, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
PGCE English, King’s College London
PL
E
S3P Tutor: Dr
AM
School Experience Report: An Investigation
into EAL Provision at a School in
EX
How do different teachers provide support
for EAL pupils with written tasks?
7962 Words
Submitted April 10th 2015
Page 1 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Contents

Introduction
3

Literature Review
4

Government and School Policy
12

Methodology
14

Analysis and Evaluation of Data
16
o Science: Interview and Lesson Observation
19
o History: Interview and Lesson Observation
23
Conclusions

Bibliography

Appendices
AM

PL
E
o EAL Specialist: Interview
29
32
34
o Appendix 2: EAL Specialist’s Interview Schedule
37
o Appendix 3: History & Science Teachers’ Interview Schedule
37
o Appendix 4: Blank Observation Schedule
38
EX
o Appendix 1: School X’s EAL Policy
o Appendix 5: Letter for Request of Permission
39
o Appendix 6: EAL Specialist’s Interview Transcript
40
o Appendix 7: Science Teacher’s Interview Transcript
42
o Appendix 8: Science Lesson Observation Schedule
44
o Appendix 9: History Teacher’s Interview Transcript
45
o Appendix 10: History Lesson Observation Schedule
47
o Appendix 11: Science Lesson Support Sheet
48
Page 2 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Introduction
This School Experience Report will investigate and evaluate the efficacy of the
EAL provision in a school in the London borough of
. The school, which shall
hereafter be referred to as School X, is a secondary academy for girls with a
coeducational sixth form. With almost a quarter of the KS3 and KS4 pupil population
having been identified as EAL pupils with a wide range of language acquisition, EAL
E
provision is considered of vital importance by the school. EAL provision is managed
by a team of three members of staff including an English curriculum teacher who leads
PL
the team as an EAL specialist. All three members of the team are CELTA1 qualified.
With GCSE assessment predominantly based upon pupils’ writing in
examinations, development of writing skills is essential for the academic success of
AM
all pupils and, therefore, EAL pupils require extra support with their writing. As
Overington states, “learners of EAL have, on average, lower levels of attainment than
pupils whose first language is English” (Overington, 2012, p.2), thus development of
EAL pupils’ writing skills is often a high priority for schools in order to close the
EX
attainment gap.
This report will focus upon the support KS3 EAL pupils receive from School X
in the development of their academic writing skills. After consideration of the existing
literature on this area of EAL provision and examination of statutory and school policy
for EAL provision, an investigation will be undertaken that seeks to relate and compare
policy with classroom practice. The question of how government and school policy
translate into teaching practice will be addressed through an investigation into the
teaching of EAL pupils by history and science teachers. Further to a scrutiny of the
1
Certificate in English Language Teaching to Adults – an initial credential for teachers of English as a foreign
language.
Page 3 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
correlation of policies and classroom practice, the ways in which these teachers
provide support and how that support leads to progress in the development of EAL
pupils’ writing skills will inform the evaluation of the efficacy of classroom support for
EAL learners in this specific area.
Literature Review
E
In the UK, there are currently “increasing demands that schools prepare [EAL]
students for the expectations of work and life in a highly literate and technologically
PL
oriented society” (Williams, 2010, p.46) and the development of EAL pupils’ writing
skills is a key component of this preparation. As well as the obvious benefits for pupils,
what they write in examinations and their resulting grades reflects on each school’s
AM
success in the league tables. Thus, in schools that have a high number of EAL pupils,
such as School X, the raising of EAL pupils’ writing skills is clearly important as well
as beneficial for both the pupils and the school.
EX
Writing, however, as the literature repeatedly points out, is a difficult skill to
develop – more so than the other three domains of listening, speaking and reading.
Syrja, for example, identifies the high level of intellectual capacity required by writing:
To write about something is to comprehend it, and so writing is a
cognitively demanding skills that requires high level of understanding and
knowledge (Syrja, 2011, p.103).
Harris and Leung also allude to the challenging nature of writing through
commenting on the complexity of the writing process:
Page 4 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Some of the knowledge and skills involved in the process of writing
are sometimes ‘hidden’, so to speak; only the outcomes are visible (Harris
& Leung, 2011, p.256).
Thus, EAL pupils’ (and, indeed, all pupils’) ability to write effectively not only
requires a high level of cognitive input – reflection on the subject of their writing, on
their understanding of that subject and on how they are expressing that understanding
E
through their writing – but also a utilization of a range of technical skills and knowledge
such as understanding of spelling, grammar, voice and vocabulary.
PL
The complex, and therefore difficult nature of writing, as highlighted by Harris
and Leung, also aids in explaining why writing “is often one of the last domains to fully
develop” (Syrja, 2011, p.173) with the receptive domains of listening and reading
AM
developing first. Owing to this typical trend of development, EAL pupils at lower levels
of language acquisition are likely to find writing in lessons far more difficult than, for
example, discussion based tasks. Consequently, teachers may also need to provide
more support for EAL pupils when setting written tasks than speaking tasks.
EX
Carson et al. add further insight into the challenge of writing for EAL pupils. The
results of their study of the transfer of reading and writing skills from Japanese and
Chinese students’ first language to English suggest that the acquisition of writing skills
poses a greater challenge than reading skills:
The weak correlation between L1 [first language] and L2 [English]
writing for the Japanese, and the lack of correlation of L1 and L2 writing for
the Chinese… suggests that the extent to which L1 writing may be exploited
or used in L2 writing pedagogy may be limited to lower L2 proficiency levels
and/or certain L1 language groups. Hence, the writing teacher may rely
Page 5 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
even less than the reading teacher on the transfer of L1 writing skills to L2
writing (Carson et al., 1990, pp.260-261).
The findings suggest that pupils who are strong readers in their first language
will naturally develop strong reading skills in English, and, therefore conclude that
reading skills are transferable between languages. The same principle, however, is
not true for writing skills – confident and accomplished writers in their first language
E
will not necessarily develop the same level of confidence and accomplishment in
English. The reason for this lack of transferability in writing skills may be intrinsically
PL
linked to the disparity between different cultures’ conventions of writing.
The concept of writing as a cultural phenomenon is identified by Carbone who
claims that “the cultural practices, understanding of academic expectation, and
AM
experiences necessary for academic writing proficiency that mainstream students
have acquired and internalized are often masked and embedded in English
instructional discourses with which they are familiar from years of schooling” (Carbone,
2012, p.137). Essentially, the kind of writing that UK schools require EAL pupils to do
EX
is idiosyncratic to the UK and may differ greatly to the kind of writing that is normal, or
perhaps traditional, in other parts of the world – the kind of writing that a pupil has
been previously schooled to produce. Edelsky echoes Carbone while also considering
how the disparity of such cultural practices in writing may impact and complicate the
teaching of classes with EAL pupils from a range of cultural backgrounds: “Teachers…
have to face different speech communities’ varying written language norms” (Edelsky,
1989, p.100).
An alternative implication of the impact of the cultural practices of education by
which EAL pupils may have been conditioned is offered by Williams: “As low literacy
Page 6 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
ESL students have usually come from contexts where literacy is not widespread…
they need assistance in understanding the nature of a highly literate… culture”
(Williams, 2010, p. 51). Williams highlights that pupils from certain parts of the world
may not have been educated to understand the concept of writing differently to first
language English pupils in the UK, but rather those pupils may have received little or
no education in their home country. It is likely, therefore, that such pupils, especially if
entering the UK at KS3 or KS4 level, will struggle with literacy and, indeed, writing at
E
a very basic level due to the absence of literary practices in their previous cultural
PL
landscape.
Having considered why the domain of writing is challenging for EAL pupils, lets
us now consider how it is challenging. While EAL pupils have a varied range of
AM
individual needs in the development of their writing skills, scholars regularly identify
two areas of academic writing that regularly create difficulties, the first of which is voice.
Syrja expounds that “developing voice in writing is one of the most difficult parts
of writing” (Syrja, 2011, p.178). In addition to English subject lessons where pupils
EX
may be required to write in a voice that is not their own – a challenging demand for
EAL pupils who may find simply writing from their own perspective difficult – in other
subjects, such as science or geography, as Cameron (2003, p.20) suggests, “pupils
are expected to write as apprentices in the subject discipline” and “expected to take
an academic stance towards knowledge in that discipline” (Cameron, 2003, p.20).
Conventionally, academic writing of this nature is expected to adopt a formal tone.
Thus, commonly, EAL pupils “have problems in finding the appropriate voice”
(Cameron, 2003, p.18) as such a voice is significantly different to the way in which
they, and others, speak – a point which will be returned to later.
Page 7 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
The second area of academic writing with which EAL pupils commonly struggle
is vocabulary. In a survey conducted by Leki and Carson, EAL students responded to
questions designed to investigate students’ perceptions of the efficacy of specialised
writing classes, preparing them for the demands of academic writing at university. One
of the most significant findings was that “respondents mentioned vocabulary more
frequently than they did any other single feature of their writing needs” (Leki & Carson,
1994, p.90). While, the results of this particular survey suggest that EAL pupils
E
consider vocabulary an area of academic writing that poses the greatest challenge,
elsewhere, scholars make similar observations. Syrja, for example, asserts that one
PL
of the major difficulties of academic writing is that it “requires high levels of academic
and content vocabulary” (Syrja, 2011, p.103).
AM
While Syrja identifies the vocabulary used in academic writing as often being
subject-specific, and therefore, vocabulary that may be unfamiliar to EAL pupils, Harris
and Leung develop the reasons behind pupils’ difficulties in acquiring this vocabulary
further:
EX
A great deal of the academic use of written English in school is
different from classroom spoken English in a number of ways: some of the
differences are related to vocabulary and grammatical choice… (Harris &
Leung, 2011, p.257).
Harris and Leung point towards the contrast between spoken and written
English as an explanation for EAL pupils vocabulary issues. Arguably, they not only
cite the problem EAL pupils have in acquiring subject-specific vocabulary due to its
inevitably infrequent use in common social interaction, but also cite a further problem
EAL pupils have in acquiring vocabulary that is not subject-specific but academic in
Page 8 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
nature – words and phrases that are common to writing in all fields of academia that
are rarely employed in spoken English: words such as ‘therefore’ and ‘whereas’ which
are commonly used in academic writing, regardless of the subject area, are seldom
used in spoken English and commonly replaced with ‘and so’ and ‘while’.
EAL pupils’ acquisition of language that is academic in nature, whether
identifying it as sophisticated vocabulary or grammar or as language that engenders
E
an appropriately formal voice, is an area of EAL research that has received a great
deal of attention. Central to this area of research are the theories of Cummins (2008)
PL
whose concepts of BICS – “Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills” – and CALP –
“Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency” – assist in explaining the difficulties EAL
pupils face when required to produce academic writing:
AM
BICS refers to conversational fluency in a language while CALP
refers to students’ ability to understand and express, in both oral and written
modes, concepts and ideas that are relevant to success in school.
(Cummins, 2008, p.71)
EX
With these terms, Cummins, therefore, differentiates between two kinds of
language ability – “conversational fluency” and “academic language proficiency”
(Cummins, 2008, p.71). According to Cummins (2008, p.71), all pupils’ conversational
fluency naturally develops before their academic language proficiency which
education seeks to nurture and cultivate. The problem for EAL pupils, especially for
those whose conversational fluency is limited, is that they are unable to develop their
academic language for a significant period of time until they have raised their
conversational fluency to a level at which their academic language, being more
Page 9 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
linguistically demanding, can realistically become a focus for them as well as their
teachers.
As previously stated, due to the demands for academic language proficiency
placed upon pupils in written examinations, the development of EAL pupils’ academic
language is of great importance for schools, thus the necessity to raise the proficiency
of EAL pupils’ academic language is commonly identified in the literature not only by
scholars but also by government bodies. For example, in her research for Ofsted,
E
Cameron concluded that the EAL focus group she was investigating needed “support
PL
in developing awareness of degrees of formality” (Cameron, 2003, p.18). Elsewhere,
Ofsted cites “teaching that assists EAL learners to internalise and apply new subjectspecific language” (Ofsted, 2001, p.11) as an important feature of the teaching of EAL
AM
pupils. Literature from the DfE also identifies the pressing need to improve EAL pupils’
academic language proficiency when commenting that “many EAL learners have
abilities which they are unable to exploit because they lack fluency in the appropriate
academic language” (DfE, 2011, p.2).
EX
Having determined that there is a need to develop EAL pupils’ academic
language proficiency, the question of how this may be achieved is a major point of
discussion in the literature – how can teachers initiate writing that transcends the
linguistic realm of conversational fluency into written responses which conform to
conventions that are typified by academic language?
Two categories of written tasks are often cited by the literature – content-based
writing and personal-response writing. Both types of writing are considered by scholars
as implemental in developing EAL pupils’ writing skills at different stages of language
acquisition. Content-based writing is writing that is specific to a subject area and
Page 10 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
therefore, academic in nature. As “research has revealed that children learn to write
by writing” (Syrja, 2011, p.173), content-based writing provides EAL pupils with
opportunities to focus on their academic writing, commonly with differentiated support
and scaffolding from the class teacher who may offer word banks, models, writing
frames or sentence starters.
In addition to its academic demands, content-based writing poses further
E
difficulties for EAL pupils due to variations in the requirements of academic styles of
writing across the curriculum. Although academic writing is often characterised by
PL
common features such as the use of the passive voice – “a valuable tool in the arsenal
of good writers” (Kameen, 1983, p.169) – different subjects require pupils to write in
different ways. Christie and Derewianka state, for example, that “grammar is deployed
AM
rather differently in writing for science from the ways it is used in the other subjects”
(Christie & Derewianka, 2008, p.211).
The alternative teaching approach of providing personal-response written tasks
is perhaps more suited to EAL pupils at a lower level of language acquisition. Such
EX
tasks require pupils to respond from a personal perspective. Syrja, for example,
advocates the “implementation of nonfiction writing across the curriculum” (Syrja, 2011,
p.174) as way of engendering written responses to subject topics. The theory is that
personal-response writing acts as a bridge to academic writing – pupils gain
confidence in writing about every subject, using subject-specific vocabulary and
expressing their understanding of specific topics, albeit not in an overtly academic form
of writing. Carbone similarly expounds the virtues of setting personal-response writing
tasks as a method of “mediat[ing] between everyday literacies and the cognitively
demanding task of academic writing” (Carbone, 2012, p.147).
Page 11 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
In conclusion, writing is the most difficult of the four domains for EAL pupils for
a wide range of reasons: it involves a combination of cognitive and technical skills; it
is typically the last domain to fully develop; there is a lack of transferability of writing
skills from pupils’ first language to English; and, depending on their background, pupils
may lack understanding of the cultural conventions of writing in the UK. While the
consistent employment of an appropriate voice and breadth of vocabulary are common
problems for EAL pupils in their writing, the main overarching issue is the development
E
of a style of writing that is suitably academic as opposed to one that is merely
communicative. Approaches to raising the academic style of EAL pupils’ writing often
PL
fall into one of two categories – content-based and personal-response written tasks –
AM
the latter of which is commonly employed in earlier stages of language acquisition.
Government and School Policy
The 2014 National Curriculum framework for KS1 to KS4 outlines policies for
inclusion and states that “teachers must… take account of the needs of pupils whose
EX
first language is not English” (DfE, 2014, para. 4.5) and that teachers “should provide
the support pupils need to take part in all subjects” (DfE, 2014, para. 4.6). As this
guidance places an emphasis on teachers catering to EAL pupils’ needs,
differentiation is therefore essential for teachers in conforming to the guidance.
Furthermore, the above guidance indicates that schools should be taking an inclusive
approach with EAL pupils attending lessons in all subjects. Schools are therefore to
avoid withdrawal methods that provide language development tuition in specially
designed sessions. As a result, EAL support is mandatory for teachers of all subjects.
Page 12 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
The necessity for teachers to both differentiate and take a shared responsibility
for EAL support is reiterated by the Teachers’ Standards which state that as well as
having “a clear understanding of the needs of… those with English as an additional
language” (DfE, 2013, p.12), teachers must “know when and how to differentiate
appropriately” (DfE, 2013, p.11) and “take responsibility for promoting high standards
of literacy, articulacy and the correct use of standard English, whatever the teacher’s
E
specialist subject” (DfE, 2013, p.11).
In relation to the purposes of this SER, School X, if complying with government
PL
policy, should be providing differentiated support for written tasks across the
curriculum. Such support should therefore be consistently identifiable components of
teaching in the history and science departments.
AM
School X’s EAL policy2 claims that “every teacher is a teacher of EAL” (School
X, EAL Policy, 2014, p.1), thus complying with statutory guidance relating to crosscurricular support as well as Teachers’ Standard 5, making EAL support a shared
responsibility of all its teachers. The statutory guidance to differentiate is similarly
EX
adhered to through seeking to “identify the personalised learning needs of each
learner” (School X, EAL Policy, 2014, p.1).
Following a summary of its aims, the policy lists four stages of language
acquisition development and describes the type of support School X commonly
provides for pupils at each stage. Perhaps in divergence to the statutory guidance,
provision at stages 1 to 3 may involve varying degrees of “withdrawal support” (School
X, EAL Policy, 2014, p.2). While the 2014 statutory guidance intends to enforce
emersion and prevent schools from the practice of withdrawal, perhaps School X’s
2
Appendix 1
Page 13 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
policy falls more in line with prior DfE guidance which stated that “schools may also
set up small group withdrawal classes to provide more focused support but schools
should also include [pupils] in mainstream education as quickly as possible”
(Overington, 2012, p.1). Whether the 2014 statutory guidance supersedes this 2012
guidance, or is simply less detailed is unclear. Nevertheless, School X appears to be
operating with reference to the 2012 guidance.
Finally, provision in stage 4 includes support “with a range of literacy strategies
E
to ensure that they develop their academic specific language skills” (School X, EAL
PL
Policy, 2014, p.2). As one of this report’s investigative focal points being the methods
teachers employ in raising the academic style of EAL pupils’ writing, the identification
of such strategies will be sought and their efficacy in developing academic writing
AM
evaluated. However, the question of why any mention of the development of
“academic specific language skills” (School X, EAL Policy, 2014, p.2) is absent from
the provision listed under the first three stages of language acquisition development
EX
in the policy will also be addressed.
Methodology
The following questions will inform the investigation into the EAL provision at
School X for supporting the development of pupils’ writing skills:

What kinds of support are provided for EAL pupils when written tasks are set?

How is the support differentiated?

How does the support provided address pupils’ need to develop an academic
style of writing?
Page 14 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015

What are teachers’ perceptions regarding the efficacy of the support they
provide in furthering pupils’ progress in writing?
The data to be analysed in order to answer these questions, as well as to
consider the extent to which classroom practice, School X’s policy and statutory
guidance relate to each other, will be collected through the following methods:
An interview with School X’s EAL specialist.

Interviews with a history and a science teacher.

Classroom observations of those teachers’ lessons.
PL
E

The interview with the EAL specialist will determine the practices the school
perceives to be in use in order to raise EAL pupils’ academic writing abilities. The
subsequent two semi-structured interviews will be conducted using an interview
AM
schedule. The history and the science teacher will be interviewed individually in order
to gather data regarding the provision they provide in their lessons and how they
perceive that provision maps onto EAL pupils’ progress in expressing their
understanding of the respective subject through written tasks. Open-ended and neutral
EX
questions will be devised so that participants are able to “contribute as much detailed
information as they desire” (Turner, 2010, p.756). By interviewing teachers from
different subjects, using identical interview schedules, the range of responses will be
“rich and thick with qualitative data” (Turner, 2010, p.756). For ethical purposes,
participants will be provided with the interview questions prior to the interview and have
the right to withdraw their participation after the interview has taken place.
Providing that participants choose not to withdraw from the study, two lessons
will be observed – one conducted by each of the interviewees. This will provide
opportunities not only to collect qualitative data regarding the support each teacher
Page 15 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
provides for written tasks, but also qualitative data that can be related to the
participants’ responses in the interviews. In order to collect a wide range of data, EAL
pupils attending these four lessons will ideally cover the four stages of language
acquisition. The provision of support for EAL writing development is the focal point of
the observations, but in order to gather data on any events pertinent to the enquiry,
the gathering of data will be undertaken in a semi-structured style. An observation
schedule will therefore be used but will not be restrictive in the kinds of data that may
E
be collected. For ethical purposes, permission to observe lessons will be sought from
focus of the observation.
PL
each teacher respectively at least 3 days in advance, informing each teacher of the
AM
Analysis and Evaluation of Data
EAL Specialist: Interview3
The interview with the EAL specialist revealed School X’s perception of how it
EX
seeks to support the development of EAL pupils’ writing skills. EAL pupils are
categorised by School X into four stages – stage 1 being new arrivals with extremely
limited English language abilities, and stage 4 being the most proficient EAL pupils.
The specialist soon identified the notion that EAL pupils struggle with writing in an
academic style, thus confirming Cummins’ theory that the demand to progress from
“conversational fluency to academic language proficiency” (Cummins, 2008, p.71)
poses many difficulties for pupils:
3
See Appendix 6
Page 16 of 48
PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
…they don’t always have the academic language so there are
literacy issues there. (EAL Specialist)
When asked how support is differentiated the specialist provided a general
overview of differentiation for the lower and higher levels – additional scaffolding of
tasks is an integral component of support for level 2, and modelling of tasks is vital for
levels 3 & 4 as well as reinforcement of key words: “They always need those key
words; they need a lot of modelling… Those who are at stage 2… need more
E
scaffolding.” (EAL Specialist)
PL
However, the kind of differentiation the specialist believes to be employed,
especially in regards to stage 1 learners, is further enhanced by differentiated learning
outcomes where EAL learners will be moving towards outcomes which are different to
AM
the rest of the class:
It all depends on ‘what is the outcome for that student for that
lesson?’ So it is really more than ‘what is the outcome for the whole
EX
class?’ (EAL Specialist)
Such differentiation, being indicative of provision that is designed to aid the
learning of individuals rather than categories of pupils correlates with school policy
which states that School X aims “to identify the personalised learning need of each
learner” (School X, EAL Policy, 2014, p.1).
A discrepancy between the school’s policy and the specialist’s understanding
of the needs of stage 3 learners became evident in her claim that “stage 3 [and] stage
4 [learners] don’t always have the academic language” (EAL Specialist) so require
support for academic written tasks. While she cited the necessity to support this area
of language development as an important part of provision for stage 3 EAL learners,
Page 17 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
the school policy only refers to strategies that “develop their academic specific
language skills” (School X, EAL Policy, 2014, p.2) in regards to the support the school
provides for stage 4 learners.
This suggests the possibility of a certain degree of confusion both for the
specialist and at policy level over at which stage teachers should focus on raising the
level of pupils’ academic language proficiency. Such confusion is perhaps evident in
Interviewer:
PL
E
the uncertainty with which the specialist begins her answer to the following question:
How do EAL pupils at different levels of language acquisition
respond to tasks that require them to write in an academic style?
Well, I suppose we’re talking stage 3 and 4 there… and 2.
AM
EAL Specialist:
Here, whilst a speculative conclusion, the brief pause before the specialist’s
EX
acknowledgment that academic writing is required in lessons at lower levels of
language acquisition than stage 3 may indicate that she had not fully considered the
urgency for all EAL learners to develop their academic language. As Syrja points out,
“rather than hold off on writing until they have achieved a high level of language
acquisition, we should be providing opportunities for writing daily” (Syrja, 2011, p.173).
Page 18 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Science: Interview4 and Observation5
The science teacher’s approach to providing support for EAL pupils’
development of writing skills was revealed through an interview and lesson
observation. Interestingly, the view that underpinned his approach was that the writing
of EAL and non-EAL pupils is often indistinguishable, particularly with regards to stage
4 EAL pupils:
E
They might have some problems with not knowing a word or
writing in the wrong tense but generally, especially for level 4 EALs,
PL
their writing isn’t noticeably different. It’s pretty hard to tell who is and
isn’t an EAL just from their writing. (Science Teacher)
While he made it clear that EAL learners require reinforcement of subject-
AM
specific vocabulary he also believed that the same was required for all learners.
Arguably, the teacher considered stage 4 EAL pupils and non-EAL pupils to be at a
relatively similar developmental stage linguistically, and therefore, all require an
approach that supports this language development. The teacher did not, therefore,
EX
believe stage 4 EAL pupils’ development of academic language required particular
support, at least at a differentiated level to non-EAL pupils.
Such claims are contrary to the results of Cameron’s research who found that
“the receptive vocabulary of EAL students who have been educated through English
for 10 years [have] gaps in the most frequent words and serious problems at the 5K
level” (Cameron, 2002, p.167). For Cameron, there is an observable difference
4
5
See Appendix 7 for Transcript
See appendix 8 for Observation Schedule
Page 19 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
between stage 4 EAL pupils’ language abilities and non-EAL pupils that requires
addressing.
When asked how he provided support for EAL pupils’ written tasks the teacher
stated that rather than providing support for written tasks, he aimed to make the
learning prior to written tasks more accessible: “I find it more productive to make sure
they can access the lesson – that leads on to them being able to do the writing for the
E
lesson” (Science Teacher). The implication is that the teacher perceived an
overlapping of differentiation for EAL and lower ability non-EAL learners.
PL
The conflation of support for these two sets of pupils was evident in the
observed lesson. The class was set the task of writing definitions for different
substances found in food. The substances included carbohydrates and minerals –
AM
subject-specific vocabulary. The lesson was differentiated through the provision of a
support sheet6 which included definitions that pupils who were struggling could match
to the substances rather than writing their own definitions. Significantly, the support
sheet was offered to all pupils in the class. The class’ two EAL pupils and some non-
EX
EAL learners chose to use the support sheet. The lesson was therefore differentiated
for two groups of pupils – higher and lower ability – with the EAL pupils falling into the
latter category.
The success of both EAL learners differed greatly with this task. The stage 4
pupil attempted the task but made some errors and even though she had taken the
support sheet, she chose not to use it. The stage 3 pupil, although having taken the
support sheet, did not write anything during the allocated time but copied the answers
during feedback. It is important to highlight that there could be various reasons why
6
See Appendix 11
Page 20 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
the stage 3 pupil did not attempt the task – behaviour, fatigue or language ability; it
cannot be assumed that her disengagement stemmed from her language deficiency.
The nature of the support provided during this particular lesson and the science
teacher’s responses indicate that the teacher did not consider himself as a science
teacher to be particularly responsible for raising the standard of pupils’ academic
writing skills:
E
But how much the writing we do in science can help EALs’
overall writing is… well, there are so many kinds of writing and the
PL
way we get them to write in science is probably quite different to other
subjects. (Science Teacher)
The science teacher therefore considered the disparity between writing in his
AM
subject and other subjects to be such that focused support for raising the standard of
pupils’ writing would have little relevance to EAL pupils’ general literacy skills.
As Christie and Derewianka claim, “grammar is deployed rather differently in
EX
writing for science from the ways it is used in the other subjects” (Christie &
Derewianka, 2008, p.211) which supports the science teacher’s perception of writing
in his subject being different to the kinds of writing required from pupils elsewhere, but
only in terms of grammar. As Syrja and Cameron both remind us, successful academic
writing involves more than grammatical competency. For example, “developing voice
in writing is one of the most difficult parts of writing” (Syrja, 2011, p.178).
In terms of how the science teacher’s practice relates to school policy, as has
been discussed, there was evidence that the teacher did not consider the individual
language needs of the two EAL pupils in his class but instead sought to provide
support for a homogenized group of pupils who required learning support for a range
Page 21 of 48
PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
of reasons. The policy states that School X aims “to identify the personalised learning
needs of each learner” (School X, EAL Policy, 2014, p.1) but the observed lesson
provided no evidence that the science teacher’s support catered for such personalised
learning needs. Furthermore, the observed lesson presented no evidence that the
science teacher was ensuring that the stage 4 EAL pupil was developing her academic
specific language skills, as the policy suggests.
E
However, while the teacher homogenised EAL and lower ability pupils into a
single group in the lesson, arguably, his practice of marking enabled him to adhere to
PL
school policy and to statutory guidance which states that “teachers must… take
account of the needs of pupils whose first language is not English” (DfE, 2014, para.
4.5). During the interview the science teacher highlighted his employment of a strategy
AM
whereby he marks written work and “get[s] them to respond and rewrite what they’ve
done after [he has] marked it” in green pens (Science Teacher).
It could be concluded that the science teacher does therefore identify and
provide support for the “personalised learning needs of each learner” (School X, EAL
EX
Policy, 2014, p.1) as the school policy claims. Indeed, there was evidence of rewriting
in green pen being a routine practice for EAL pupils in the observed lesson – the stage
4 EAL pupil, having become aware of her errors, began to erase her mistakes and
correct her answers using green pen. Certainly, what was observed differs from
responding to the teacher’s marking but her independent use of this method of selfcorrection implies familiarity with such a strategy.
Interestingly, although the science teacher appeared to dismiss the idea that
he was responsible for raising the writing skills of EAL learners in the interview, through
his method of marking, he was actually providing pupils with the individualized support
Page 22 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
they required. His assertion that “it is more important to help [EAL pupils] access the
lesson, rather than specifically with their writing” (Science Teacher) may reflect his
provision of support during lessons but his marking strategy suggests that he was
providing personalised support for the development of pupils’ academic writing skills
and following both school policy and statutory guidance. Possibly the science
teacher’s dismissal of the idea of him having any significant impact on the
PL
potential benefits of his marking strategy.
E
development of EAL pupils’ academic writing suggests he was unaware of the
History: Interview7 and Observation8
The interview with School X’s history teacher revealed her belief that support
AM
specifically targeting the development of EAL pupils’ writing skills is an integral
component of her differentiated classroom practice. The history teacher placed more
emphasis than the science teacher on the importance of raising EAL pupils’ writing
abilities. Arguably, her subject requires pupils to read and write more than in science
EX
lessons which may explain why the science teacher placed more emphasis on making
the content of lessons accessible.
During the interview, the history teacher described EAL pupils’ need to develop
both their understanding and application of grammar and, significantly, their academic
style of writing. The teacher therefore concurs with the DfE’s statement that “many
EAL learners have abilities which they are unable to exploit because they lack fluency
7
8
See Appendix 9 for Transcript
See Appendix 10 for Observation Schedule
Page 23 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
in the appropriate academic language” (DfE, 2011, p.2) and implements strategies to
address this issue.
Her strategies, which involved modelling language, were closely linked to the
type of writing pupils were being asked to do – descriptions and explanation:
But I usually get them to use the words, so ‘this is a word for
describing; this is how you start any piece of description; this is how
E
you write explanations; this is how you answer why questions. So it’s
almost like drilled into them. (History Teacher)
PL
The writing skills described above are not specific to writing in history and
therefore, the history teacher provides literacy development support that is applicable
across the curriculum. Furthermore, modelling is repeatedly identified by the literature
AM
as an effective method of developing writing skills. Williams, for example, claims
“teachers need to… provide clear models and examples of written language and
explicitly discuss and explain them so that students come to recognize different types
of written texts and their uses” (Williams, 2010, p.53). Syrja similarly recognises the
EX
benefits of modelling, citing it as the most effective way to improve writing until it begins
to approximate that of a native English speaker (Syrja, 2012, p.174). Thus, the history
teacher’s use of modelling is an example of how her EAL provision aligns with
commonly recommended strategies in the literature.
While the support described above targets EAL pupils’ writing for specific
purposes such as writing to describe or explain, the history teacher also described a
strategy that focuses on the development of EAL pupils’ structuring of extended
writing:
Page 24 of 48
PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
I always do hands. I draw around their hands and write on the
fingers point, then evidence, then explanation. So they’ve got
paragraphs there as well. So at least they can do the point and the
evidence, if not the explanation. So at least they are getting near that
level C grade. (History Teacher)
The history teacher’s consideration of how EAL pupils’ writing skills relate
support for the development of their writing skills.
E
closely to attainment in examinations, again, reflects the importance she places on
PL
Whether the support provided is intended to develop EAL pupils’ writing for
different purposes or the structuring of their writing, key to the history teacher’s
concept of support is the advancement of pupils’ independence as writers. The
AM
purpose of her “drilling models into them” (History Teacher) is to equip EAL pupils with
a set of skills they are able to routinely apply without assistance. Her comments on the
use of sentence starters further demonstrates her belief in providing support that leads
EAL pupils towards attaining confidence and independence as writers, and not merely
EX
as support that leads them towards success in a single task:
Give them starter sentences. I don’t often do starter sentences
– don’t particularly like them; don’t think it works. I think they need to
know how to write a sentence without you telling them how to write a
sentence. I think you have to get it drilled into their heads and then
leave it. (History Teacher)
The objective of such support is to develop EAL pupils’ literacy rather than to
simply complete the current task. The teacher’s belief in the necessity to move EAL
pupils towards independent production of writing was evident during the observed
Page 25 of 48
PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
lesson when, near the end of the lesson, pupils were asked to write in silence – an
instruction that extended to the five stage 1 and 2 EAL pupils, some of whom had
previously received a great deal of support from a bilingual teaching assistant in the
lesson.
As the task had been clearly scaffolded throughout the lesson the EAL pupils
were finally required to write independently. All five pupils struggled to produce an
E
amount of writing similar to non-EAL pupils – the strongest of the EAL pupils produced
only 5 lines. Although the EAL pupils were clearly not as successful in the task as the
PL
non-EAL pupils this phase of the lesson illustrated the teacher’s desire for the EAL
pupils to develop their independence as writers. As the EAL specialist stated in her
interview, the learning outcome for EAL pupils may be different from the rest of the
AM
class. This was identifiable in the observed history lesson which, indeed, had
differentiated learning outcomes, the first of which would have been provided
specifically for the EAL pupils:
Level 5 – You can organise your ideas well into a PEE9 speech.

Level 6 – You can give 2 views whilst still being persuasive.

Level 7 – You can hypothesise about the consequences of the trial.
EX

While the history teacher’s provision focuses on the development of pupils’
academic language, attempting to raise ‘students’ ability to understand and express,
in both oral and written modes, concepts and ideas that are relevant to success in
school’ (Cummins, 2008, p.71), School X’s policy, as previously identified, suggests
that “a range of literacy strategies to ensure that [EAL pupils] develop their academic
specific language skills” (School X, EAL Policy, 2014, p.2) are only implemented for
9
PEE = Point, Evidence and Explanation
Page 26 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
stage 4 pupils. Significantly, the strategies of which the History teacher spoke during
the interview were aimed at EAL pupils in lower stages, thus conflicting with school
policy. The history teacher’s methods echo Syrja who states that “English learners
should have opportunities every day to engage in the four domains of language” (Syrja,
2012, p.34) and, for the history teacher, such opportunities should include writing in
an academic style as soon as possible.
During the observed lesson, two EAL pupils’ were provided with support
E
through the buddy system – a system where an EAL pupil works throughout the lesson
PL
with a non-pupil who attempts to help the EAL pupil through the lesson through
discussion and direction. The buddy system was implemented with varying success
between the two EAL pupils that impacted the quality of the writing produced.
AM
Pupils were given various statements regarding a king of England, some of
which were positive and some of which were negative. Pupils read, sorted and copied
them into two columns signifying whether they believed they were arguments for or
against executing the king. This phase of the lesson provided pupils with a basis for
EX
writing a persuasive speech which was to express their opinion on whether or not the
king should be executed by the government. One pupil who worked with a buddy was
able to fully complete this task with the assistance of the buddy who discussed each
statement with her. However, most significantly for the purposes of this report, the
buddy was proactive in correcting the EAL pupil’s writing. At one point, the buddy used
a highlighter pen to draw the EAL pupil’s attention towards both punctuation and
spelling mistakes she had made. The EAL proceeded by correcting her mistakes.
In this pairing of EAL and non-EAL pupils the buddy system provided effective
personalised support, concurring with the school policy – the lesson was made
Page 27 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
accessible through the buddy’s assistance and the EAL was able to develop her
writing skills. However, the pairing of another EAL and non-EAL was unsuccessful –
the two pupils did not communicate with each other and, consequently, the EAL pupil
produced relatively little work. The buddy system therefore has great potential for
providing EAL pupils with the assistance they require, but only if the pairing is wellmatched.
E
As discussed, the history teacher employed strategies, such as modelling and
the buddy system, which are recommended by the literature as well as referenced by
PL
the school policy as common practice. However, an interesting discrepancy arose in
the interview between the teacher’s perceptions of the development of EAL pupils’
writing abilities and Carson et al.’s conclusions from research. Carson et al., as
AM
previously cited, concluded that, with the group of EAL students they investigated,
there was “weak correlation between L1 [first language] and L2 [English] writing for
the Japanese, and [a] lack of correlation of L1 and L2 writing for the Chinese” (Carson
et al., 1990, pp.260-261).
EX
In contrast, the history teacher believed there was an identifiable transfer of
writing skills between the two languages:
So, generally you’ll find that students who have been taught
well and have very high literacy in their own language tend to very
well. (History Teacher)
Although there appears to be a discrepancy here, Carson et al. concede that
their findings are not conclusive and that “we need to… learn more about the
relationship between L1 and L2 writing, and about the ways in which L2 writing skills
are affected by interlingual transfer” (Carson et al., 1990, p261). The discrepancy may
Page 28 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
be further explained through the correlation of the history teacher’s EAL pupils’ first
language and English –two languages that belong to the Indo-European languages
family and therefore share grammatical similarities. The same level of grammatical
correlation is not found between English and Japanese or Mandarin.
Conclusions
E
The evaluated data collected from interviews and observations within School
X’s science and history departments, as well as from an interview with the EAL
PL
specialist, illustrates how the school provides EAL pupils with support that develops
their academic writing skills. However, it was also revealed that the school could
consider revising its EAL policy in order to place greater prominence upon the
AM
improvement of EAL pupils’ academic writing skills across the four stages of language
acquisition. Such measures would generate increased awareness among its teachers
of the need to develop these skills as soon as EAL pupils are able to comprehend
them. The EAL specialist’s acknowledgment that stage 2, 3 and 4 EAL learners require
EX
this kind of support diverges from the school policy that suggests such support should
only concern the teachers of stage 4 EAL learners.
The history teacher’s practice similarly diverges from the school policy as
development of academic writing skills are central to her EAL support for EAL pupils
at all stages, thus suggesting that both she and the EAL specialist would agree that
School X’s EAL policy requires revising. The history teacher would likely also agree
with Syrja who expounds that “children learn to write by writing” (Syrja, 2011, p.173) –
the more practice a child has of writing in an academic style, the quicker this writing
style will become habituated and conversant.
Page 29 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Through the use of the buddy system, differentiated learning outcomes and
support specifically targeting EAL pupils’ ability to write academically, the history
teacher met the statutory requirement to “plan teaching opportunities to help pupils
develop their English” (DfE, 2014, para. 4.6). While there was evidence that her choice
of pairing of EAL and non-EAL pupils in her employment of the buddy system required
reconsideration, it was clear that the history teacher used a range of strategies that
provided pupils with effective support in developing their academic writing skills, and,
E
as the school policy states, she aimed to address “personalised learning needs”
PL
(School X, EAL Policy, 2014, p.1).
The science teacher also addressed EAL pupils’ “personalised learning needs”
(School X, EAL Policy, 2014, p.1) but, arguably, only through marking. The nature of
AM
the provision provided in the observed lesson and his responses during the interview
suggest that the development of pupils’ writing skills was of a low priority for him in
comparison to making the lesson accessible. Through viewing EAL pupils and lower
ability learners as a homogenised group, it could be suggested that the science
EX
teacher was not providing the two EAL pupils in his class with support that targeted
their individual literacy needs, hence the difficulty the stage 3 learner had in completing
the written task.
His belief that improvements in their writing in science would not, and do not
result in a transfer of skills across the curriculum explains why he perceived support
for improvement of EAL pupils’ academic writing skills to be unimportant. It could be
concluded that the science teacher was aware that EAL pupils struggle with subjectspecific vocabulary in science, hence the reinforcement of key terms in the observed
lesson, but was unaware of the challenge EAL pupils face when writing requires them
to not only use such vocabulary, but also to write in an appropriately academic style.
Page 30 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
As Williams reminds us, “[EAL pupils] need to develop the capacity to use English in
the ways expected by the school” (Williams, 2010, p.46).
Statutory guidance states that “teachers should plan teaching opportunities to
help pupils develop their English” (DfE, 2014, para. 4.6). Although the science
teacher’s marking strategy could be considered a method of satisfying this
requirement, further EAL teacher training throughout the school could raise awareness
E
of how teachers, such as the science teacher, can assist in developing pupils’
academic writing style, and thus adhere to statutory guidance more fully. However,
PL
while the science teacher’s responses during the interview seem to correlate with the
provision observed in his lesson, it should be recognised that conclusions regarding
the nature of the science teacher’s provision are limited by having only observed a
AM
single lesson.
Finally, the contrast in provision between the history and science teacher can,
to an extent, be explained through the difference in language acquisition levels of the
EAL pupils in each class. However, the contrast suggests that the EAL department
EX
could provide more training for staff to raise awareness of the need for all teachers to
share the responsibility of developing EAL pupils’ academic writing style. As Cameron
states, “ideas would need to be accepted and adopted consistently in all subject areas”
(Cameron, 2003, p.41); a cross-curricular consistency of approach is most effective in
the raising of standards to support EAL pupils’ progress. Through an elevation of the
prominence of such provision in the wording of School X’s EAL policy, redefining it as
relevant and integral to every department’s support for EAL pupils at all stages of
language acquisition, the school will be better positioned to lead its EAL pupils towards
academic success.
Page 31 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Bibliography
Cameron, L. (2002). Measuring Vocabulary Size in English as an Additional
Language. Language Teaching Research. 6(2), 145-173.
Cameron, L. (2003). Writing in English as an Additional Language at Key Stage 4
and Post-16. [Online] Ofsted Research: HMI 1094. Available from:
http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/4723/1/Writing_in_English_as_an_additional_language_at_Key
_Stage_4_and_post-16_(PDF_format)%5B1%5D.pdf [Accessed 15th February 2015]
E
Carbone, P. M. (2012). Teachers’ Roles in Facilitating Novice Writers from
Generation 1.5. In Yoon, B. & Kim, H. K. (Eds.), Teachers’ Roles in Second
Language Learning: Classroom Application of Sociocultural Theory (pp. 135-154).
Information Age Publishing
PL
Carson, J., Carrell, E., Silberstein, S., Kroll, B. & Kuehn, P. (1990). Reading-Writing
Relationships in First and Second Language. TESOL Quarterly. 24(2), 245-266.
Christie, F. & Derewianka, B. (2008). School Discourse. Continuum
AM
Cummins, J. (2008). BICS and CALP: Empirical and Theoretical Status of the
Distinction. In Street, B. & Hornberger, N. H. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Language and
Education, 2nd Edition, Volume 2: Literacy (pp. 71-83). Springer Science & Business
Media LLC
DfE (2011). Developing Quality Tuition: Effective Practice in Schools – English as an
Additional Language. DfE
EX
DfE (2013). Teacher’s Standards: Guidance for School Leaders, School Staff and
Governing Bodies. [Online] Available from:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/30110
7/Teachers__Standards.pdf [Accessed 17th February 2015]
DfE (2014). National Curriculum in England: Framework for Key Stages 1 to 4.
[Online] Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nationalcurriculum-in-england-framework-for-key-stages-1-to-4/the-national-curriculum-inengland-framework-for-key-stages-1-to-4#inclusion [Accessed 17th February 2015]
Edelsky, C. (1989). Putting Language Variation to Work. In Rigg, P. & Allen, V. G.
(Eds.), When They Don’t All Speak English: Integrating the ESL Student into the
Regular Classroom (pp. 96-107). National Council of Teachers of English
Harris, R. & Leung, C. (2011). English as an Additional Language. In Dillon, J. &
Maguire, M. (Eds.), Becoming a Teacher (pp. 249-263). Open University Press
Page 32 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Kameen, P. (1983). Syntactic Skill and ESL Writing Quality. In Freedman, A.,
Pringle, I. & Yalden, J. (Eds.), Learning to Write: First Language/Second Language
(pp. 162-170). Longman
Leki, I. & Carson, J. (1994). Students’ Perceptions of EAP Writing Instruction and
Writing Needs across the Disciplines. TESOL Quarterly. 28(1), 81-101.
Ofsted (2001). Inspecting English as an Additional Language: 11-16 with Guidance
on Self-Evaluation. Crown Copyright
E
Overington, A. (2012). DfE Summary of Government Policy in Relation to EAL
learners. [Online] Available from:
http://www.naldic.org.uk/Resources/NALDIC/Research%20and%20Information/Docu
ments/Brief_summary_of_Government_policy_for_EAL_Learners.pdf [Accessed 15th
February 2015]
PL
Syrja, R. C. (2011). How to Reach and Teach English Language Learners. JosseyBass
Turner, D. W. (2010). Qualitative Interview Design: A Practical Guide for Novice
Investigators. The Qualitative Report. 15(3), 754-760.
EX
AM
Williams, A. (2010). Connecting Communication, Curriculum and Second Language
Literacy Development: Meeting the Needs of ‘Low Literacy’ EAL/ESL Learners. In
Leung, C. & Creese, A. (Eds.), English as an Additional Language: Approaches to
Teaching Linguistic Minority Students (pp. 44-57). Sage
Page 33 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Appendix 1: School X’s EAL Policy (The name of the school has been
redacted for the purposes of non-traceablity.)
St Martin’s EAL Policy
'Every teacher is a teacher of EAL'
Introduction:
E
St Martin’s provides an inclusive education. All pupils are entitled to access the
curriculum regardless of their ability and language. Wider global issues and the
changing population of the local area reflect the changes in our classrooms.
PL
St Martin's is at the heart of this. Recently we have welcomed many pupils from a
diverse geographical and linguistic trajectory. Our aim is to ensure that these pupils are
not left behind (ECM) and feel part of the school community.
Knowledge and understanding of the needs of bilingual learners and those in the
process of second language acquisition is essential in the teaching and learning. Just
like literacy and numeracy, every teacher is a teacher of EAL.
EX
AM
Aims:
1. To provide newly arrived pupils with a welcoming and safe environment.
2. To ensure all pupils have access to the curriculum
3. To provide newly arrived and bilingual pupils with language support to enable
to access a supportive pastoral and academic system
4. To identify the personalised learning needs of each learner
5. To have high expectations of all pupils regardless of their language level and to
recognise their true cognitive abilities
6. To monitor pupils’ progress and use the data to feed forward for planning
7. To recognise the various needs of EAL learners including G and T and SEND.
EAL is not a homogenous group. Pupils are of varying abilities and must be
accommodated to encompass their language needs. All pupils need to be provided
with a language rich environment.
We follow the New Arrivals Excellence Programme Guidance.
Stage 1: New Arrivals
Our first priority is that our newly arrived pupils feel welcomed and settle into their
new surroundings and life in the UK. Through the success of previous newly arrived
pupils, we have found that a mixed method approach of 1-1 and small classes for
focused language work and emersion with their mainstream class. Any withdrawal is
for a short period of time. We strongly believe that once newly arrived pupils have
Page 34 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
developed ‘survival’ language, it is through their peers and the teaching in mainstream
classroom that they develop higher language skills.




To recognise the ‘silent’ phase
Provide bilingual dictionaries/electronic translator and a vocabulary book
A 1-1 tour of the school
Meet and greet with older EAL pupils (who are now stage 2 and higher)
E
Key Stage 3: Pupils follow a mainstream class, have an identified buddy and are
provided with some withdrawal lessons. Differentiated lesson materials to help them
access the mainstream curriculum. We encourage pupils to be active in lessons like
Art, PE and Music.
PL
Key stage 4: Newly arrived pupils who arrive at the start of their GCSE’s select a range
of accessible GCSE options and a reduced timetable. Where possible, pupils will take
the GCSE exam in their language.
AM
Stage 2:
Key Stage 3: As learners arrive with some understanding of English, they are
encouraged to develop their speaking and listening skills through their new peers.
Appropriate and time limited withdrawal support is provided for additional support
with reading and writing. Pupils in this group make good progress over a short period
of time.
EX
Key stage 4: Pupils select a range of GCSE options which will enable them to succeed in
English and academically. Lessons are differentiated. They are carefully monitored
and given EAL support lessons. Where possible bilingual books are provided to
support them to access a range of GCSE courses. They also receive extra English
support in an intervention class which is part of their timetable.
Stage 3:
All pupils identified as being at this stage of language acquisition are regularly
monitored. Withdrawal support is specific to those learners with specific needs
(particularly new arrivals who are identified at being stage 3 learners). All pupils are
encouraged to also consider taking home language GCSE examinations (depending on
the fluency of their home language).
Stage 4:
Our advanced bilingual pupils range with differing learner’s needs. Learners are
supported with a range of literacy strategies to ensure that they develop their
academic specific language skills for their GCSE exams and to prepare them for Key
Stage 5 courses.
Page 35 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Advanced bilingual learners are recognised as an invaluable asset to the school. Many
pupils are more than happy to help welcome newly arrived pupils and become EAL
buddies (time focused).
Mother tongue languages: All pupils are encouraged to also remember the value of
their home language. Where a home language GCSE is available, pupils are given the
opportunity to sit an early GCSE. They are provided with resources and materials.
EX
AM
PL
E
Extra-Curricular: The EAL department maximise any opportunity to encourage the
development of both English and home languages. Extra-curricular opportunities
include:
 The Mother Tongue Arvon Project
 Heritage Evening: Home Language film produced by pupils
 SOAS Language Day
 KCL Bilingual Learners’ workshop
 Romeo and Juliet in Somali
 St Martin’s Creative Writing EAL Summer School
Page 36 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Appendix 2: EAL Specialist’s Interview Schedule
1. What kinds of support are provided for EAL pupils when written tasks
are set?
2. How is the support differentiated?
3. How do EAL pupils at different levels of language acquisition respond
E
to tasks that require them to write in an academic style?
4. Are there any factors which may prevent teachers from providing this
PL
support?
Appendix 3: History and Science Teachers’ Interview Schedule
AM
1. What subject do you teach?
2. What kinds of writing are pupils often asked to produce in your
subject?
3. How would you characterize the writing of EAL pupils relative to pupils
EX
whose first language is English?
4. The school EAL policy lists four stages of language acquisition and
therefore every EAL pupil is identified as falling within one of these
stages. How do you respond to this set of school data in your
teaching?
5. What kinds of support do you consider particularly effective in raising
the standard of EAL pupils’ writing skills?
6. How easy or difficult do you find providing EAL pupils with the support
they need to raise their writing skills?
Page 37 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Appendix 4: Blank Observation Schedule
Observation Schedule
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Date:
Time:
Year Group:
Subject:
Total Number of Pupils:
E
Number of EAL Pupils at Stage 1:
Total Number of EAL Pupils:
Number of EAL Pupils at Stage 2:
Number of EAL Pupils at Stage 3:
Description of support that was provided for EAL pupils:
EX
AM
Description of written task:
PL
Number of EAL Pupils at Stage 4:
Further Notes on the Lesson:
Page 38 of 48
EAL pupils’ response to the task:
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Appendix 5: Letter for Request of Permission
To ……………………………………………………………. (Science / History Department)
I am a PGCE English student from KCL currently on placement here at
. I am
hoping you could do me a big favour and agree to let me interview you and, at a later
date, observe just one of your lessons.
I am doing a research project for university on EAL provision and how teachers provide
support for EAL pupils’ development of their writing skills and being able to interview you
and observe one of your lessons would be really helpful.
The interview would take less than 10 minutes. The questions I would ask are as follows:
AM
PL
E
1. What subject do you teach?
2. What kinds of writing are pupils often asked to produce in your subject?
3. How would you characterize the writing of EAL pupils relative to pupils whose first
language is English?
4. The school EAL policy lists four stages of language acquisition and therefore every
EAL pupil is identified as falling within one of these stages. How do you respond to
this set of school data in your teaching?
5. What kinds of support do you consider particularly effective in raising the standard
of EAL pupils’ writing skills?
6. How easy or difficult do you find providing EAL pupils with the support they need
to raise their writing skills?
If you are willing to take part in the interview then could we please meet at your
department office on ………………………………………………………………………… and then relocate to
an empty classroom to do the interview?
EX
Additionally, if you would kindly grant me permission to observe your lesson on period
……………………………………………………………………………………. to observe the kind of support you
provide for EAL pupils with their writing please let me know at the interview.
Lastly, I would like to let you know that your anonymity will be protected in the project’s
report – both your name and the school’s name will not be included in the report.
Furthermore, if at any time you wish to withdraw, including any time after the interview
or observation you are able to do so and all record of any participation you may have had
will be excluded from the report.
Many thanks for your consideration.
With regards,
Page 39 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Appendix 6: EAL Specialist’s Interview Transcript
Interviewer:
What kinds of support are provided for EAL pupils when written tasks are set?
EAL Specialist: Well, it all depends on what ability the student is. Because EAL is a range of stages so
it’s not a homogenous group in our school. We’ve got newly arrived pupils; we’ve
got pupils that are stage 2; we’ve got stage 3 pupils; and we’ve got students who are
advanced bilingual students. So it all depends on… But within EAL there’s masses of
differentiation.
Interviewer:
PL
E
So, for example, if they were stage 1, we wouldn’t, for writing, they are probably
going through the silent phase so we wouldn’t expect them to do a certain amount
of writing. And if they had to do some writing we would probably just get them to
write it in their first-home language. If they were stage 3 then… well, stage 3 stage 4
– they’re advanced bilingual students – we would probably give them… You know,
their needs that they have are that they don’t always have the academic language so
that there are literacy issues there. And they just don’t know alternative ways to say
things and they don’t know the right language so it really depends on which stage
you’re talking about.
How is the support differentiated?
EAL Specialist: From the rest of the class?
Interviewer:
Err… yes.
EX
AM
EAL Specialist: Well again this all really dependent upon… because in one class you can have one
EAL student or two EAL students. So some teachers have a support teacher with
them and that’s not always for all the lessons. So the support teacher would have…
might have ahead of the time the work that they are doing a resource and they
would adapt that for the student. It all depends on ‘what is the outcome for that
student for that lesson?’ So it is really more than ‘what is the outcome for the whole
class?’ Where was that student and where should they be after a sequence of
lessons? So really it has got to be their aims and objectives that are very different
from the rest of the class.
Interviewer:
How do EAL pupils at different levels of language acquisition respond to tasks that
require them to write in an academic style?
EAL Specialist: Well, I suppose we’re talking stage 3 and 4 there. And 2. Stage 4, again, they know
how to write. They just, because they’re not familiar with using a lot of words,
maybe at home, they just need that reinforcement. They always need those key
words; they need a lot of modelling. So modelling would be the main thing. Those
who are at stage 2 – they need more scaffolding. Initially they probably have
something where, not the essays – fill in the blanks, but something that is very
structured. So you’re putting in this here and then you need to find something from
the text here, and explain this. So, again it just really depends on what it is. But for 3
and 4 they just need like lots of modelling and lots of examples. Because they don’t
have the familiarity or exposure of that.
Interviewer:
Do you think they generally struggle with those kind of tasks?
Page 40 of 48
PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
EAL Specialist: Yeah they struggle with those kinds of tasks. I mean, it’s funny because stage 4
students who are advanced bilingual students, can struggle quite a lot with
homophones. Because they just don’t… sometimes they get them – the meanings
get jumbled up and they write one word and mean another word. It’s just practising
exposure and they’re not used to using it. So, that’s probably what it is.
Interviewer:
Are there any factors which may prevent teachers from providing this support?
E
EAL Specialist: I think it just goes across with the whole, well, you know, with anything in school.
Teachers are under huge amounts of pressure. The thing with EAL is it can be quite
spontaneous and sporadic. So, you can’t… At the start of term… Well, you can have
casual admissions say from like week four and we wouldn’t have known about that
because the parents have just moved here. So, for teachers, it’s like you need to
understand that… teachers need to be aware that being able to be flexible and move
with those things. And that these things can happen. So what’s your contingency –
what would you do? So that each time you get a newly arrived pupil it’s not a new
thing again. It’s like, well, we had this system last time so…
EX
AM
PL
Because it’s not funded by the government as such. It’s not… like schools are lucky
to have EALs, or to have an EAL unit, or somebody who is looking after an EAL,
because some schools won’t even have it at all. Or some schools that have it have a
really advanced system. It all really depends on the school where the catchment
area is; the number of students that are coming through; and what they’ve had in
the past. So, I think for some teachers it is ‘oh my God I’ve got an EAL student – I’m
not going to be able to cope.’ But they’ve got to understand the fact they’ve got
these kids. Rather than panicking that they’ve got this kid in my maths class who
can’t do anything – if they can’t speak English of course they can’t do anything. But,
they are also trying to learn English so it’s natural for them to go through the silent
phase. What’s the main concern for that student at that time? It’s probably that
they need to feel a bit comfortable in their new environment. Their language for
that time would be survival language. They could probably do maths, or some
description of maths, because you can assess them on their maths ability without
the language. So, the thing is, for EAL each story is different. And each case is
unique. There is no ‘one size fits all’ because it’s a spectrum.
Page 41 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Appendix 7: Science Teacher’s Interview Transcript
What subject do you teach?
Teacher:
I teach science and math.
Interviewer:
What kind of writing are pupils often asked to produce in science?
Teacher:
I guess there’s a range of writing. But in general they do two kinds. We get them to
do short answers. For GCSE they have to answer a set of six questions and each
answer is about a sentence long and then they get a mark for each answer. Then,
especially for GCSE, they do longer answers that ask them to convey information.
And that can be a paragraph or two long.
Interviewer:
How would you characterize the writing of EAL pupils relative to pupils whose first
language is English?
Teacher:
Well, not much different really. They might have some problems with not knowing a
word or writing in the wrong tense but generally, especially for level 4 EALs, their
writing isn’t noticeably different. It’s pretty hard to tell who is and isn’t an EAL just
from their writing. First language English speakers make the same kinds of mistakes
as EALs so nothing particularly stands out. For level 3 or 2 their writing might not be
quite at the standard of others, but I think it is more important to help them access
the lesson, rather than specifically with their writing. If you can get them to access
the lesson then they tend to be able to do the writing.
Interviewer:
The school EAL policy lists four stages of language acquisition and therefore every
EAL pupil is identified as falling within one of these stages. How do you respond to
this set of school data in your teaching?
Teacher:
Well, you’ll obviously take a look at that data to get a rough idea of what level the
kids are at. But that’s just a starting point and a level doesn’t really tell you that
much about each student’s individual needs. So, although I’ll look at the data to get
a rough guide of where my pupils are at, I’ll get more information in the first few
lessons by seeing what the pupils are doing in my lessons and taking a look at their
books. So it’s more important to get to know your pupils than anything the data can
tell you.
EX
AM
PL
E
Interviewer:
Interviewer:
What kinds of support do you consider particularly effective in raising the standard
of EAL pupils’ writing skills?
Teacher:
As I say, I find it more productive to make sure they can access the lesson – that
leads on to them being able to do the writing for the lesson. There are other ways
like getting them working with a non-EAL pupil who is going to keep them on target.
The best way for me is to get them to green pen their writing. So I’ll get them to
respond and rewrite what they’ve done after I’ve marked it. I find that helps their
progress more than anything else.
Interviewer:
How easy or difficult do you find providing EAL pupils with the support they need to
raise their writing skills.
Page 42 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
I’m not sure how relevant the writing pupils do in science is to the kinds of writing
pupils do in other subjects, like English for example. It must be quite different. I
guess there are crossovers, like making a point, finding evidence and explaining the
evidence. I presume that kind of structured writing can be found in history lessons
as much as in science. But how much the writing we do in science can help EALs’
overall writing skills is… well, there are so many kinds of writing and the way we ask
them to write in science is probably quite different to other subjects.
EX
AM
PL
E
Teacher:
Page 43 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Appendix 8: Science Lesson Observation Schedule
Observation Schedule
PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Date: 17/03/2015
Duration: 40 Minutes
Year Group: Year 7
Subject: Science
Total Number of Pupils: 9
E
Number of EAL Pupils at Stage 1: 0
Total Number of EAL Pupils: 2
Number of EAL Pupils at Stage 2: 0
Number of EAL Pupils at Stage 3: 1
EAL pupils were given a choice of whether to use the support provided.
Rather than write their own definitions, they were able to take and use a
support sheet with a set of definitions and rather than coming up with their
own definitions, match the correct definition on the support sheet to the
substances. They would copy out the definition after selecting it. This
support was not only offered to EAL pupils but the whole class should they
need it.
None provided by the teacher. However, the pupils were in groups of 3 and
had to record their results in a table format in their exercise books. This
required them to write the words of the substances they were looking for
and the food they were testing. As they needed to decide as a group how
the table would be laid out and they all needed to record the data, the
writing/spelling was modelled by their group members if they required help.
EX
Writing definitions for different
substances found in the food.
Words included carbohydrates,
minerals, fibre and protein.
Description of support that was provided for EAL pupils:
AM
Description of written task:
PL
Number of EAL Pupils at Stage 4: 1
Pupils record their results from a
practical task in a table.
EAL pupils’ response to the task:
The Stage 4 EAL pupil wrote a definition of
carbohydrates – ‘I think that when we eat
carbohydrates they help us grow.’ This was her own
definition, although she had taken a copy of the
support sheet. After finding her answer was factually
incorrect, she erased her answer and wrote the correct
answer in green pen, highlighting her mistake.
The Stage 3 EAL pupil did not produce much work but
when provided with the correct answers she copied the
correct answers into her exercise book. She had also
taken a copy of the support sheet.
The Stage 4 EAL pupil needed no help with spelling
from her group as she was the first to complete the
table, ready to do the practical tasks.
The Stage 3 EAL pupil appeared to be the slowest in
her group to set up the table and checked her group
members’ spelling for words such as ‘cornflake’.
Further Notes on the Lesson: The teacher drew pupils’ attention to where he was reading from on the task sheet with his finger, as he talked through the instruction.
Page 44 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Appendix 9: History Teacher’s Interview Transcript
What subject do you teach?
Teacher:
History.
Interviewer:
What kind of writing are pupils often asked to produce in your subject?
Teacher:
Explanation, description and evaluation with judgement.
Interviewer:
How would you characterize the writing of EAL pupils relative to pupils whose first
language is English?
Teacher:
It depends on the stage of the student. So, generally you’ll find that students who
have been taught well and have very high literacy in their own language tend to do
very well… So, if someone is educated well, they will perform well in history as well.
However, if somebody has not got the same type of literacy level in their own
language it’s a lot harder. And you find the sentence structures and the style – so
not knowing where the noun is and the verb, and putting it in that place and that
order is more difficult. Also, maybe they can try to explain but they haven’t got the
punctuation to understand where to put it, and the grammar in that way.
Interviewer:
The school EAL policy lists four stages of language acquisition and therefore every
EAL pupil is identified as falling within one of these stages. How do you respond to
this set of school data in your teaching?
Teacher:
Well… in different ways, because I’ve come from a background where EAL is taught
in a far more focused way. This school’s got less EAL compared to most of the other
schools I’ve taught in. So I’m used to having that 70% at the advanced learner stage,
and then that 10% of the class who are beginner EAL. So, to be honest with you, it’s
just what I’m used to teaching. It’s not really anything new or different. It’s just what
I’ve already done. I think I’m different to other people in this school because I’ve
come from schools where that is an issue. Here, it’s only starting to become an
issue.
EX
AM
PL
E
Interviewer:
Interviewer:
What kinds of support do you consider particularly effective in raising the standard
of EAL pupils’ writing skills?
Teacher:
The 3 beginner students in my own class, I’ve had to start right from the very
beginning. Literally word and picture. Match up type thing. Writing in their own
language for a bit. Then bringing it into writing in your own language but you have to
write 2 sentences in English. Give them starter sentences. I don’t often do starter
sentences – don’t particularly like them. Don’t think it works. I think they need to
know how to write a sentence without you telling them how to write a sentence. I
think you have to get it drilled into their heads and then leave it. And once you’ve
got a drill, it usually works. But I usually get them to use the words so ‘this is a word
for describing; this is how you start any piece of description; this is how you write
explanations; this is how you answer why questions. So it’s almost like drilled into
them. So I always do hands. I draw around their hands and write on the fingers
point, then evidence, then explanation. So they’ve got paragraphs there as well. So
at least they can do the point and the evidence, if not the explanation. So at least
they are getting near that level C grade.
Page 45 of 48
PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
How easy of difficult do you find providing EAL pupils with the support they need to
raise their writing skills.
Teacher:
I find it easy to be honest with you. I find the way you teach and EAL is the way you
should teach. I teach my lessons and plan my units of work in this style of format:
from spoken English, then you go to writing English. And it’s not a linear line, it’s a
flowing line. So you go from spoken English, you get them to think about definitions,
do discussion, look at key words and key terms, define it, okay bring back the
discussion, do a bit more writing , have more discussion, more academic writing
right at the end. So it’s a flow within a continuum. And I think that’s how you should
teach. And it’s not just for EAL. I just think that that’s how you should teach.
EX
AM
PL
E
Interviewer:
Page 46 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Appendix 10: History Lesson Observation Schedule
Observation Schedule
PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
Date: 25/03/2015
Duration: 50 Minutes
Year Group: Year 8
Subject: History
Total Number of Pupils: 28
E
Number of EAL Pupils at Stage 1: 1
Total Number of EAL Pupils: 5
Number of EAL Pupils at Stage 2: 4
Number of EAL Pupils at Stage 3: 0
Buddy system – 2 EAL pupils (those with the highest level of language
acquisition) worked with a non-EAL pupil.
TA support – 3 EAL pupils worked with a bilingual TA. Two of these pupils
also worked together. The EAL pupil at the lowest stage of language
acquisition worked exclusively with the TA.
Although the work was done silently and independently for non-EAL pupils,
the TA provided support for the 3 EAL pupils with the lowest level of
language acquisition.
EX
Independent writing: pupils
wrote their own opinion regarding
whether the government should
have executed the king.
Description of support that was provided for EAL pupils:
AM
Description of written task:
Scaffolded planning for a writing
task: pupils were given various
statements regarding a king of
England – some positive some
negative. Pupils read and sorted
and copied them into two
columns signifying whether they
believed they were arguments for
or against executing the king.
This provided pupils with a basis
for writing about their own
opinion regarding whether the
government should have
executed the king.
PL
Number of EAL Pupils at Stage 4: 0
EAL pupils’ response to the task:
One of the EAL pupils working with a buddy was able
to work through the task successfully. In this case, the
buddy was pro-active in assisting her – peer-correction
with a highlighter pen focusing on the EAL pupils’
punctuation using full stops was also evident.
The other EAL pupil working with a buddy struggled,
perhaps because the buddy was reluctant to assist
her. They communicated very little so the TA provided
assistance.
The 3 EAL pupils working with the TA worked at a slow
pace but progressed through the task, although did
not finish it completely.
The EAL pupil whose buddy was pro-active produced 4
lines in the 10 minutes of writing time. The other four
EAL pupils produced only 2 or 3 lines.
Further Notes on the Lesson: The EAL pupils’ seating had been given consideration with the 3 with the lowest language acquisition level sat close or next to the TA and
the other two further away in order to integrate those who could learn without first language support and promote independence. The teacher returned to an EAL pupil
who could not answer a question after a no-EAL pupils provided the answer.
Page 47 of 48
, PGCE English, King’s College London, 2015
EX
AM
PL
E
Appendix 11: Science Lesson Support Sheet
Page 48 of 48