Struggles and Challenges of English Language Learners

 

English language learners face a unique set of challenges within their educational experience. Bilingual students have a wealth of knowledge and skills that often goes unrecognized and underdeveloped in English-centered education settings. ELLs can struggle with academic reading and writing according to standardized test scores and other types of formative assessments and fall short of the levels of their English-only peers, but these conclusions are not reflective of their intellectual, creative, or social abilities. In this blog, I will explore some struggles and challenges that ELL students face in their academic careers, including some strategies that have been identified by the research as possible aides.

One struggle for ELL students is high academic, creative, or other potential being overlooked because of a perceived lack of literacy skills. Academic language differs from language spoken at home; therefore, teachers must take into account all students’ home literacy skills, but especially those of English language learners. Most language acquisition in early childhood and elementary school occurs informally (Pereira, 2015). ELL students are often more than able to use the English language to communicate with others, but they may not be proficient in academic language usage (p 209). English language learners are also underrepresented in gifted classrooms. A study conducted by Yoon and Gentry (2009) examined the racial and ethnic representation in gifted programs and concluded that Hispanic students were underrepresented in 43 out of 50 states (Pereira, 209). High potential English language learners are often not identified as gifted because of a lack of proficiency in English, and their talents and skills are overlooked.

“In contrast to monolingual English-speaking students, language-minority students bring an additional set of resources or abilities and face an additional set of challenges when learning to read and write in English as a second language” (Grant et al., 601)

One way that teachers can help their bilingual students is to view their literacy skills as essential resources to the classroom, and work to understand the prior knowledge (or funds of knowledge, which will be mentioned later) that these students bring to school. In English-dominant reading instruction, ELLs run the risk of losing their first language before acquiring a second, in what one researcher called “subtractive bilingualism” (Lambert, 1975, as cited in Grant, 2015). In subtractive bilingualism, the student’s first language is replaced by English, rather than the student becoming proficient in both languages. In an additive approach, the “heritage language is respected and maintained and English is taught as an additional language” (Grant et al. 601-602). Reading instruction in both languages is important in order to keep this from happening.

 In addition to instructional materials being primarily in English, standardized tests present academic language that is not always explicitly taught, which creates a problem for ELLs.  There exists a gap between English-only students and ELL students in vocabulary knowledge, which leads to problems with comprehension. During reading, students often learn new words by incidental vocabulary learning, which occurs by using context clues in the text, rather than explicitly being taught vocabulary words or using a dictionary or glossary. Carlo et al. (2009) found that “ELLs are less able to use context to disambiguate the meaning of unfamiliar words because a higher proportion of words in text is likely to be unknown to them”, and “are less able to exploit linguistic clues to word meaning as an English-only speaker would (p 191). This can be helped by teaching explicitly how to use context clues, teaching morphological analysis, and teaching about cognates (Carlo et al., 204).

English language learners are negatively affected by a definition of literacy that only includes reading and writing standards that are rigid and traditional. Grant et al. (2007) notes that “Some are in the process of losing the home language without having fully developed academic literacy in English” (Grant et. al. 603). The definition of literacy has expanded within the last 20 years to include multiple modes by which to learn. Academic English and English-centered reading and writing standards, as established earlier, often do not leave room for students to use their funds of knowledge from their home lives and culture in a way that will advance them academically. Some literacy research on English language learners draws from Vygotsky’s (1978) theory of the zone of proximal development, which posits that learning occurs first in purposeful social interactions within the zone of proximal development and is gradually appropriated and internalized, which enables learners to co-construct understanding (Koelsch, 2014, 643). Reading and learning in general are social acts, and it especially benefits ELL students to emphasize co-constructing of knowledge. Partner work and individual conferencing with students will help them co-construct knowledge.

Grant et al. note that “the social mediates literacy development” (p 602). Not only is it beneficial to encourage students to work together to co-construct their knowledge in class, it is important to understand student’s culture and socioeconomic status. The social context of literacy development for English language learners differs greatly from that of students that speak only English. The development of literacy skills for second-language learners in the United States “must take into consideration the sociological dimensions of literacy, including issues of power such as the intersections of gender, race, and class” (Grant et al., 600). This approach has roots in critical race theory, and is necessary for an equitable education for all students. Taking into account the sociological dimensions of literacy will enable teachers to understand their ELLs and provide them with an education that will benefit them more throughout their lives and provide them with more opportunities for advancement. Teachers have the ability to foster an equitable learning environment and “build on ESOL students’ diverse ways of knowing to not only build a bridge from the known to the unknown for racial, ethnic, and linguistic minorities, but also to expand the canon for all U.S. students” (Grant, 606). A classroom environment where students understand and appreciate each other’s cultures and backgrounds is mutually beneficial. Grant notes that “mainstream curriculum too often seeks to assimilate minority students into the curriculum rather than draw from the diverse and multiple epistemological traditions of students” (p 606). A critical literacy lens is beneficial for teachers and administration to utilize, but professional development and other training can often fall short in educating school leadership in this regard. There is a level of responsibility, then, that literacy researchers must take to conduct studies on best practices for teachers to implement critical literacy, and more specifically, ways that English language learners can be best supported. Grant et al. note that “literacy researchers must make genuine efforts to capture the lived reality of history, culture, and power that permeate the individual, family, and community” (p 605).

In addition, ELL students also can be misidentified for special education programs, due to intervention strategies that have not been validated with English language learners, and instead are implemented broadly in schools (Moore & Klingner, 394). They may be placed into special education simply because the interventions are not meeting their language and learning needs (Orosco & Klingner, 2010, as cited in Moore & Klingner, 2014). ELL students are at risk of being overrepresented in certain special education categories, and can fall further behind their peers, as their language learning needs are not properly met by special education programs that do not necessarily involve proper bilingual instruction. “Students who fail to respond to evidence-based general education literacy instruction should receive more intensive, explicit, evidence-based reading interventions prior to placement in special education” (Torgeson et al. 2001, as cited in Moore & Klingner). It is imperative that reading intervention and explicit teaching of vocabulary are utilized before placing students into a program that may or may not meet their needs.

English language learners face challenges in their academic careers due in part to a structural failure to validate their funds of knowledge and integrate their literacy skills into the perception of their general abilities. They can be underrepresented in gifted programs, and in general classrooms they often experience being identified as low-level readers and writers. Mainstream curriculum can often force ELL students to assimilate to the curriculum without drawing on the resources they bring from their culture and literacy skills. Traditional literacy standards that focus on basic reading and writing skills can be difficult for English language learners to master, due in part to how similar or dissimilar cognates in their primary language are to English, and also the difficulty of incidental vocabulary learning. Comprehending a text written in English can be more difficult for ELL students because inferring meaning built on prior knowledge will come more easily to a student that has been taught English since birth. There are many strategies that can be utilized by teachers to ensure that their ELL students can excel, using critical literacy theory and critical race theory as a lens. Explicit vocabulary teaching, including using advanced texts that offer exposure to higher-level words, and presenting materials in both English and the student’s primary language can also be used. I will be detailing best practices for teachers found in literacy research that will help their English language learners in another blog.

References

 Carlo, M.S, August, D., McLaughlin, B., Snow, C., Dressler, C., Lippman, D., & White, C.E. (2009). Closing the Gap: Addressing the Vocabulary Needs of English-Language Learners in Bilingual and Mainstream Classrooms. Journal of Education (Boston, Mass.), 189(1-2), 57-76.

Grant, R., Wong, S., & Osterling, J. (2007). Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners: Critique from a Heteroglossic, Sociocultural, and Multidimensional Framework. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(4), 598-609.

Koelsch, N., Chu, H., & Rodriguez Bañuelos, G. (2014). Language for Learning: Supporting English Language Learners to Meet the Challenges of New Standards. TESOL Quarterly, 48(3), 642-650.

Moore, B.A., & Klingner, J.K. (2014). Considering the Needs of English Language Learner Populations. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(5), 391-408.

Pereira, N., & De Oliveira, L.C. (2015). Meeting the Linguistic Needs of High-Potential English Language Learners. Teaching Exceptional Children, 47(4), 208-215.