IMPLEMENTING VARIED LEARNING STRATEGIES INTO TODAY’S ESL
CLASSROOM
A Report of a Senior Study
by
Marissa Renee Summitt
Major: Childhood Development with Teacher Licensure
Maryville College
Fall, 2010
Date Approved________________, by _______________________
Faculty Supervisor
Date Approved________________, by _______________________
Editor
1
2
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to determine if classroom teachers are implementing
ESL specific teaching strategies into the classroom. The hypothesis for this study was that
in classrooms where a greater number of ESL strategies are observed, the teachers would
self-report a higher level of self-confidence. The participants consisted of ten general
education classroom teachers from three local schools. Each teacher was observed, and
the strategies implemented by the teacher were recorded using tally marks on a Teaching
Strategies Checklist. The teachers were given a Teacher Confidence Scale to complete
after the lesson to rate their level of confidence in using teaching strategies. The data
collected from the observation checklists and the Teacher Confidence Surveys were
measured using a Correlation and Regression Analysis. The results from this study
suggested that the amount of ESL strategies implemented during a lesson is not affected
by a teacher’s confidence level, which did not support the hypothesis.
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Abstract
iii
Chapter I
Implementing Varied Learning Strategies Into Today’s ESL Classroom
1
Chapter II
Methods
20
Chapter III
Results
27
Chapter IV
Discussion
31
Conclusion
42
Appendices
44
References
77
4
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
1
Teacher Confidence Scale Scores
29
2
Teacher Strategies Checklist Scores
30
3
Descriptive Statistics from Teacher Confidence Scale Scores
28
4
Amount of ESL Training Teacher Received
42
5
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Classrooms filled with colorful posters, chalkboards, students completing
assignments, packed cafeterias during lunch, the sound of laughter on the playground,
and the bustling in the hallways when the 3:15 bell rings are typical descriptions of
elementary school classrooms both from the past and today. However, a closer look
reveals just how much schools have changed in the past few years. Today’s public school
classrooms have certainly evolved over the past twenty years, particularly during the past
ten years. Even though today’s schools may include lunch, recess, physical education,
and special activities every day for the students to participate in, the dynamics within the
schools are different.
In 1989, a man by the name of Alan Greenspan spoke at a convention at Wake
Forest University. He discussed many topics relevant to the decade at hand, but he
specifically discussed the education situation. Greenspan stated that the education in the
United States was headed in a wrong direction and it needed to be turned around. He felt
as though students in all grade levels were falling behind in learning when looking at
6
other schools outside of the United States. He also thought there would be a problem with
the education budget in the future, due to the amount of students that would be entering
school. These students would be the children of baby-boomers, and then the babyboomers grandchildren would be entering school after that. So, Greenspan was concerned
about the budget, and he was trying to warn people that something needed to be done to
prepare the education system for this increase (Greenspan, 1989).
Greenspan’s prediction might have taken a little longer than he thought to occur,
but today in 2010, classrooms are feeling budget constraints. In many states, such as
Tennessee, school districts are having budget issues due to growing class sizes. Many
schools have created duplicate classrooms to support the growing number of children.
Instead of two kindergarten classrooms, there may be four kindergarten classrooms in the
same school to accommodate the rising numbers. Adding classrooms to accommodate the
amount of students requires the school to hire more teachers, which hinders the budget.
When the budget is under pressure, many school districts are forced to cut teachers.
When the teachers are cut, the students are combined into larger class sizes and the four
kindergarten classes that contained sixteen students may be combined to two classrooms
that contain thirty-two students (Freedburg & Cabrera, 2009). The combining of
classrooms can cause parents to stress over whether or not their children are actually
learning what they need to learn in such crowded, overpopulated classrooms.
Due to the budget issue and overcrowded classroom sizes, many states like
Tennessee, tried to implement state-wide classroom reduction programs. These reduction
programs were designed to reduce class size. Tennessee participated in a large-scale, four
year study that examined the effectiveness of small classroom sizes. Both small
7
classroom sizes with thirteen to seventeen students were compared to large classroom
sizes with twenty-two to twenty-five students to see which group had a higher
performance on state standardized tests. After the program was over, the results showed
that the students in the smaller class sizes performed significantly better than students in
the large classes. Minority students in the smaller classroom sizes doubled their score
over the majority students in the smaller classroom sizes (Mosteller, 1995).
This state-wide program showed that smaller classroom sizes were beneficial to
students. Sadly, the budget constraint does not allow every school in the state of
Tennessee to have small class sizes. Therefore, it is the duty of the classroom teacher to
ensure that all students are receiving a high quality education, as if it was a small class
size. The classroom teacher can easily become overwhelmed by the higher number of
students in the class and forget to teach to each student. With more students in a
classroom, there can often be more noise, chaos, and more time that the teacher has to
spend on behavior management. All of the students in the class may be on different
learning levels. The teacher may have a lot of differentiation when teaching the
instruction. It is important for the classroom teacher to tailor to all students and to ensure
that all students are learning the material being presented.
The teacher is the most important person in teaching the students the educational
material that they will be required to know. There are many standards that teachers have
to cover with their students in a short amount of time. The students are then tested over
the standards to see how much they were taught by their classroom teacher. Students
have information flying at them from every angle. Students in today’s classrooms often
have a great deal of new information to process and understand. They are responsible for
8
learning the material, because if they do not, they may fall behind. If they do not learn the
first concept, how would they learn the second concept if it requires an understanding of
the first concept? Since so many teachers are on a time schedule to cover all of the
required standards in time for testing, many students may fall through the cracks. It is up
to the teacher to help every student and ensure that the student understands the material
being presented. How the teacher presents the material can affect how the student is able
to conceptualize the information. Every single student is diverse and different in their
own way, and all students learn differently. Therefore, it is imperative for the teacher to
figure out how the students learn. The teacher may be forced to stray from the style
he/she is used to using and try something new. Individuals learn in many ways and how
the teacher presents the information can greatly benefit or greatly hinder a student’s
learning.
As stated previously, individuals learn in many ways. They can learn by seeing,
hearing, reasoning logically, memorizing, talking aloud, or even by acting (Felder &
Henriques, 1995). What students learn can, in part, be associated with their learning style,
but it can also depend on how the teacher presents the information. Learning styles, as
defined by Felder and Henriques, can be defined as, “The ways in which an individual
characteristically acquires, retains, and retrieves information” (1995, p.21). For the
purpose of this study, Felder and Henriques’s definition will be the definition used when
discussing learning styles.
There are many definitions of learning styles, because as each researcher
experiments with this concept, they create their own working definition. There can be
confusion when trying to determine what learning styles really are, because research in
9
this area is so varied. However, learning styles are concepts that have been around for
several decades, and many researchers have studied this topic and created several
different models to describe this concept. Jihan Alumran (2008) discusses several models
that different researchers have used to try and describe how students learn. For example,
he introduces the Felder-Silverman Learning Style Model (1988). This specific model
categorizes learners on a continuum into four dimensions, which are, sensing/intuitive,
visual/verbal, active/reflective, and sequential/global. This model takes into account some
psychological aspects and information about processing dimensions (Felder and
Silverman, 1988). Each learning model that researchers create and study tries to
encompass the different ways in which individuals learn. Some models are more
simplistic and others are more complex. The Felder-Silverman Learning Style Model is
more complex, because it takes into account more complex issues, such as psychological
aspects, to try and explain how an individual learns.
There are four well-known types of learning styles which are based on the senses
and each different style caters to a different sense. The idea, introduced by Jung (1971),
of sensation deems that people learn by using their senses to observe and collect data.
Jung notes that sensation is one of two main ways that people learn. The other way in
which people learn is called intuition, and intuition is a way in which individuals gather
information by accessing their memory, speculating, and by imagining (Jung, 1971).
Sensors tend to like concrete ideas and are very methodical in what they do,
where as intuitors tend to like abstract ideas, are very creative, and tend to be
imaginative. Sensors like facts, and intuitors like big concepts and theories. Basically,
these two learning styles are complete opposites of each other. However different they
10
may seem, all learners tend to be more dominant in one of these areas. Most learners use
both of these areas to think cognitively and to process information, but the learners will
favor one over the other (Jung, 1971).
Under the two types of perception, sensors and intuitors, are the four main types
of learning. These types of learning are better known as visual, auditory, tactile, and
kinesthetic. Students vary in the ways in which they process information, and these four
types of learning styles cater to different students (Allen & Butler, 1996). Teachers can
differentiate instruction by incorporating these different types of learning strategies into
the classroom. By doing so, each student’s strengths are considered (Sprenger, 2003).
Incorporating these learning strategies is an important feat for today’s classroom teacher,
because research has shown that varying teaching strategies improves all students’
learning, even if it is not the students’ primary preference (Thomas, Cox, & Kojima,
2000).
The visual learners tend to learn better by seeing a picture or watching how to
perform a certain task, which plays on the seeing sense. These learners are good at
visualizing how to do something. For example, if a teacher is trying to teach a lesson on
Greek Mythology, it is beneficial for this learner if the teacher provided pictures. The
teacher presents the class with pictures of each god or goddess and what they have
dominion over. The visual learner can then connect the picture to the concept and better
understand the material. This type of learner needs time to think about the concepts and
needs time to soak in the pictures (Plimpton Sweeney, 2003).
11
The auditory learner benefits from the hearing sense. Auditory learners tend to
learn better from speaking and listening activities. They do better when the material is
presented orally. For example, this type of learner may like when the teacher lectures, or
talks through the process of how to do something. This learner may also like to talk
through a process. This helps the learner to hear what they are saying and they can listen
to what another person might say (Plimpton & Sweeney, 2003).
The third type of learner benefits from working with the touch sense, and they
benefit from using their hands to create. This type of learner is known as a tactile learner.
Tactile learners tend to understand the material better when it is presented in a way they
can use their hands to work through the problem. For instance, when learning about the
life cycle of a butterfly, it may benefit this learner if they can create projects using arts
and crafts to demonstrate this process. As tactual learners create the project, they will
grasp the material and remember it better.
There has not been as much of an emphasis on this type of learning style in the
past when comparing it to more visual and auditory learners. However, in the last decade,
there have been several “hands-on” approaches to learning that have surfaced. For
example, the Math Their Way (“Center for Innovation”, 2004) program was created by
Mary Baratta-Lorton and her husband Bob when they preparing to teach in a poorly
funded inner city school. They began to hold workshops to show other teachers how to
incorporate their ideas into every classroom.
Previously, math classrooms tended to use the math book to do all of the
instructing. Math Their Way is intended to be an “activity-centered, child-centered,
12
manipulative math program in which the children learn through the five senses” (“Center
for Innovation”, 2004, p.1). One of the most important elements of this program is its
goal of having all children learn and understand math, no matter what their ability is. This
program has been around for awhile, and it is now implemented in all fifty state’s
kindergarten, first grade, and second grade classrooms. This type of program is based off
of the tactile learning style, because it is a hands-on approach to learning. Instead of
trying to teach children abstract concepts by using a math book, this program bases math
instruction off of the five senses. The teacher acts as facilitator and allows the students to
explore different alternatives to finding the solution, rather than lecturing the students on
how to do math problems.
With Math Their Way, students get to use their creativity and use manipulatives
to work through their math problems. Math tends to be a subject that is procedurally
taught. The conceptual understanding of why the problem is being solved a certain way is
sometimes left out. If students can understand the conceptual knowledge of math, they
will be more likely to understand how to work that problem and similar problems like
that one. Math Their Way teaches students to tap into the conceptual understanding part
of math, and it shows students how to learn math rather than just doing math (“Center for
Innovation”, 2004).
The last type of learner benefits from using large motor skills. This type of
learner, kinesthetic learner, learns best when they can move their body around. The
kinesthetic way of learning is not classified as a sense, because moving the body around
is not one of the five senses. This type of learning style is classified in its own group
13
(Felder & Henriques, 1995). When this learner can actively engage in the lesson, they
will be more likely to understand and remember the material (Allen & Butler, 1996).
All students learn in a different way, and most students tend to learn by one of the
four ways mentioned previously. So, they learn either visually, by auditory, tactilely, or
kinesthetically (“Performance Learning Systems”, 2006). A representative of
Performance Learning Systems, Tony Buzan, stated that, "Learning how to learn is life’s
most important skill” (¶4, 2006). This is an important thought, because students have to
be instructed on how to learn. It is the teacher’s job to ensure that students are learning. It
is also important for the teacher to understand that not all students learn in the same way,
and that they are required to change their traditional teaching methods to accommodate
every student. Therefore, the teacher needs to mix up the style of teaching, and present
the material in various forms so the material will relate to all types of students’ learning
styles.
Research in this area of study has shown that when teachers vary their instruction
and teaching strategies to meet the needs of all learning styles, all students will learn
better, regardless of their dominant learning style (Thomas, Cox, & Kojima, 2000). This
does not mean that the teacher has to present each lesson in four separate ways, but the
teacher can add elements of each style into the lesson. Students tend to learn better when
the material is presented through their dominate learning style, but if the teacher is
mixing up the instruction, it is beneficial to all students. Research has shown that when
teachers differentiate their lessons and take into consideration the different student
learning styles and student strengths and weaknesses, the student will receive more
14
knowledge from the lesson (Sprenger, 2003). When teachers present the material in this
way, it will correspond to a variety of learners, therefore benefiting more student learners.
Extensive research exists on which type of learning style is best for students to
learn the material, and on how to find out what learning style an individual might use.
Researchers DeBoth and Dominowski (1978) conducted research on this topic. These
researchers were concerned with how information was presented, and they wanted to see
if changing the mode of presentation affected the learner outcome. They wanted to look
at individual differences in learning in visual and auditory presentation. They did not look
at the tactile and kinesthetic learning styles. DeBoth and Dominowski believed that more
individuals would learn better through visual presentation, as compared to an auditory
presentation. For this study, a group of students were given two practice lists, one under
auditory presentation and one under visual presentation. Researchers alternated the way
the information was presented so that every participant had information presented to them
in both ways. When the study ended and the results were analyzed, it was found that
students remembered more under the visual presentation than they did under the auditory
presentation (DeBoth & Dominowski, 1978).
DeBoth and Dominowski conducted more specific experiments on how students
remember information that is presented to them in varying forms. After experimenting
with this for awhile, they concluded that it is hard to say exactly which learning style that
all students learn best by. There is not one learning style that will cater to every students’
needs. Results from these experiments showed that there is too much attention paid to
trying to figure out which specific style works best. Every person learns in a different
way, so it is hard to pinpoint what learning style works best for every student. They
15
suggest more attention needs to be paid to individual learning differences and why
students are different, rather than picking one learning style that work best for all students
(DeBoth & Dominowski, 1978).
Similarly, there seems to be a trend in today’s society to look at individual
learning differences rather than focus on the four main types. Because teachers cannot
focus on twenty-three different learning preferences, it seems impossible for teachers to
be able to instruct and teach all of the required standards and to be able to have their
students pass all of the required forms of formal, high-stakes testing. It is a common ideal
that teachers should be able to cater to all types, because after all they are the teachers
and they went to college to learn how to do this.
Even though every student learns in a different way, the teacher does not have to
change the lesson plan to fit four different formats. Teachers do not have to teach the
lesson in a visual way and then go back and teach it in a way that appeals to more
auditory learners. The teachers do have to cater to all types of learners, but they can do
this by implementing different teaching and learning strategies into the classroom.
Focusing on learning strategies seems to be a better way of reaching a wider
variety of learners. Teaching and learning strategies are alternative ways of presenting
instructional information and incorporating activities that teachers can use to include
many different types of learners (Vacca & Vacca, 2008). Instead of focusing on whether
the student is more visual, more auditory, more tactual, or more kinesthetic, the teacher
can think about and use teaching and learning strategies. This does not require the teacher
to go back to college for four years to learn how to implement these strategies, nor do
16
they have to plan for hours of how they can create and use these strategies. The teachers
can simply help the learner by mixing up the instruction to fit all learners’ needs.
As stated above, teaching strategies are alternative ways of presenting
instructional information and incorporating activities that teachers can use to include
many different learners during instruction. When thinking about teaching strategies, one
could compare it to that of a toolbox. Teachers need to equip their toolbox with an
adequate amount of tools. So no matter what the issue is, they can be prepared to handle
it if their toolbox is full. If the teacher only has one tool, then that one tool is all that will
be used and the students will get no variety of the instruction (Tewksbury & Macdonald,
2005). Teaching strategies help differentiate the instruction in the hopes that students will
understand the material better. If the students do not understand the instruction, the
teacher can use a teaching strategy and change the instruction.
There are many teaching strategies that teachers can use. It is up to the classroom
teacher to decide which strategies work best for the students in the classroom. An
example of a teaching strategy is incorporating collaborative learning into the lesson.
When the teacher forces the students to work collaboratively on an assignment or during
an activity, it forces the students to interact with each other and work as a team to reach
the final project (Garcia, 1991). When students work with a group and other peers, they
feel comfortable conversing with each other. The students may ask questions to their
peers that they would not ask the teacher, due to fear of asking a dumb question to the
teacher (Garcia, 1991). Also, when the students are working in groups, the teacher can
assess each group and get a better understanding of what level each group is on. Then, the
teacher can modify the next lesson according to how much each group knew about the
17
topic at hand. Therefore, group work is one teaching strategy that can lead to better
learner outcomes. There are many other teaching strategies that teachers can use to
modify the instruction. The use of thematic units, speaking clearly, repeating instructions
and directions, having high expectations, incorporating cultural elements into instruction,
using labels, using cognates, and using technology are other examples of teaching
strategies (Winnigham, 1990).
These teaching strategies help all learners. However, they can specifically help a
new type of learner that is becoming more prevalent in today’s classrooms. This new
learner is a diverse learner. These diverse learners come from different backgrounds and
different countries and cultures. Many, if not all, are Non-Native English speakers,
meaning English is not their first langauge, and often times English is not the language
spoken at home. Furthermore, for many of these students, English may be the third,
fourth, or nth language they are learning (Williams, 2001).
As previously stated, today’s classroom has given way to a new population of
learners. These learners are unlike the typical learner, because they are diverse students.
Joan Williams stated in an article about opportunities for diverse learners that the focus of
education had dramatically shifted in the past 30 years (2001). Williams went on to say
that, “We have shifted from primarily addressing the needs of native English-speaking
students to including a rapidly growing number of children from linguistically and
culturally different backgrounds” (2001, ¶ 1). In the 1990s, the diverse learner population
increased by eight percent every year, and it is predicted that between the years of 2000
and 2020 there will be a forty-seven percent increase of Hispanic children, aged 5 to 13.
18
The United States education departments reported over 3 million students were
learning English as a second language in 1996-1998. More recent research has reported
that the diverse learner population grew fifty-two percent between the years of 1990 and
2000, which more specifically the population went from 14 million students to 21.3
million students (Honigsfeld, 2009). This research suggests that by the year 2030, forty
percent of school-aged children will be made up of diverse learners who speak a language
other than English at home.
These statistics show that it is evident that there is a new population of learners
appearing in the American school systems. These new, diverse students are referred to by
many different names and terms throughout school systems and in research studies. To
name a few, Williams (2001) uses the terms Limited English proficient (LEP) and
English as a Second Language (ESL). Another common term, as referred to by Wilner,
Rivera, and Acosta (2009) is English-language learner (ELL). English learners, students
who speak English as a nonnative language, is used to describe diverse learners in Vacca
and Vacca (p. 87, 2008). English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) is a term used
by Reiss (2001) in his book on how to use ESOL strategies in the teaching content. There
are many names used to describe diverse learners, but it does not change the learner.
For the purpose of this study, the term English as a second language (ESL) will be
used when describing diverse learners. English as a second language can be operationally
defined in this study as school-aged students who are learning and studying English when
English is not their first language, realizing that some students may be learning English
as their second, third, or fourth language. As stated above, this term and definition will be
used in this study when referring to diverse learners.
19
Almost all schools nationwide are faced with diverse learners in their classrooms.
As stated by Williams, (2001, ¶ 1), it is estimated that between the years 2000 and 2020
there will be a forty-seven percent increase in this population of students aged five to
thirteen. This growing number of students has an impact on the instructional
environment. All students are entitled to a free, public education, no matter if they are a
diverse learner or a Native-speaking learner. The No Child Left Behind Act’s statement
of purpose reads,
All children will have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to receive a high
quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging state
academic achievement standards and state academic assessments (Kamps et al.,
2007).
This statement of purpose makes it clear that all students should receive a quality
education. However, Hispanic students account for the largest population of diverse
learners in the American school system, and this population of students have traditionally
performed poorly on national assessments (Kamps et al., 2007).
As the ESL population of students increases, so does the pressure on schools and
teachers. School systems and teachers have to accommodate these students and give them
the quality education that all of students are receiving. Often times this can be difficult,
due to the proficiency level of each ESL student. Not every ESL student can speak the
same amount of English or understand the same amount of English. English as a Second
Language students also learn differently, and they all have different strengths and
weaknesses. According to Wilner, Rivera, and Acosta (2009), ESL students learn in a
20
different way, compared to that of the traditional classroom lecturing (p. 697). ESL
students need accommodations in the classroom in order to help them better understand
the material, that way they can be proficient in their studies. In the past, ESL students
were often overlooked and forgotten about. Then, in 1975 when the Individuals with
Disabilities Act (IDEA), it was intended to support students with disabilities and ESL
students. After this, many states used the same accommodations for ESL students that
were used to help students with disabilities (Wilner, Rivera, & Acosta, 2009). However,
the needs of these two groups are not the same. The accommodations dealing with the
cognitive aspects of students with disabilities do not apply to ESL learners. Diverse
students should not be instructed according to how students with disabilities are
instructed.
Research has shown that ESL students do need to be instructed differently
(Manyak & Bauer, 2009). However, this differentiation can be easy for the teachers to
implement, and it helps all learners, not just ESL students. The way teachers can help
diverse students is through the use of teaching strategies. As mentioned previously,
teaching strategies are alternative ways of presenting instructional information and
incorporating activities that teachers can use to include many different types of learners
(Vacca & Vacca, 2008). English as a Second Language students need the classroom
instruction to incorporate teaching strategies.
Manyak and Bauer conducted a study on vocabulary instruction for ESL students.
This study was aimed at trying to discover best practices for teaching English vocabulary
to ESL students. These researchers wanted to investigate whether or not the same
techniques used to instruct native-speaking students would benefit ESL students. After
21
several experiments were conducted that included teaching both kinds of students using
teaching strategies, the results showed that ESL students closed the learning gap (Manyak
& Bauer, 2009). This means that if teachers incorporate teaching strategies into their
instruction, ESL students will enhance their learning.
Another study, conducted by researchers Felder and Henriques (1995), focused on
ESL learning preferences. The research question posed for this study pertained to what
aspects of learning style were particularly significant in foreign and second language
education. Felder and Henriques researched ESL instruction for a significant amount of
time and found that their educational needs were not being met through traditional
approaches to language instruction. Therefore, they gathered data and wrote an article
offering suggestions for meeting ESL students’ educational needs (1995). The
suggestions that were made in this article are all teaching strategies that teachers can
incorporate into daily classroom instruction. These researchers discussed different
learning styles, such as sensing, visual, and auditory, and how teaching strategies can
reach a great amount of students, and more importantly ESL students.
Author Jodi Reiss dedicated an entire book on the subject of ESL teaching
strategies and how teachers can use these strategies in the classroom to enhance ESL
students understanding of the material. The strategies discussed in this book appeal to a
variety of learning styles. There are visual strategies teachers can use, such as
incorporating maps, charts, and pictures, there are auditory strategies, tactile strategies,
such as group projects and hands-on activities, and there is even kinesthetic activities,
such as realia and dancing (Reiss, 2001).
22
The above strategies are a few ways that teachers can improve ESL students’
learning. However, teachers are just as different as the students are. Teachers have
different learning and teaching styles, which can effect the instruction. Some teachers
will tend to use strategies more than other teachers. Part of this could be due to the level
of self-confidence the teacher has achieved. High confidence in an individual can
enhance the person’s motivation, which in turn can effect how they achieve in life
(Bénabou & Tirole, 2002). On the other hand, if a person has little confidence, the
person may have a lack of motivation. This is an important concept when relating to
teachers. According to this, teachers would need a high level of confidence to ensure they
will use their motivation to help all students learn. If the teacher had little confidence, the
teacher may have low motivation and would not be as willing to go out of their way to
help all students (Bénabou & Tirole, 2002).
A study conducted by Stipek, Givvin, Salmon, and MacGyvers (2001) about how
a teacher’s beliefs and attitudes towards mathematics effected the math instruction in the
classroom. The teacher’s beliefs about math were assessed at the beginning of the school
year to compare the teacher responses and what was observed in the instruction. The
results showed there was substantial coherence among the teachers’ beliefs about math,
their attitudes, and their confidence levels towards math and how the teacher conducted
the math instruction (2001). It was even noted that the teachers’ self-confidence level
affected the students’ self-confidence level about math. This research shows that the
teachers’ self-confidence can affect the instruction being taught, how the material is
presented to the students, and it can affect the students’ confidence levels.
23
This study seeks to show whether or not classroom teachers implement teaching
strategies into daily classroom instruction for the purpose of benefiting ESL students’
educational needs. As many studies have shown, this new population of diverse learners
is increasing and the pressure to get these students on the proficiency levels they should
be on is increasing. The classroom teacher has many responsibilities, and incorporating
teaching strategies should be a main focus. It is predicted that the results of this study will
be consistent with previous research, in that, results will show that teachers need to
incorporate teaching strategies into their instruction. It is expected that teachers who selfreport a higher level of confidence will use a greater amount of teaching strategies into
the instruction.
24
CHAPTER II
METHOD
Brief Overview
The purpose of this study was to determine the degree to which classroom
teachers were implementing ESL specific teaching strategies into their instructional
lessons. The teachers’ confidence level was measured and considered a factor when
observing the amount of strategies the teacher used during the lesson. It was hypothesized
that in a classroom where a greater number of ESL strategies were observed, the teacher
would self-report a higher level of self-confidence.
This study was approved by the teachers involved in the study and by an IRB
committee who reviewed the ethics of the research. The teachers were given a consent
form from the investigator to sign (see Appendix B), and the IRB committee was given a
formal research proposal (see Appendix A).
Participants
The participants in this study were ten teachers from different classroom grades in
local schools. There were five fifth-grade teachers, three teachers from kindergarten, one
teacher from second grade, & one guidance teacher. All of these classrooms were general
25
classrooms that included Native Speaking English students and Non-Native Speaking
students.
All of the participating teachers were given the same instructions. Before each
participant could take part in the study, (s) he was given a consent form from the
researcher and verbally told what information was included on it. Participants were told
to review consent form, sign their name, and ask any questions about the process before
beginning the study. The researcher indicated in the instructions that the teacher was to
teach the lesson in a normal manner as if the observer was not there. They were informed
that the researcher would be observing and taking notes during the lesson. Participants
were told that the observation and the notes being recorded would be based solely on the
classroom teacher and would have nothing to do with the students. After the lesson was
over, participants were informed to complete the Teacher Confidence Scale Survey.
Accompanying this survey was a list of teaching strategy terms with definitions for each
strategy. The participants were told to complete each question on the survey, using the
definition terms to help their understanding of each strategy. Finally, they were informed
that the surveys would be picked up in two days, and the results would be shared with
participants when the study was completed.
Materials
An Internal Review Board (IRB) form was first turned in to an IRB review board
for approval of the study (See Appendix A). The IRB forms contained important
information about the study, like the consent form, description of how the study would be
carried out, and a copy of the Teaching Strategies Checklist and Teacher Confidence
26
Scale (See Appendices C and D). Each participant was given a consent form before
completing the study (See Appendix B). A modified version of the Pinellas County
Schools ESOL STRATEGIES CHECKLIST was used during the observations by the
researcher (see Appendix C).
The teachers were given the edited version of the Teacher Confidence Scale to
self-report their confidence in their own teaching abilities (See Appendix D). The
researcher modified The Teaching Strategies Checklist by deleting strategies on the
checklist that could not be observed in one class period, or during one lesson. The
original checklist had the teaching strategies broken up into three categories; the
researcher modified the checklist but left the remaining strategies in the original three
categories (See Appendix E). There was a total of 69 teaching strategies on the checklist
used. The first category was titled Teaching Strategies which contained 53 different
strategies. These strategies were ones that the teacher could do, like summarize the
information, vary the complexity of the assignment, or use visuals with matching words.
The second category was titled Cooperative/Grouping Strategies which contained 12
different strategies, and these strategies were ones where students work with other
students to better understand the information. For example, students could work with a
peer or in a group of three to help each other with the assignment. The third category was
titled Alternative Assessment which contained four different strategies, and these
strategies dealt more with assessing what the students knew. These strategies included
alternative ways the teacher could assess the students. For example, the teacher could
keep the students’ assignments and compile them into portfolios and then assess the
27
students’ portfolios. Also, the teacher could take the students’ writing samples and assess
the students based off of their writing.
The teaching strategies were ones that most teachers should have learned about in
their college teacher education program, or during specialized teacher trainings, such as
conferences or workshops. The strategies on the checklist were beneficial for both
Native-Speaking students and Non-Native Speaking students, but they were more tailored
to Non-Native Speaking students. Each strategy was one that could help the Non-Native
Speaking students better understand the lesson and the information presented.
The Teacher Confidence Scale was also edited to match the Teaching Strategy
Checklist. The scale contained only the strategies that were used on the checklist. A few
basic questions were included prior to the scale, like teacher gender and school
demographics, that each participant was expected to complete. The scale contained all 69
teaching strategies and each teaching strategy had a Likert Scale numbered one through
six beside it. The strategies were also broken up into the three categories. The teachers
were given an accompanying paper that had the definitions of each of the teaching
strategies, that way if the teachers did not know what one of the strategies meant the
teachers could read the definition (See Appendix G).
Design and Procedure
The researcher initiated the research process by first getting the IRB proposal
approved. Once the IRB was approved, the researcher located the ten local classrooms
that would be included in the study. The ten classrooms were chosen by convenience, due
to the small time frame to complete the research. The ten participants were asked by the
28
researcher to be part of the study, and consent forms were handed out. After the consent
forms were turned in to the researcher, the researcher set up a time to come and observe
the participants. The researcher used the Teaching Strategies Checklist during the
observation, and then the participant completed the Teacher Confidence Scale after the
lesson. As stated previously, the Teaching Strategies Checklist was changed to better
accommodate a shortened instructional block, since the researcher was only able to
observe the teacher for small increments of time. The researcher took certain items off of
the list that could not be observed during a typical class period. The Teacher Confidence
Scale was also modified from the original to match the strategies on the Teaching
Strategies Checklist. The original Teacher Confidence Scale Survey was geared toward
mathematics instruction (See Appendix F). However, the instructions stated the word
choice for the statements on the original checklist could be changed to match different
topics of interests. For example, one statement read, “I am confident in my ability to
integrate language arts teaching”, and the researcher modified it to, “I am confident in my
ability to integrate computer/software”. The items added to the modified version of the
Teacher Confidence Scale came from the Teaching Strategy Checklist, which was the
form the researcher used to keep track of the strategies demonstrated during the
observation.
As stated above, the researcher used the Teaching Strategy Checklist during the
observation time. The researcher recorded a tally mark next to each strategy that the
classroom teacher used during that class period. The teachers did not see this checklist.
They did not know what behavior the researcher was expecting to observe, and they did
not know what the researcher was recording. There was a total of 69 strategies that the
29
observer could have observed in one sitting. After the observation period, the
participating teachers were handed the Teacher Confidence Scale to complete after their
lesson. The teachers were given instructions, as stated previously, on how to complete the
survey. After the teachers completed the surveys they were collected by the researcher,
and the data from both the checklists and surveys were entered into a spreadsheet.
There were 69 strategies on the Teacher Confidence Scale, so there was a total of
414 points possible. The researcher counted up the amount of points each participant
scored. The researcher did this by counting all of the responses each participant gave.
Then, the researcher broke the data up into the three categories and counted the score
from each of the three categories. The researcher did this on both the Teaching Strategies
Checklist that the researcher used during the observation, and on the Teacher Confidence
Scale that each participant filled out. There were 69 points possible on the teaching
Strategies Checklist. After all ten of the Teacher Confidence Scales and Teaching
Strategies Checklists had been reviewed, the data was recorded by the researcher, then
analyzed. A Correlation and a Regression analysis was used to analyze the data. First, a
Correlation test was used on the participants’ ten total scores from the Teaching
Strategies Checklist, and the participants’ ten total scores from the responses’ from the
Teacher Confidence Scale to find the negative or positive correlation between the data.
Then, a Regression Analysis was completed on the same data to determine if the data was
significant or not significant. Finally, a Correlation and Regression Analysis was
performed for each of the three categories: (1) Teaching Strategies, (2)
Cooperative/Grouping Strategies, & (3) Alternative Assessment. These categories were
30
individually analyzed to see if the teachers used one strategy more than another and to
see if the hypothesis was supported by one type of teaching strategy.
31
CHAPTER III
RESULTS
The hypothesis for this study was that in classrooms where a greater number of
English as a Second Language teaching strategies were observed, the teachers would
self-report a higher level of self-confidence. The independent variable for this study was
the score received from the Teacher Confidence Scale Survey, which was completed by
the teachers of the observed classrooms included in the study. The dependant variable
was the number of English as a Second Language teaching strategies observed using the
Teaching Strategies Checklist. To investigate whether the hypothesis for this study was
supported, a number of tests were conducted using the data collected from the
observations. It was expected that the teachers who self-reported higher scores on the
Teacher Confidence Scale Survey would implement more ESL teaching strategies into
their classroom. Using the data collected from the observations, the descriptive stats for
the data were (M = 367.33, SD = 34.70). Figure 3 lists the descriptive stats for the data
from the scores from the Teacher Confidence Scale. The mean for this set of data was
367, which is fairly high considering the highest score that can be achieved is 414. The
minimum score was 306, and the maximum score was 402.
32
377
Mean
367.3333333
Median
Mode
384
#N/A
Standard Deviation
Range
34.69870315
96
Minimum
306
Maximum
402
Figure 3: Descriptive Statistics from Teacher Confidence Scale Scores
More specifically a correlation and a regression analysis was conducted to see if
the teachers who self-reported a higher confidence level implemented more ESL teaching
strategies. The positive correlation indicated that the results were not significant, (r =
0.104, F = 0.790). In order to be significant, the F value had to be F < .05, and in this
case the F value was 0.790 which was larger than 0.05. Therefore, the relationship
between the teachers’ self-reported confidence levels and number of teaching strategies
implemented was not significant. The results did not support the hypothesis which stated
that a higher self-reported confidence level from the teachers would yield a greater
number of ESL teaching strategies used in the classroom. Figure 1 shows the independent
variable for this study, which was the teachers’ self-reported score from the Teacher
Confidence Scale. The ten different teachers’ responses can be observed, and by inputting
this data into a bar graph, it shows a rough score for each teachers’ score. It should be
33
noted that the highest possible score possible for this scale was 414. When looking at the
graph, seven out of ten teachers scored above 350, only one teacher scored over 400, and
three teachers scored between 300 and 350. The mean score was 367. This data set
indicated that all ten teachers scored themselves fairly high on the scale.
450
400
350
300
250
Series1
200
150
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Figure 1: Teacher Confidence Scale Scores
The Teaching Strategies Checklist was made up of three parts: (1) Teaching
Strategies, (2) Cooperative/Grouping Strategies, and (3) Alternative Assessment. The
descriptive stats for the above sections were, Teaching Strategies ((M = 281.78, SD =
30.60), Cooperative/Grouping Strategies (M = 5.33, SD = 1.66), and Alternative
Assessment (M = 2.89, SD = 0.60)). Once again, a correlation and a regression analysis
were conducted on each of the above categories to see if the hypothesis was supported
with in a smaller set of data. However, the data in the smaller categories also were not
significant, Teaching Strategies ((r = 0.13, F = 0.12), Cooperative/Grouping Strategies (r
= 0.03, F = 0.94), and Alternative Assessment (r = 0.61, F = 0.08)). Broken into smaller
34
categories, the results did not support the hypothesis that a higher self-reported
confidence level from the teachers would yield a greater number of teaching strategies
used in the classroom. Figure 2 shows the dependent variable for this study, which was
the score from the Teaching Strategies Checklist. The ten different scores recorded by the
researcher can be observed, and by imputing this data into a bar graph, it shows a rough
score for each participant. It should be noted that the highest possible score possible for
this scale was 69. When looking at the graph, none of the ten scores are close to 69. Only
one score was higher than 40. Nine out of ten scores were under 40, and four scores were
under 35. This means that four teachers barely used half of the teaching strategies listed
on the checklist. The mean score for the data was 35.6.
50
45
40
35
30
25
Series1
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Figure 2: Teacher Strategies Checklist Scores
35
CHAPTER IV
DISCUSSION
Summary of Findings
The purpose of this study was to investigate whether a higher self-reported
confidence level from teachers would yield a greater number of teaching strategies used
in the classroom. The hypothesis for this study was that in classrooms where a greater
number of English as a Second Language Teaching Strategies were observed, teachers
would self-report a higher level of self-confidence. The hypothesis was not supported. It
was thought that the more confident the teachers were, the more ESL strategies they
would incorporate into their lessons. ESL strategies were used by the teachers, but they
were not used frequently enough to match the confidence of the teachers. Almost all of
the teachers self-reported high levels of confidence, but they did not use enough ESL
strategies to make the data significant.
Comparisons with Previous Research
The idea for this study is based off of research that has been conducted on the
topic of using teaching strategies with ESL students. Because of ever increasing numbers
of ESL students in classrooms, research on the best ways to improve ESL students’
understanding of the material being presented to them has increased as well. Much of the
36
research described how certain teaching strategies seem to help ESL students better
understand the material and how teachers are responsible for using these strategies.
Williams (2001) article focused on opportunities for ESL students to learn in US
mainstream classrooms. The statistics supporting the amount of ESL students in US
classrooms today were compared to past statistics to observe the increasing amounts of
diverse learners in today’s classrooms. This article went on to mention that it is
sometimes easy to classify all ESL students as being on the same language proficient
level and on the same skill level. However, ESL students are just as diverse as any other
student.
All ESL students come from diverse backgrounds and are on differing education
levels. Therefore, it is important for teachers to find out at what level of proficiency the
ESL students operate, and then use the appropriate strategies to help enhance their
learning. For example, teachers should draw attention by using visuals, let students
converse with each other and learn from their peers, teachers should speak clearly and
repeat instructions, show cognates that match the student’s home language, and establish
a safe environment for the students to feel safe and comfortable in (Williams, 2001).
There are many ways to improve ESL students’ learning, but using teaching strategies
was one of the main focuses of this article.
There are even books that are used in some teacher education programs to help
preservice teachers become familiar with teaching strategies that help ESL students learn
in the classroom. Vacca and Vacca (2008) devote an entire chapter of their text on how
ESL students learn differently and how it is important for classroom teachers to realize
37
these differences and incorporate various teaching strategies to help meet these students’
needs.
Limitations
This study demonstrated that there was not a significant difference between the
teachers’ self-reported confidence level and the number of teaching strategies they
implemented into their lessons. The result was surprising, but it could be due to a number
of limitations. This study included certain limitations that could have affected the
outcome of the results. The first is the size of the sample. This study encompassed ten
different classroom teachers. If more teachers were included there would have been more
data collected, and the results might have supported the hypothesis better. A Correlation
was used to compare the data from this study using only ten samples. However, a
Correlation test needs to have at least 30 samples to be accurate. Having only ten samples
did not necessarily mean that this study did not show any pertinent information, it just
meant that more samples would have provided more accurate results.
Another limitation for this study was the participants involved and how the
participants were chosen. Ten participants were chosen because of convenience to be part
of this study. The schools used were all local schools in the same school district, and they
were all schools that the researcher was familiar with and had visited before. Eight out of
the ten participating teachers were teachers the researcher had never interacted with
before or had been in their class. Five teachers used for the study, however, were from
the same school. Although they each taught differently, they still followed the same
38
guidelines enforced by their school. Therefore, if other teachers from other schools were
included, different results may have been observed.
It would have been beneficial for the researcher to try to include other school
districts to get different perspectives, which also served as a limitation to the research. It
would have been better to have used a more random way to choose participants. For
example, the researcher could have listed all of the different schools within a reasonable
area from where the researcher was stationed, and then randomly picked the teachers
from ten of those schools. The researcher could have used a random number generator to
help do this.
Also, all of the teachers observed were teachers of general education classrooms.
This meant that the students in the classrooms were both Native-Speaking students and
Non-Native speaking students. It would have been a good idea to include only ESL
classrooms into this study. ESL only classrooms are classrooms in which the Non-Native
speaking students are pulled out to interact with only other Non-Native speaking ESL
students. Typically, these classes are smaller in size, and the students only spend a short
amount of the school day in, two to three hours, compartmentalized. These students have
a teacher and have class just like in a general classroom, but it is solely an ESL class. It is
assumed that all ESL classroom teachers would automatically use teaching strategies
most beneficial to ESL students, but it would have been interesting to see if they actually
did. It would be interesting to compare the results to see if the ESL classroom teacher
actually used more strategies than the general classroom teacher that teaches both NativeSpeaking and Non-Native speaking students.
39
The above limitations dealt more with how the set-up and logistics of the study
could have affected the results. There are limitations that are more specific to the protocol
the researcher used, such as instructions that the teachers were given. For example,
instructions given to the teachers could have been made clearer by the researcher,
because it appeared as though the teachers were confused about certain parts of the
survey. The researcher explained what the teachers needed to do in as much detail as
possible without giving away what the study was examining. There was a packet that
accompanied the Teacher Confidence Scale that contained all of the definitions to the
teaching strategy terms listed on the survey given to the teachers. The instructions were
easy to understand, and the directions for how to complete the scale were explained to the
participants. The researcher was confident the participating teachers understood what
their objectives were and how they were supposed to complete the scale. However, when
the researcher received the surveys back, there were some questions that were left blank
due to the teacher not understanding the teaching strategy. It was vital that every question
was answered, due to the small sample size. The researcher had to return to the schools
and ask the teachers to complete the questions they had left out. Several of the teachers
responded stating that they did not know what the strategy was. The researcher then
explained the strategies to the teacher. Though all of the definitions to the terms could be
found in the accompanying packet, the teachers admitted that they did not take the time to
always look up the correct answer. This misunderstanding was a limitation to the study
because the teachers may have quickly read through the survey list but did not ask
questions about any confusing parts. It was vital that the participating teachers asked
questions, to ensure complete understanding of the questions being asked. The researcher
40
concluded that teachers involved in this study were very busy trying to teach their
students and manage other responsibilities in their classroom as well. Consequently, it
seemed as though a couple of the teachers did not ask questions to better understand the
survey due to a lack of time. If they had asked questions to better understand the survey
their increased knowledge of the study may have helped the accuracy of the results.
Another limitation to this study was the criteria for how the data was collected.
The checklist was a good measure for recording the data that needed to be collected.
However, the criteria for using the tally marks could have been improved. The researcher
placed a tally mark beside each teaching strategy that the teacher used during the
observation period. There were a total of 69 strategies listed on the checklist. The
researcher was familiar with all of the teaching strategies on the list and knew what to
look for when observing the teachers. However, the researcher had a difficult time
deciding whether or not some of the strategies were used by the teachers. For example,
there were several strategies that had to do with how the teacher incorporated maps,
charts, and graphs. Most of the teachers had maps and graphs on their classroom walls,
but they did not refer to them during the lesson. The researcher had to decide if this
would count as a strategy, because even though they may not have used it during the
lesson, it was still on the wall for the students to refer.
Several of the other teaching strategies listed on the checklist were also hard for
the researcher to determine full usage by the teacher. The rules for the study included the
provision that the teachers had to use the strategy during the lesson the researcher
observed. Several of the strategies were reported to be used in instruction by the
participating teachers on the Teacher Confidence Scale. However, in such a short amount
41
of observation time, the researcher did not see the teacher using certain strategies.
Therefore, the researcher would have liked to have placed a tally mark next to the
strategies that the teacher probably used in other lessons, but due to the protocol of the
study this was not allowed. This reason could be a factor in the low scores from the
observation checklist.
After reviewing the surveys, the researcher determined that all ten of the
participants felt confident in their abilities to use these teaching strategies, even though
the data showed otherwise. The minimum score reported was 306 and the maximum
score was 402. The researcher should have been more specific when instructing the
teachers on how to fill out the survey. The teachers filled out the survey according to
whether or not they felt confident to use these strategies any time throughout the year, not
necessarily during the specific lesson that the researcher observed. Since the researcher
could only see the strategies used during a set amount of time, the researcher should have
made it clearer that the teachers needed to base their answers off of the lesson the
observer was there to see.
All ten participating teachers scored themselves highly on the Teacher Confidence
Scale Survey, meaning they were very confident in their ability to use and incorporate
teaching strategies into the classroom. Checklists examined after observations, indicated
six out of ten teachers averaged a score of 36. The researcher only observed about 45
minutes per lesson, and the average number of teaching strategies used was 36 out of 69
teaching strategies. Therefore, it is safe to say that with these teachers, it is possible that
they would have used several other strategies during a longer period of time. If the
researcher had observed the participating teachers for a longer amount of time, the
42
number of strategies used by the classroom teachers may have been increased. Therefore,
if the lessons were observed for a longer length of time, it may have affected the amount
of strategies the teachers used, which in turn could have changed the results.
It was not reasonable for the teacher to use every single strategy on the checklist
in such a short amount of observation time. The total number of strategies averaged 36,
which does not seem like a high number. However, this is because it is hard to observe all
of these strategies in the short observation period, as stated above. If the researcher could
have stayed for a longer period of time or come back on multiple occasions, more
strategies might have been observed. It should also be noted that teachers teach different
lessons on different days that require a different set of skills and approaches to reach
students. There were several limitations demonstrated at the conclusion of this study.
These demonstrations have been discussed by the researcher and ways to help improve
the study have been contemplated. This is a beneficial study, due to the increasing
amounts of Non-Native Speaking students in the general education classrooms, and it is a
study that provides opportunities for future investigations.
Future Studies
Opportunities for the future investigation of the amount of teaching strategies
used in the classroom based off of the teachers’ confidence levels are numerous. It would
be best to have a larger sample size, because the more participants there are the more
accurate the results will be. This study only had ten participants, and the hypothesis was
not supported. With a larger sample size, it would provide a greater number of teachers
and more data, which would yield more accurate results.
43
Also, a variety of schools should be recruited to be observed. This study only used
schools from one school system. By observing other school systems, a more random
sample would be provided. A school system may mandate a certain type of training for
their teachers or require teachers to incorporate and use certain types of teaching
methods. Therefore, all of the teachers in that school may present similar results. If other
school systems were incorporated, it would provide a variety between teachers and
teaching methods.
For this study, only general education classroom teachers were included. In the
future, it would be beneficial to include English as Second Language only classrooms. As
stated previously, ESL only classrooms have teachers that are assumed to already
incorporate teaching strategies that will help the ESL students. It would be interesting to
see how many of these teachers actually did use these teaching strategies, and how
confident they were in their ability to incorporate them into their lessons. Results could
be compared to that of the general education classroom teachers. The results from this
type of focus may look similar to this study in that it would compare teachers’ confidence
levels to amount of teaching strategies used, or it might take a whole new direction and
focus on what ESL only classroom teachers are doing in their classroom instruction.
This study did not incorporate or include students in any way. Perhaps a future
study could include the students more. For example, the researcher could have the
participating teacher teach a lesson using minimal or zero ESL teaching strategies, and
then assess the students’ progress toward an objective. The teacher could then teach the
same lesson using a certain set number of teaching strategies and again assess students.
The researcher would examine the results to see if the teaching strategies had an impact
44
on the students’ learning. This idea could even be taken a step further and very specific
strategies could be tested. The current study used strategies that were broken up into three
categories: (1) Teaching Strategies, (2) Cooperative/Grouping Strategies, and (3)
Alternative Assessment. Each of these categories could be reviewed to see which
category the teachers were more likely to use in their lessons and classrooms. The
researcher could also look at which category of teaching strategies would be most
effective to the ESL students by teaching lessons that only included those types of
strategies under each category.
Implications
The implications of this study are important for classroom teachers of all types,
preservice teachers, and other educational personnel. Although the results for this study
were not significant, it is still important to look at the data found through this research.
All ten of the participating teachers who participated in this study scored themselves very
highly on the Teacher Confidence Scale, meaning they had high confidence levels about
their ability to use ESL teaching strategies. It is important to know how teachers respond
to using any teaching strategies, but more specifically ESL teaching strategies, during
their lessons. School administration could use this data to better train and educate their
teachers if they see that their teachers are not very confident in a certain subject area.
Nine out of ten teachers from this study answered that they had zero training on how to
help ESL students. Many of them kept the packet of definitions to the key terms of the
teaching strategies used, because they wanted to improve their teaching methods. This
study could help these teachers see how their own confidence level affects the outcome of
their lesson, and ultimately how it affects their students.
45
This research could also benefit preservice teachers. Preservice teachers spend
many observation hours in elementary schools working with the classroom students. In
their education program, preservice teachers learn about best practices in general, and
right now improving ESL education is one main focus. This data could help preservice
teachers become more aware of what strategies they use in the classroom and more aware
of how what they do affects students. Proven teaching strategies are great to use with
ESL students, especially the strategies examined in this study. All students benefit from
teacher variation during lesson instruction. This study can help preservice teachers see
the need to use multiple teaching strategies during all aspects of their lesson, even if no
ESL students are present in their classroom.
School administration could use this data to investigate what their teachers
believed about working with and helping ESL students. This data would help them see
whether or not the teachers are actually using any methods, like ESL teaching strategies,
to help these students. The school administrators could examine this data, and decide if
their teachers need more training or guidance on how to help these students and other
students, too. One of the basic questions on the Teacher Confidence Scale asked the
participating teachers to write down the amount of ESL training they had received. Nine
out of the ten participants stated they had received no training to help teach ESL students.
The only teacher who reported ESL specific training stated she had received this training
by teaching in another state where they required ESL training. Figure 4 shows a bar graph
of the teachers’ responses to the amount of training they had received to help ESL
students. If administrators trained the teachers to help ESL students, and they made
teachers incorporate teaching strategies into their daily instruction, it could provide a
46
more cohesive working environment, because all teachers would be incorporating the
same type of strategies into lessons for their students, which would help all students
succeed, hopefully improving the entire schools’ scores.
450
400
350
300
Amount of ESL Training
250
Scores from Teacher
Confidence Scale
200
150
Scores from Observation
Checklist
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Figure 4: Amount of ESL Training Teacher Received
Conclusion
This study yielded results that were not significant and the hypothesis for this
study was not supported. However, there was still educational value gleaned by
conducting the study. This study brings awareness to the fact that ESL students need a
variety of instruction to better their learning. It also brings awareness to what some
general classroom teachers are doing in their classrooms. In this century, ESL students
are an increasing population, and teachers need to be educated on how to better help these
students. This is not an issue that can be over looked or ignored. Attention needs to be
47
paid to what classroom teachers believe about their confidence to adequately instruct
Non-Native speaking students. Often times, teachers are not asked how confident they
feel about certain abilities; they are just expected to know how to do everything and deal
with every situation. However, that is not the case. Teachers are life-long learners, and
they need to learn how to better help their students. It is important to look at previous
research and the limitations of this study. If alterations could be made to this study, this
study could have produced results that might have supported the hypothesis, showing that
the more confident teachers are the more likely they are to implement ESL strategies into
their classrooms. This study was intended to bring awareness to the need for teachers to
incorporate teaching strategies into their classroom, and to show how a teacher’s
confidence level can affect the lesson, the outcome of the lesson, and what the students
learn from the lesson. If current teachers and preservice teaches alike get in the habit of
using ESL teaching strategies, they may increase their confidence levels and have a better
impact on all of the students they are expected to teach.
48
APPENDICES
49
APPENDIX A
Appendix A: Internal Review Board Proposal
MARYVILLE COLLEGE
Human Participants Research Proposal Form
Principal researcher(s): Marissa Summitt
Faculty sponsor (if applicable): Dr. Alesia Orren
Division: Behavioral Science, Child Development with Teacher Licensure
Mailing address of the principal researcher:
Maryville College mailbox number: 2975
Title of proposed research:
Implementing Varied ESL Learning Strategies into Today’s Classroom
Proposed starting date: September 2010
Ending date: October 2010
Purpose and objectives of proposed research: (attachments as necessary)
The purpose of this study is to determine if classroom teachers are implementing ESL
specific teaching strategies into the classroom. The teacher’s confidence level will also be
measured and considered a factor when observing the amount of strategies the teacher uses
in the classroom.
Participants:
The participants for the study will be six general classroom teachers from six fifth grade
classes at Maryville Intermediate School, and four general classroom teachers from four
fifth grade classrooms at Alcoa Elementary School. These classrooms are general
classrooms that include Native Speaking English students, and Non-Native speaking
students. I will be observing the teacher as she/he teaches the lesson, but I will not be
interacting with the children. As I observe the teacher, I will check off the strategies used on
a checklist. The class will be in the student’s normal classroom environment, so no consent
51
forms will be needed for students. I will get consent from the teachers since they will be
filling out self-evaluation forms (see Appendix D).
Pre-selection of Participants: As stated above, I will pre-select ten fifth grade classrooms to
observe the teachers by getting permission using the consent form (see Appendix B).
Anonymity/ Confidentiality: I will not be conducting experiments on the students. I will only
be observing the teachers and marking checks on the strategy checklist. I will have the
teachers complete the Teacher Confidence Scale after their lesson. Since I will be in a
classroom and handing out Scales to the teachers, I will keep all information confidential.
There will be codes to identify the teachers, but all information gained will be kept
confidential.
Methods and procedures:
I will prepare a checklist that has different teaching/learning strategies broken up into three
categories of likeliness (see Appendix C). As the teacher teaches her lesson, I will put tally
marks beside the strategies that I observe her using. I will prepare a Teacher Confidence
Scale for the classroom teachers to complete after the lesson (see Appendix D).
The results from the checklist will be analyzed to see what strategies were being used and
how many strategies were actually observed. I will also be checking to see how the teachers
reported on the Teacher Confidence Scale. The responses will be analyzed and evaluated
using a correlation and regression analysis test to determine if more strategies were used
when the teacher reported a higher level of confidence in his/her ability.
Informed Consent: The teachers will be given a consent form to fill out, since they will be
completing self-evaluation forms (see Appendix B).
Debriefing: After I complete my study and analyze the information, I will inform the
teachers what the self-evaluation forms were used for. I will offer them the opportunity to
examine my study and review the results. I will shred all checklists used during observations
and all teacher self-evaluation forms.
Principal Researcher
______________________________________
(Signature)
Faculty Supervisor
______________________________________
(Signature)
Committee Approval
______________________________________
(Signature)
Date___________________________
52
APPENDIX B
Appendix B: Consent Form
Implementing Various ESL Strategies in the Classroom
Human Participant Consent Form
1. The purpose of this study is to determine if teachers are implementing teaching
strategies into their daily lessons. It will also look at how the teacher’s confidence
plays a role during the lessons. Participants in this study will be required to complete
a post Teaching Confidence Scale (Woolfolk, 2000), and allow the experimenter to
observe classroom lessons.
2. Five general classrooms at Maryville Intermediate School, four general classrooms
at John Sevier Elementary, and one general classroom teacher from Sam Houston
will be recruited to participate.
3. The duration for the experiment will be from September 13, 2010 through October
2010.
4. Experimenter will be observing the teachers’ lessons and marking tally marks next
to the strategies used on a checklist. Experimenter will also be distributing the
Teaching Confidence Scale to be filled out after the lesson.
5. There will be no added risk or harm inflicted from those posed in a typical
classroom setting in participating in this study.
6. All information will be kept confidential, and all data and forms will be destroyed
when study is complete.
7. Any questions will be answered after completion of study.
8. Participation in this study is voluntary, and at any time if participant feels threatened
or would like to withdrawal from the study, participant can with no penalty or loss of
benefits. All information will then be destroyed if participate drops out early.
9. For questions about the research, contact the principal investigator:
Marissa Summitt
Maryville College Student
Maryville College
502 East Lamar Alexander Pkwy. Box 2975
Maryville, TN 37804
[email protected]
865-556-5244
10. You have rights as a volunteer. Taking part in this study is completely voluntary.
If you do not take part, you will receive no penalty. You may stop participating at
any time without penalty. If you have questions about your rights as a research
volunteer, call or write:
Dr. Alesia Orren
54
Education Department
502 E. Lamar Alexander Pkwy.
Maryville, TN 37804
[email protected]
865-981-8029
I have read and understood the information above. I consent to take part in this study. The
researchers have answered my questions to my satisfaction. I understand a copy of this
form is available upon my request.
Participant’s Signature
Date
Investigator’s Signature
Date
55
APPENDIX C
Appendix C: Teaching Strategy Checklist
Teaching Strategies
Total Physical Response (TPR)
Natural Approach
Whole Language Approach
Language Experience Approach (LEA)
Retelling a Story
Activating Prior Knowledge
Flow Charts
Maps/Charts
Graphs
Pictures
Semantic Webbing/Mapping
T-Charts
Venn Diagrams
Timelines
Computer/Software
Realia
Videos/Films/CD ROM
Demonstrations
Captioning
Labeling
Music/Songs
Jazz Chants/Raps
Cassettes-Music/Books
KWL Charts
Role Play
Games
Varied Complexity of Assignment
Ono-on-One Instruction with
Teacher/Aid
Modified Nature of Assignment
Substitute Diagram for Paragraph
Home Language for Instruction
Explanations for Key Concepts
Repetition/Paraphrasing/Speed
Vocabulary with Context Clues
Simple, Direct Language(Limit Idioms)
All Modalities/Learning Styles
Visuals with Matching Words
Drills
Unscrambling
Sentences/Words/Visuals
Categorizing Visuals
Context Clues
Outlined Notes
Directed Reading/Thinking Activity
SQ3R
Summarizing
Note-Taking
Word Banks
Repetition
Question-Answer Relationships
Interviews
Content Retelling
Content Dictation
Graphic Representation
Cooperative/Grouping Strategies
Peer Buddy
Small Group Activities
Jigsaw
Pairs and Threes
Corners
Think/Pair/Share
Cooperative Learning
Group Reports/Projects
Panel Discussions/Debates
Guest Speakers
Use of Community Resources
Cultural Sharing
Alternative Assessment
Writing Samples
Group Testing
Observation/Anecdotal
Portfolio
57
APPENDIX D
Appendix D: Teacher Confidence Scale
ID Code: ___________ (0001-0010)
Basic Questions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Age: _______________________
Gender: ____________________
Number of years in teaching profession: _________________________
Amount of years attended in college: ____________________________
Amount of years attended training/college specifically for ESL learning: __________
Average class size for the 2010-2011 school year: ____________________________
Estimate the number of ESL students in each class period: ______________________
School Demographics:
- County or City:________________________________
- Public or Private:______________________________
- Low SES/High SES:___________________________
59
Teacher Confidence Scale
INSTRUCTIONS: Please indicate your opinion about each statement by circling the appropriate response at the right
of the statement. There are no right or wrong answers. We are interested in your frank opinions. Your responses are
confidential.
KEY: 1 = Strongly Disagree
2 = Moderately Disagree
3 = Slightly Disagree
4 = Slightly Agree
5 = Moderately Agree
6= Strongly Agree
I am confident in my ability to use
Disagree--->Agree
Total Physical Response
1 2 3 4 5 6
Natural Approach
1 2 3 4 5 6
Whole Language Approach
1 2 3 4 5 6
Language Experience Approach
1 2 3 4 5 6
Retelling a Story
1 2 3 4 5 6
Activating Prior Knowledge
1 2 3 4 5 6
Flow Charts
1 2 3 4 5 6
Maps/Charts
1 2 3 4 5 6
Graphs
1 2 3 4 5 6
Pictures
1 2 3 4 5 6
Semantic Webbing / Mapping
1 2 3 4 5 6
T-Charts
1 2 3 4 5 6
Venn Diagrams
1 2 3 4 5 6
Timelines
1 2 3 4 5 6
60
Computer/Software
1 2 3 4 5 6
Realia
1 2 3 4 5 6
Videos/Film/CD ROM
1 2 3 4 5 6
Demonstrations
1 2 3 4 5 6
Captioning
1 2 3 4 5 6
Labeling
1 2 3 4 5 6
Music/Songs
1 2 3 4 5 6
Jazz Chants/Raps
1 2 3 4 5 6
Cassettes-Music/Books
1 2 3 4 5 6
KWL Charts
1 2 3 4 5 6
Role Play
1 2 3 4 5 6
Games
1 2 3 4 5 6
Varied Complexity of Assignments
1 2 3 4 5 6
Modified Nature of Assignment
1 2 3 4 5 6
One-on-One Instruction with Teacher/Aid
1 2 3 4 5 6
Substitute Diagram for Paragraph
1 2 3 4 5 6
Home Language for Instruction
1 2 3 4 5 6
Explanations for Key Concepts
1 2 3 4 5 6
Repetition/Paraphrasing/Speed
1 2 3 4 5 6
Vocabulary with Context Clues
1 2 3 4 5 6
Simple, Direct Language(limit idioms)
1 2 3 4 5 6
All Modalities/Learning Styles
1 2 3 4 5 6
Drills
1 2 3 4 5 6
Visuals Matching with Words
1 2 3 4 5 6
Unscrambling/Visuals/Words
1 2 3 4 5 6
Categorizing Vocabulary
1 2 3 4 5 6
Context Clues
1 2 3 4 5 6
Outlined Notes
1 2 3 4 5 6
Directed Reading/Thinking Activity
1 2 3 4 5 6
Summarizing
1 2 3 4 5 6
Note-taking
1 2 3 4 5 6
Word Banks
1 2 3 4 5 6
Repetition
1 2 3 4 5 6
Question-Answer Relationships
1 2 3 4 5 6
Interviews
1 2 3 4 5 6
Content Retelling
1 2 3 4 5 6
61
Content Dictation
1 2 3 4 5 6
Graphic Representation
1 2 3 4 5 6
SQ3R
1 2 3 4 5 6
I am confident in my ability to integrate
Peer Buddies
1 2 3 4 5 6
Small Group Activities
1 2 3 4 5 6
Pairs and Threes
1 2 3 4 5 6
Jigsaw
1 2 3 4 5 6
Corners
1 2 3 4 5 6
Think/Pair/Share
1 2 3 4 5 6
Cooperative Learning
1 2 3 4 5 6
Group Reports/Projects
1 2 3 4 5 6
Panel Discussions/ Debates
1 2 3 4 5 6
Guest Speakers
1 2 3 4 5 6
Community Resources
1 2 3 4 5 6
Cultural Sharing
1 2 3 4 5 6
Writing Samples
1 2 3 4 5 6
Group Testing
1 2 3 4 5 6
Observations/Anecdotal
1 2 3 4 5 6
Portfolio
1 2 3 4 5 6
I am confident in my ability to interpret
62
APPENDIX E
Appendix E: Original Teaching Strategies Checklist
ESOL STRATEGIES CHECKLIST
Directions: Please review this list of strategies and select the ones you find most
helpful in making your
instruction understandable to limited English proficient students. For audit
purposes, RECORD THE
STRATEGY NUMBER IN YOUR DAILY LESSON PLANS.
TEACHING STRATEGIES
1 Abstract Concepts/Concrete Examples
2 Appropriate Media Materials
3 Buddy Materials
4 Capsule Vocabulary
5 Categorization
6 Classifying
7 Cloze Exercises
8 Clustering
9 Concrete Vocabulary
1 0 Content Journals
1 1 Demonstrations
1 2 Dialogue Journals
1 3 Drama
1 4 Experiments
1 5 Field Trips
1 6 Flow Charts
1 7 Framed Paragraphs
1 8 Graphs
1 9 Games
STRATEGIES
2 0 Highlighting
2 1 Illustrations
2 2 Jazz Chants
2 3 KWL Charts
2 4 Language Experience Approach
2 5 Learning Centers
2 6 Learning Logs
2 7 Listening Activities
2 8 Mapping
2 9 Mystery Pot
30 Non-essential Detail Reduction (RAFT)
31 Opinion/Proof
32 Outlines
33 Plan-Do-Review
34 Power Thinking
4 8 Sentence Synthesis
4 9 Spool Paragraphs
5 0 Story Grammars
5 1 Story Maps
5 2 Strip Sentences
5 3 Strip Stories
5 4 Summaries
5 5 Teacher Think Alouds
5 6 Thematic Approach
5 7 Timelines
5 8 Total Physical Response
5 9 Two Column Notes
6 0 Venn Diagram
6 1 Visual Representations
6 2 Vocabulary Card Files
6 3 Vocabulary Filing System
6 4 Vocabulary Journals
COOPERATIVE/GROUPING
6 5 Brainstorming
6 6 Group Discussion
6 7 Integration Information Gap
6 8 Jigsaw
6 9 Numbered Heads Review
7 0 Pair Problem Solving
7 1 Pairwork
7 2 Peer Tutors
7 3 Round Robin
7 4 Small Groups
7 5 Teacher Assistants
7 6 Think-Write-Pair-Share
7 7 Volunteers
64
35 Predicting
36 Problem Solutions Guides
37 Problem Solving
38 Question-Answer Relationships
39 Reading Logs
40 Realia
41 Role, Audience, Format, Topic
42 Roleplay
43 Schema Development
44 Selective Underlining
45 Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA)
46 Semantic Webbing
47 Sentence Expansion
ALTERNATIVE ASSESSMENT
7 8 Content Retelling/Dicatation
7 9 Debates
8 0 Diorama
8 1 Games
8 2 Graphic Demonstrations
8 3 Group Testing
8 4 Interview
8 5 Observation
8 6 Portfolio
8 7 Student Self-Rating
8 8 Writing Samples
65
APPENDIX F
Appendix F: Original Teacher Confidence Scale:
ID Code: (Mother’s month and day of birth and her initials)
Undergrad Degree______________ Institution_________________________
Major______________________________Minor________________________
Please list the High School Advanced Placement classes you took, if
any:____________________________________________________________________
Teacher Confidence Scale
INSTRUCTIONS: Please indicate your opinion about each statement by circling
the appropriate response at the right of the statement. There are no right or wrong
answers. We are interested in your frank opinions. Your responses are confidential.
KEY:
create integrated lessons and units
construct student-centered activities
teach basic concepts of fractions
123456
123456
123456
manage classrooms
123456
teach algebra
123456
use cooperative learning approaches
123456
facilitate students’ communication about mathematics
(through journals, discussions, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5 6
explain the meaning of standardized test scores
to students and parents
123456
implement a variety of science teaching strategies
that incorporate inquiry-based learning 1 2 3 4 5 6
1=Strongly Disagree 2=Moderately Disagree
3=Disagree slightly more than agree
4=Agree slightly more than disagree
5=Moderately Agree 6=Strongly Agree
I am confident in my ability to
Disagree--->Agree
develop number sense in children
123456
locate resources for preparing mathematics lessons
123456
teach science as a co-inquirer with students
123456
build learning in science on children’s intuitive
understandings
123456
connect mathematics to literature
123456
use journals in teaching
123456
analyze my teaching in an objective and
ethical manner1 2 3 4 5 6
construct a web
123456
give students concrete experiences in
learning mathematics 1 2 3 4 5 6
integrate language arts teaching
123456
use media to support teaching and learning 1 2 3 4 5 6
67
use a variety of assessment techniques
determine the academic needs of my students
123456
123456
evaluate software for teaching and learning 1 2 3 4 5 6
understand the impact of cultural diversity on
select appropriate literature for thematic teaching
123456
evaluate students’ work
123456
teach effectively in an urban school
123456
facilitate class discussions
123456
establish a feeling of community in my classes
123456
incorporate different activities and curricula into
science teaching
123456
develop an assessment rubric
123456
classroom content, context, &
instructional strategies.
define the social in social studies
123456
123456
68
Directions for Scoring the Teaching Confidence Scale
This scale was developed in order to devise a program-specific measure of efficacy. In an
attempt to identify an appropriate level of specificity for assessing efficacy in our
preservice teacher preparation program, we surveyed all the instructors who worked with
the prospective teacher cohorts, asking the instructors what students should be able to do
after completing the coursework. After removing redundancies, the result was a list of 32
teaching skills such as manage classrooms, evaluate student work, use cooperative
learning approaches, teach basic concepts of fractions, and build learning in science on
children’s intuitive understandings.
We then designed a questionnaire, named the Teaching Confidence Scale (initially called
the OSU Teaching Confidence Scale because it focused on skills in our program), that
asked students to rate on a 6-point scale how confident they were in their ability to
accomplish each skill, the higher the score, the more confident. We then calculated a total
average score for each respondent. In our first study, based on the average score for the
entire 32-item scale, the alpha coefficient of reliability was in the 95.
In order to create a measure appropriate for your program, you would have to determine
what students should be able to do after completing your requirements and then build a
scale based on these expectations.
69
APPENDIX G
Appendix G: Terms for Teaching Strategies
A. Methodologies / Approaches
A1.
Total Physical Response (TPR)
In TPR, teachers interact with students by delivering commands, and students
demonstrate comprehension through physical response. Students are not expected to
respond orally until they feel ready. This strategy involves little or no pressure to speak.
(Asher, 1992).
A2.
The Natural Approach
In this approach (Krashen and Terrell, 1983), students acquire new vocabulary through
experiences and associations with the words, as such words are employed in a meaningful
context. Extended listening experiences include physical response activities, use of vivid
pictures to illustrate concepts, and active involvement of the students through physical
contact with the pictures and objects being discussed-by means of choice-making, yes-no
questions, and game situations.
A3.
The Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach
The Cognitive / Academic Language Learning Approach (CALLA) (Chamot &
O’Malley, 1994) assists in the transition from a language arts program in which content is
made comprehensible through the use of ESOL strategies to the “mainstream” language
arts curriculum by teaching students how to handle content area material with success.
CALLA can help intermediate and advanced students in understanding and retaining
content area material while they are increasing their English language skills.
A4.
Whole Language Approach
In a Whole Language Approach, linguistic, cognitive, and early literacy skills are
developed in an integrated fashion. Instructional strategies for a Whole Language
Approach include the four language skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing
(Goodman, Goodman & Hood, 1989).
A5.
Language Experience Approach
The goal of the Language Experience Approach (LEA) is to have students produce
language in response to first-hand, multi-sensorial experiences. The LEA uses the
students’ ideas and their language to develop reading and writing skills.
71
Steps for using the Language Experience Approach in the classroom (Dixon &
Nessel, 1983).
Step 1: Providing the Experience / Motivation
An experience story is based on an experience the teacher and
students share.
Step 2: Facilitation Language Production
Immediately following an experience students need to interact with
each other to discuss the experience and what it meant to them.
Step 3: Creating a Personal View Representation
The teacher has the students draw or paint a picture about
something interesting about the activity.
Step 4: Retelling Events / Reactions
A volunteer is selected to share his or her picture with the group.
Step 5: Writing Students’ Statements
The teacher asks each student a question and records his / her
answer, writing on the chalkboard exactly what the student says,
using large manuscript letters. After writing each statement, the
teacher reads it back to the group for confirmation. When four or
five statements are on the board, the students decide their
sequential ordering. The statements are then numbered and
transferred to a sentence strip, and the students correctly arrange
the strips on a chart holder.
Step 6: Reading
After the chart or individual statements have been completed,
students read their statements to each other and to the teacher.
Step 7: Writing
As students develop writing skills, they copy the story into their
notebooks or on lined paper.
Step 8: Follow Up with Activities
The story may be reread on several subsequent days either by the
teacher, the students, or both. Students can also save the story with
other language experience class stories to form their own class
book for later reading.
A6.
Retelling a Story
Storytelling is an important method for providing natural language experiences even
during very early states of language acquisition. Stories should be highly predictable or
72
familiar to the students from their native culture. They should be repetitive, making
regular use of patterns. The story line should lend itself to dramatization and pantomime.
A7.
Activating Prior Knowledge
For material to be meaningful, it must be clearly related to existing knowledge that the
learner already posses (Omaggio, 1993). Teachers must plan activities in their instruction
to provide the relevant context to activate students’ knowledge on the topic discussed.
B. Visuals
Teachers should use visual displays (i.e. graphs, charts, photos) in the lessons and
assignments to support the oral or written message. Visual / graphic organizers should be
used before presenting a reading passage. The provision of additional contextual
information in the form of a visual should make the comprehension task easier (Omaggio,
1993).
B1.
Flow Charts
This graphic organizer strategy assists students in representing position, role and order
relationships among group elements. Students draw a representation of a sequential flow
of events, actions, character roles, and / or decisions. Based on the situation, the graphic
frame for the flowchart can be student and / or teacher generated.
B2-5. Maps / Charts / Graphs / Pictures
Visual aids that assist teachers in demonstrating relationships between words and
concepts.
B6.
Semantic Webbing / Mapping
This strategy provides LEP students with a visual picture of how words or phrases
connect to a concept or a topic. The instructor lists the target topic or concept, and builds
a web-like structure (by circling and connecting the words) of words, phrases and verbs
that students offer as being connected with the central topic. Class discussion may
follow, with the instructor as the facilitator, to argue against or to defend the perceived
relationships of the called out words to the topic, and eventually a consensus is reached as
to what the class believes constitutes a “web” for that concept.
B7.
T-Charts
T-Charts are graphic organizers that compare / contrast two topics by dividing a page in
half like a “T”.
B8.
Venn Diagrams
73
Venn diagrams can be used to create a visual analysis of information that represents
similarities and differences among concepts, peoples and things. This graphic organizer
is constructed by using two or more overlapping geometrical figures (i.e.: circles,
squares, rectangles) that share an area in common. Students list the unique characteristics
of each concept or object being compared in the area not being shared with any other
figure, and those elements that are common to all in the common shared area.
B9.
Story Maps
Story maps are visual outlines to help students understand, recall, and connect key terms
and ideas from a text. Story maps may be made individually or by the class as a whole.
B10.
Timelines
Timelines are graphic organizers that allow learners to organize sequential events
chronologically, and also give meaningful practice in the past and present tenses.
B11.
Computer / Software
This involves the use of technology to promote Computer Assisted Language Learning
(CALL).
B12.
Realia
Bringing realia (authentic objects from a culture), or manipulatives to the classroom
helps teachers in providing comprehensible input in a second language. Students should
be allowed to touch, smell, and taste, if possible, prior to being exposed to the lesson, for
optimal comprehensible input.
B13.
Videos / Films/ CD-ROM
Borrowing films and other audiovisual materials from school district media centers can
help improve a language arts lesson. Audiovisuals also assist in illustrating ideas,
reteaching a concept, or infusing content area concepts from other disciplines. It is
always wise to preview the audiovisual materials before showing them to a class,
screening them for possible language difficulties, misleading cultural information or
controversial content.
B14.
Demonstrations
Demonstrations involve step-by-step sequential procedures presented to the class using
realia; i.e. cooking lessons, arts and crafts lessons, etc.
B15.
Captioning
74
Captioning uses written materials and pictures to demonstrate main ideas or to summarize
exercises. Captioning can involve students at different language levels.
75
Steps for using Captioning in the Classroom:
1.
Explain what a caption is.
2.
Have learners read information on handout you develop and distribute.
3.
Distribute illustrations and have students arrange in order of written
information.
4.
Have each group caption the pictures, and read their captions to the class.
B16.
Labeling
Labeling items in the classrooms will assist LEP students in the identification of items
and in relating them to written words.
B17-19.
Music / Songs, Jazz Chants / Raps, Cassettes-Music / Books
Language teachers frequently use music and chants in their classes. These activities are
motivating for students and assist in reinforcing and revisiting content area concepts
while acquiring English pronunciation and intonation patterns.
Jazz Chants are rhythmic expressions of standard English as it occurs in situations
through the use of music or rap. Jazz chants improve intonation, vocabulary and
grammar development.
B20.
Language Master
Auditory practice is obtained through the use of Language Master Cards to provide
repetitive tasks that increase vocabulary and pronunciation skills.
C. Interactive Strategies
C1-3. Peer Buddy / Small Group Activities / Pairs and Threes
Small cooperative groups are used to provide home language assistance and opportunities
to negotiate meaning in the development of second language communication skills in a
non-threatening environment.
C4.
Jigsaw
This is a cooperative learning strategy in which everyone becomes an “expert” about a
topic or sub-topic, and shares his or her learning within a group setting so that eventually
all members learn the content.
To implement this strategy, the students are divided into groups; each group member is
assigned a section or a part of the material selected for study. Each student meets with
the members of other similar groups who have similar assignments, forming a new group.
This new group learns together, becomes an expert on their assigned material, and then
plans how to teach this material to members of their original groups.
76
Students later return to their original groups (whose members each now represent one of
the different areas of the topic being studies) and teach their area of expertise to the other
group members. In this matter, a topic or subject of great length can be covered and
learned in a fraction of the usual time. LEP students can learn the material must more
effectively since they also must become teachers of the content they have learned to the
members of their original groups. Jigsaw offers many opportunities for language
acquisition, practice, enrichment and reinforcement.
C5.
“Corners”
This is also a cooperative learning strategy, designed to optimize the learning of the
assigned task, and sharing that learning with other students. The teacher needs to assign
small groups of students to different corners of the classroom. They discuss various
solutions, perspectives and points of view concerning a pre-selected issue, and decide on
a presentation format. Finally, small groups present to the class.
C6.
Think / Pair / Share
This strategy is well suited to help students develop their own ideas as well as build on
ideas that originated from co-learners. After reflecting on a topic, students form pairs and
discuss, review, and revise their ideas, and eventually share them with the class.
C7.
Cooperative Learning (Group Reports / Projects)
Cooperative Learning is a dynamic strategy through which students develop linguistic
and academic skills simultaneously (Calderon, 1988; Cohen, 1986; Green, 1991; Kagan,
1985). In this highly successful strategy, LEP students work together in small
intellectually and culturally missed groups to achieve a common goal. The outcome of
their work is both a reflection on how well the group functioned, and an academic
assessment tool for the instructor.
C8.
Panel Discussions / Debate
This is also a cooperative learning strategy in which students organize planned
presentations, where each member of the group takes one of the possible topic
viewpoints. The individual presentations may have oral, written or multimedia
components. Students form teams to research, develop, and articulate their viewpoints.
This strategy helps the students in developing the ability to organize information, to filter
ideas and to draw conclusions.
C9.
Choral Reading / Read Around Groups (RAG)
This is an activity designed to give students an opportunity to think, discuss, and write
about topics related to what they have read.
77
Procedure:
1. After reading, teacher and students select a purpose and topic(s) for a short
writing activity. Students participate in a pre-writing activity such as
brainstorming, develop criteria for the written work, then free-write for about ten
minutes on a topic related to the reading.
2. Students code their written work with numbers instead of using their own names.
3. Papers are collected by the teacher, and students are divided into groups of four or
five and given the same number of coded papers.
4. Everyone in each group reads all the papers assigned to their group. This is done
by reading for a short timed interval, and then passing the papers around the circle
and repeating the process until all papers are read.
5. Each group votes on the one or two papers that meet the criteria best, and explains
their choice.
6. The teacher tallies the results of the papers voted “best” on the chalkboard and
students share their ideas about how and why these papers are most effective in
achieving the given purpose, e.g., organization of information, use of descriptive
terms, persuasiveness, effectiveness in making a point.
D. Other Interactive Strategies
D1.
Field Trips
This strategy consists of a planned learning experience in the community for the student
group to observe, study, and participate in a real-life setting, using the community as a
laboratory. The instructor and the students plan and structure the experience by preparing
beforehand for activities during the visit and then engage in follow-up activities after the
trip.
D2.
K-W-L (Knows / Wants to Know / Learned)
An introductory or pre-activity strategy that provides a defined structure for recalling and
stating; What the student knows regarding a concept or a topic; what the student wants to
know, and finally lists what has been learned and / or what is yet to be learned. To use
this strategy, the student lists all the information he / she knows or thinks he / she knows
under the heading “What We Know”; then, the learner makes an inventory of “What We
Want to Know”, categorizing the information about the topic the student expects to use.
D3.
Role Play
In describing learning strategies, Dale (1990) emphasizes that direct and purposeful
experiences are best for all students, especially LEP learners. For example, students can
demonstrate comprehension of a story by role-play through retelling, using realia, visuals,
and props previously demonstrated by the instructor.
78
D4.
Games
Allow LEP students to develop conversational skills in a non-threatening format. Games
are motivating for students and assist in reinforcing classroom material.
D5.
Dialogue Journals
A dialogue journal is a written conversation in which a student and the teacher
communicate regularly and carry on a private conversation. Dialogue journals provide a
communicative context for language and writing development since they are both
functional and interactive (Peyton & Reed, 1990). Students write on topics of their
choice and the teacher responds with advice, comments, observations, thus, serving as a
participant, not an evaluator, in a written conversation. Dialogue journals can and should
be used very early in the language learning process. Students can begin by writing a few
words and combining them with pictures.
E. Modified Class-work (Based on Level of English Proficiency)
E1-18, 20, 22-25.
Modifying class-work involves the use of a variety of adaptations or modifications that
provide class-work appropriate to the language proficiency level of the LEP students, so
that comprehensible instruction can occur. Modifying class-work allows for differences
in student learning styles and cultural diversity factors.
E-19. Directed Reading / Thinking Activity (DRTA)
The teacher directs the students in activities to check their prior knowledge of the subject,
set the purpose for reading, and become acquainted with new vocabulary and concepts.
At this stage, the students may also predict the content. Students then read small sections
silently, while keeping their predictions and purposes for reading in mind. They read
critically. After reading, the students think about what they read. They revise predictions
or prove them. Follow-up activities help students expand, summarize, and restate their
ideas.
E21.
Survey, Question, Read, Recite, Review (SQ3R)
This is a pre-reading activity that helps students focus on their topic, develop questions
about that topic, and answer those questions based on the reading.
Procedure:
1. S-Survey-“preview”
2. Q-Question-Wh-words, such as: why, who, what, etc.
3. 3R-Read, Recite, Review
79
E26.
Question-Answer Relationship (QAR)
Teachers can use QAR when developing comprehension questions, helping students to
identify different question types, and teaching text organization. The QAR classification
is divided into four question types in two categories:
A. In the Book
1. Right there
The answer is in the text, usually easy to find. The words used to
make up the question and words used to answer the question are Right
There in the same sentence.
2. Think and Search (Putting It Together)
The answer is in the text, but you need to put together different text
parts to find it. Words for the question and words for the answer are
not found in the same sentence. They come from different parts of the
text.
B. In Your Head
1. Author and You
The answer is not in the text. You need to think about what you
already know, what the author tells you in the text, and how it fits
together.
2. On Your Own
The answer is not in the text. You can answer the question without
even reading the text. You need to use your own experience.
F. Multicultural Resources
F1-4
Multicultural Resources
These include community resources, local organizations and clubs (e.g. Hispanic Unity,
Haitian-American, German-American, Italian-American Clubs, etc.)
Organize cultural sharing through ESOL Parent Advisory Council, international fairs,
parents as cultural representatives, business liaisons, multicultural guest speakers, ethnic
folk music presentation, and multicultural students as resources for academic classes. For
samples of varied holiday activities see Multicultural Calendar.
G. Alternative Assessment Instruments
G1.
Interviews
Interviews are an excellent strategy to allow the student to master the competencies
necessary to gather information about a particular topic and report on it following
80
predetermined format. This is most effective when students are guided to pre-plan a set
of questions, use those questions to create a format for the interview and finalize it with a
presentation.
G2-3, 5-10.
Portfolios, observations, interviews, checklists, etc. are used to accurately assess the
progress of LEP students when they may not be ready to complete traditional reading and
writing evaluations that require reading on grade level. They should be ongoing utilizing
a variety of strategies and procedures to collect student work. (Also called authentic
assessment).
G4.
Close Procedures
This is an open-ended strategy in which a selected work or phrase is eliminated from a
sentence or paragraph, while the student is asked to complete the missing word. The
Cloze concept has also been applied to second language oral development, in which the
instructor proposes a series of incomplete oral statements, and the student “fills in” the
missing information.
G11. Portfolios
Portfolios use work samples chosen with specific criteria to evaluate student progress.
Students compare their current effort to their previous work rather than to the work of
other students.
81
REFERENCES
Allen, B. A., & Butler, L. (1996). The effects of music and movement opportunity on the
analogical reasoning performance of African American and white school children:
A preliminary study. Journal of Black Psychology, 22 (3), 316-328.
Alumran, J. (2008). Learning styles in relation to gender, field of study, and academic
achievement for Bahraini University students. Individual Differences Research,
6 (4), 303-316.
Bénabou, R., Tirole, J. (2002). Self-confidence and personal motivation. The Quarterly
Journal of Economics, 117 (3), 871-915.
Center for Innovation in Education Mathematics Their Way. (2004). Retrieved April 12,
2010, from www.center.edu/pub/docs/MTWCourseSyllabus.pdf
DeBoth, C., & Dominowski, R. (1978). Individual differences in learning: Visual verses
auditory presentation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70 (4), 498-503.
Felder, R. & Henriques, E. (1995). Learning and teaching styles in foreign and second
language education. Foreign Language Annuals, 28 (1), 21-31.
Felder, R.M., & Silverman, L.K. (1988). Learning styles and teaching styles in
engineering education. Engineering Education, 78 (7), 674-681.
Freedburg, L., & Cabrera, H. (2009, November 19). Despite state subsidies, class sizes
begin to rise again in California schools. Center for Investigative Reporting.
Retrieved March 10, 2010 from
<http://www.centerforinvestigativereporting.org/articles/despitestatesubsidiesclas
Ssizesbegintoriseagainincaliforniaschools>
82
Garcia, E. (1991). The Education of linguistically and culturally diverse students:
Effective instructional practices. National Center for Research on Cultural
Diversity and Second Language Learning, 1-10.
Greenspan, A. (1989). Remarks at a convocation at Wake Forest University. Federal
Reserve Archival System for Economic Research, 1-12.
Honigsfeld, A. (2009). ELL programs: Not ‘one size fits all.’ Kappa Delta Pi Record, 45
(4), 166-171.
Jung, C.G. (1971). Psychological Types. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kamps, D., Abbott, M., Greenwood, C., Wills, H., Longstaff, J., Culpepper, M., et al.
(2007). Use of evidence-based, small-group reading instruction for English
Language Learners in elementary grades: Secondary-tier intervention. Learning
Disability Quarterly, 30, 153-168
Manyak, P., & Bauer, E. (2009). English vocabulary instruction for English learners. The
Reading Teacher, 63(2), 174-176. DOI: 10.1598/RT.63.2.11
Mosteller, F. (1995). The Tennessee study of class size in the early school grades. The
Future of Children, 5 (2), 113-127.
Performance Learning Systems. (2006). Retrieved April 14, 2010, from
http://www.plsweb.com/Products-Resources/Newsletter/NewsletterArchives/October-2006
Plimpton, C., & Sweeney, V. (2003). Physical Education for the Elementary Classroom
Teachers (2nd Edition). Ann Arbor, Michigan: Huron Valley Publishing, Inc.
Reiss, J. (2001). ESOL strategies for teaching content: Facilitating instruction for
English language learners. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall
Inc.
83
Sprenger, M. (2003). Differentiation through learning styles and memory. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Stipek, D., Givvin, K., Salmon, J., & MacGyvers, V. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs and
practices related to mathematics instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17
(2), 213-226.
Tewksbury, B., & Macdonald, H. (2005). Teaching strategies. On the Cutting Edge.
Retrieved April 14, 2010, from
http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/coursedesign/tutorial/strategies.html
Thomas, H., Cox, R., & Kojima, T. (2003). Relating preferred learning style to student
achievement: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Teachers of English
to Speakers of Other Languages. Vancouver, BC [Canada]: ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. 445 513.
Vacca, R., & Vacca, J. (2008). Content area reading (Rev. Ninth edition). Boston,
Massachusetts: Pearson Education Inc.
Williams, J. (2001). Classroom conversations: Opportunities to learn for ESL students in
mainstream classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 54 (8), 750-757.
Willner, L., Rivera, C., & Acosta, B. (2009). Ensuring accommodations used in content
assessments are responsive to English-language learners. The Reading Teacher,
62 (8), 696-698. DOI: 10.1598/RT.62.8.8.
Winningham, B. (1991). Silent voices: How language minority students learn in the
content areas. Quarterly of the National Writing Project and the Center for the
Study of Writing and Literacy, 12 (1), 4-9.
84
REFERENCES
Allen, B. A., & Butler, L. (1996). The effects of music and movement opportunity on the
analogical reasoning performance of African American and white school children:
A preliminary study. Journal of Black Psychology, 22 (3), 316-328.
Alumran, J. (2008). Learning styles in relation to gender, field of study, and academic
achievement for Bahraini University students. Individual Differences Research,
6 (4), 303-316.
Bénabou, R., Tirole, J. (2002). Self-confidence and personal motivation. The Quarterly
Journal of Economics, 117 (3), 871-915.
Center for Innovation in Education Mathematics Their Way. (2004). Retrieved April 12,
2010, from www.center.edu/pub/docs/MTWCourseSyllabus.pdf
DeBoth, C., & Dominowski, R. (1978). Individual differences in learning: Visual verses
auditory presentation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70 (4), 498-503.
Felder, R. & Henriques, E. (1995). Learning and teaching styles in foreign and second
language education. Foreign Language Annuals, 28 (1), 21-31.
Felder, R.M., & Silverman, L.K. (1988). Learning styles and teaching styles in
engineering education. Engineering Education, 78 (7), 674-681.
Freedburg, L., & Cabrera, H. (2009, November 19). Despite state subsidies, class sizes
begin to rise again in Calafornia schools. Center for Investigative Reporting.
Retreived March 10, 2010 from
<http://www.centerforinvestigativereporting.org/articles/despitestatesubsidiesclas
85
Ssizesbegintoriseagainincaliforniaschools>
Garcia, E. (1991). The Education of linguistically and culturally diverse students:
Effective instructional practices. National Center for Research on Cultural
Diversity and Second Language Learning, 1-10.
Greenspan, A. (1989). Remarks at a convocation at Wake Forest University. Federal
Reserve Archival System for Economic Research, 1-12.
Jung, C.G. (1971). Psychological Types. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kamps, D., Abbott, M., Greenwood, C., Wills, H., Longstaff, J., Culpepper, M., et al.
(2007). Use of evidence-based, small-group reading instruction for English
Language Learners in elementary gards: Secondary-tier intervention. Learning
Disability Quarterly, 30, 153-168
Manyak, P., & Bauer, E. (2009). English vocabulary instruction for English learners. The
Reading Teacher, 63(2), 174-176. DOI: 10.1598/RT.63.2.11
Mosteller, F. (1995). The Tennessee study of class size in the early school grades. The
Future of Children, 5 (2), 113-127.
Performance Learning Systems. (2006). Retreived April 14, 2010, from
http://www.plsweb.com/Products-Resources/Newsletter/NewsletterArchives/October-2006
Plimpton, C., & Sweeney, V. (2003). Physical Education for the Elementary Classroom
Teachers (2nd Edition). Ann Arbor, Michigan: Huron Valley Publishing, Inc.
Reiss, J. (2001). ESOL strategies for teaching content: Facilitating instruction for
English language learners. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall
86
Inc.
Sprenger, M. (2003). Differentiation through learning styles and memory. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Stipek, D., Givvin, K., Salmon, J., & MacGyvers, V. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs and
practices related to mathematics instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17
(2), 213-226.
Tewksbury, B., & Macdonald, H. (2005). Teaching strategies. On the Cutting Edge.
Retrieved April 14, 2010, from
http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/coursedesign/tutorial/strategies.html
Thomas, H., Cox, R., & Kojima, T. (2003). Relating preferred learning style to student
achievement: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Teachers of English
to Speakers of Other Languages. Vancouver, BC [Canada]: ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. 445 513.
Vacca, R., & Vacca, J. (2008). Content area reading (Rev. Ninth edition). Boston,
Massachusetts: Pearson Education Inc.
Williams, J. (2001). Classroom conversations: Opportunities to learn for ESL students in
mainstream classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 54 (8), 750-757.
Willner, L., Rivera, C., & Acosta, B. (2009). Ensuring accommodations used in content
assessments are responsive to English-language learners. The Reading Teacher,
62 (8), 696-698. DOI: 10.1598/RT.62.8.8.
Winningham, B. (1991). Silent voices: How language minority students learn in the
content areas. Quarterly of the National Writing Project and the Center for the
87
Study of Writing and Literacy, 12 (1), 4-9
88
89