

Dimensionsofan ESLProgramPadilla,AmadoM.,KathrynJ.Lindholm,AndrewChen,RichardDuran,KenjiHakuta,WallaceLambert,and RichardTucker

1991 The English-OnlyMovement:Myths, Reality, and ImplicationsforPsychology.AmericanPsychologist46(2):120-130.Philips,SusanU.1983 The InvisibleCulture:Communicatingn Classroomand Communityon theWarmSpringsIndianReservation.New York:Longman.Ramirez,J.David,SandraD.Yuen,and DenaR.Ramey1991 LongitudinalStudy of StructuredEnglishImmersionStrategy,Early-ExitandLate-ExitTansitionalBilingualEducationPrograms orLanguage-MinorityChildren.SanMateo,CA:AguirreInternational.Spradley,James1980 ParticipantObservation.New York:Holt,Reinhartand Winston.Suarez-Orozco,Marcelo1991 ImmigrantAdaptation to Schooling:A Hispanic Case. In MinorityStatusandSchooling:A ComparativeStudyof Immigrant nd InvoluntaryMinorities.MargaretA. Gibsonand JohnU. Ogbu, eds. Pp. 37-51. NewYork:GarlandPublishing.Trueba,HenryT.,GracePungGuthrie,and KathrynHu-peiAu, eds.1981 Cultureand the BilingualClassroom:Studies in ClassroomEthnogra-phy. Rowley,MA:NewburyHouse.Weade,Regina,andJudithL.Green1989 Readingin the InstructionalContext:An InteractionalSociolinguis-tic/EthnographicPerspective. nLocatingLearningAcross heCurriculum:EthnographicPerspectiveson ClassroomResearch.CatherineEmihovich,ed. Pp. 17-56.Norwood,NJ:Ablex.Wong-Fillmore,Lili,andConcepcionValadez1986 Teaching BilingualLearners. n Handbookof Researchon Teaching.M.C.Wittrock, d. Pp.648-685. New York:MacmillanPublishing.

Ernst 335

Documents

Beyond Language - The Many Dimensions of an ESL Program