CHAPTER22
PREDICTINGSECONDLANGUAGE ACADEMIC
SUCCESSIN E,NGLISHUSING THE,PRISMMODEL
V I R G I N I AP . C O L L I E RA N D W A Y N E P . T H O M A S
George Moson Universitl,-,f;airfax, LlSA
ABSTRACT
M a n l ' . s t u d e n t s i n I ; n g l i s h - s p c a k i n gc o n t e x t s w h o n r c n c \ \ ' t o t h c t r n g l i s h l a n g u a g c h a v c t o r l c L l u i r c
p r o fr c i c n c y i n t h c l a n g u a g c ,a n d a t t h e s a m c t i r n c l c a r n a r a n g c o f - a c a c l c r r r icco n t e n t .s o n t c o 1 ' u h j c h i s
v c n L r n f a n r i l i a rl.' h c l ) r l s r nn t t t d c ld ef l n c s l i c t o r s t l i a t a l l o l v f i r r p r c d i c t i o n st o b c n t a c l cr c q a r d i n qI : n g l i s i r
I c a r n e r s 'd e g r c c o f ' s c c o n d l a n g u a g c a c q u i s i t i o n i n a n a c a c l c r n i cc o n t c x l . I n t h i s c h a p t c r . t l r c a u t i r o r s
d e s c r l b c i n d e t a i l t h c c o l r p t u c n t s a n d d i r r c r r s i o n so f ' t h c l ) r i s n r n r o c l c la n c l d c s c r i b c s c , " c r a lc u r r c n t l \
p o p u l a r t l p c s o 1 ' e d u c a t r o tpt f o g r a m s l b r I : n g l i s h l a n g u a g el e a r n c r si n t h c [ ] n i t c d S t a t c si n t c r n t s o 1 ' t h e r r
d e g r c e o f i i d l r c r c n c et o t h e m o d c l . I r i n a l l y , w c c o n r p a r c t h c p r q d i c t i o n s o 1 ' t h c I ) r i s r n n r o d c l . L r s i n g
p r e d i c t e dr a n k i n g s o f r c l a t i v c p r o g r a m s u c c c s s t, o t h c a c t u a l n r c a s u r e dc 1 ' l c c t i v c n c sosl ' c a c l r p r o g l r n r i n
p r o d u c i n g I ' a r y i n g d e g r e e so 1 ' f - . n g l i s hl e a r n c r s ' a c h i e v c m c n tg a p c l o s u r c u i t h n r o t h c r t o n r r L r e - l : . n r t l i s h
spcakcrs.
INTRODUCTION
T h e P r j s mm o d e l ,f r r s tp u b l i s i r e d
i n C o l l i e r( 1 9 9 - 5 a1, 9 9 - 5 bl 9
, i ) - 5 ca) n c lc x p a n dde i 1 1
T h o m a sa n d C o l l i c r ( 1 9 9 1 ) ,w a s i n i t i a l l yc o n c e i v c di n a d i a l o g u c\ \ ' i t h a g r o u p o l
Hispanicparentsconcerrled
abouttheir chrldren'seducationin the USA. Thc parents
spoke of thetr passionsand concerns,and severalof the elementsof the pnsn.l
emergedas we,iotteddown tssueson the chalkboard.Over the tbtlow'ingycar,these
same lssuescontinuedto surfacein the researchon academicachieremcntilt a
s e c o n dl a n g u a g e( L 2 ) c o n t e x t .T h e g e n e r a lc a t e g o r i e si n i t i a l l y ' i d c n t r f l e d
b;-'the
I:hspanicparentsmatchedcloselywith emergingtheonesbasedon researchin SLA
( E l l i s , 1 9 9 4 ;L a r s e n - F r e e m &
a n L o n g , l 9 9 l ; w o n g - F i l h . n o r e1,9 9 1 ) .T h e P r i s n r
model also closely connectsto other social sciencetheories,sllch as Cuntrnins'
theorieson negotiatrngidentitiesand the interdependencc
of a str-rdent's
llrst and
secondlanguages(Cummins,2000). As we studiedthe lists of variablesthat n,e
were examiningin our researchon the long-termacademicachievenrent
of students
acquiring ESL in school, to organizethe variablesinto rnajor categones,the
components
of the Prismmodelbeganto takeshape.
The researchsynthesis,upon which the Prism model is based,can be fbund rn
, 9 9 5 b ,1 9 9 5 c a
C o l l i e r( 1 9 9 5 a 1
) n d O v a n d oe t a l . ( 2 0 0 3 ) O
. v e r a l l t. h e P r i s mm o d e l
definesmajor del'elopmental
processes
that childrenexperienceduring therrschool
yearsthat need to be supportedat schoolfor languageacquisitionand learningto
takeplace.The model can be appliedto mothertongue-English
speakerslearningan
L2 as well as to studentsacquiringEnglishas tlieir L2. Tlie rnodelcan be uscd to
Cullier uncl Thontus
-)-)+
gap i n
predrctthe major schoolfactorsthat help to closethe academicachievement
countrles,A S
L2, a currenttopic of considerableimportancein English-speaking
numbersof childrenwho do not know Englisharrivern schools.
increasing
THE PRISM MODEL: LANGUAGE ACQUISITION FOR SCHOOL
The Prisrnmodel has fbur major componentsthat drive languageacquisitionfbr
s c h o o l :s o c i o c u l f u r alli,n g u i s t r ca, c a d e m i ca, n d c o g n i t i v ep r o c e s s e sT.o e x p e r t e n c e
successin L2 academiccontexts,L2 studentswho are not yet proficrentin English
that
need a schoolcontextthat providesthe samebasic conditionsand advantages
the
ongoing
to
attention
This
includes
group
experiences.
the English-speaking
processes
that occurnaturallyfor any child throughthe schoolyears.
developmental
language
other than English home background, these
tion-r
a
For sfudents
academic,and linguisticdevelopment-must
proccsses-cognitivr.',
interdependent
occur in a supportivesocioculturalenvironmentthrough both their first language
(L 1) andtheir L2 to enhancestudentlearning.
T h e P r i s m m o d e l h a s e i g h t d r m e n s i o n s c, o m p r i s i n g t h e s e s o c i o c u l t u r a l ,
l i n g u i s t i ca
, c a d e r n r ca,n d c o g n i t i v cp r o c e s s eisn L l a n d L 2 . T h i s i s i l l u s t r a t e di n
F i s l r r el .
Processes in
Li and L2
L2 CognitiveDevelopment
T h e P r i s mM o d e l f o rb i l i n g u al el a r n e r s
o[rvillht €r:LlU,i V[qrnra F Collrer A\^rEyrre P Thonas
Figure l. Lunguage acquisitionJor schor-tl
of the
As you exanrinethis figure, which looks triangularon the flat surf-ace
page, visualize rnsteadthat you are looking down through a complex multrdimensionalprism, with the student in the center. Connectedto the student's
emotional responsesto learning are the socioculfuralprocessesthat influence the
learning process.Interconnectedto this componentare the other three major
PredictingSecondLanguageAcademicSuccessin English
335
interdependentand complex components-linguistic,academic.and cognrtil'e
processes.
Eachof thesedimensionswill be describedin turn.
Soci ocult ura I P ro cesses
At the heartof the Prism model is the individualstudentacquiringa L2 in school.
of languageare all o{-thesurroundingsocialand
Centralto that student'sacqursition
culturalprocesses
occurnngin everydaylife within the student'spast.present.and
future. in all contexts-home, school, community,and the broadersociety.For
at work in SLA rnay includeindividualstudcnts'
example,socioculturalprocesses
or anxiety or other allective
emotionalresponsesto school such as self'-esteenr
e
or administratir
environmentin a classroor-n
factors.At school,the rnstructronal
programstructurcmay crcate social and psychologicaldistancebctr.leengroups.
Comrnunity or regional social pattcrns such as prcjudicc atrd discrinrination
contexts,as
expressedtowardsgroupsor individualsin personaland prof'essional
group or
ntinority
u,ell as societalpatternssuch as the subordinatestatusof a
acculturationvcrsus assirnilationfbrces at rvork can all inlluence students'
responseto
in schoctl.Thesef-actors
can negativclyal1bctthe studerrt's
achieyement
the neu' languageand learningthrough thc L2, unlessthc studctrtis in a vcn'
s o c i o c u l t u r a lsl yu p p o r t i v e n v i r o n m c n t .
LanguageDevelopment
Linguisticprocesses,
a secondcomponentol'tl-remodcl,consisto[-tl-resubconsciotts
aspectsof language del'elopment(an innatc ability all hunrans possesslirr
a c q u i s i t i o no 1 -o r a l l a n g u a g e )a, s w e l l a s t h e m e t a l i n g u i s t i cc,( ) n s e i ( ) u sl o. r n r a l
tcaching of languagein school, and the acquisitionof the lr,rittcn systcnt ol'
language.This includesthe acquisitionof the oral and rvrittcn systemsof the
acrossall languagedonrains.suchas phortologl
student'sflrst and secondlanguages
(the pronunciationsystem),vocabulary,morphology and syntax (the grarnnlar
(mearring),
(hou,languageis r-tscd
tn a given context).
pragmattcs
system),semantics
(stretches
paralinguistics
and
a
sentcnce),
language
beyond
single
o1discourse
(nonverbaland other extralrngurstic
features).To assurecognitive and academic
successin the L), a student'sLl system,oral and written.rnustbe developedto a
high cognrtivelevelat leastthroughoutthe elementaryschoolyears.
AcademicDevelopment
includesall schoolrvork rn
A third contponentof the model,academicdevelopment,
the sciences,social studies,and the llne arts for each
languagearts,mathematics,
grade level, K- I 2 and beyond. With each succeedinggrade, acadetlic u ork
and dtscoursedimensionso1'
drarraticallyexpandsthe vocabulary,sociolinguistic,
language to higher cognitive ler els. Academic knowledge and conceptual
developmenttransferfrom the Ll to the L2. Thus, it is most efficientto develop
academicwork throughstudents'Li, while teachingthe L2 during otherperiodsof
the school day or week throughmeaningfulacademiccontentthat reinfbrcesand
expandson the knowledgedevelopedbut doesnot repeatthe academicr.vorkin L1.
as the first stepand the
In earlierdecadesin the USA teachingL2was recommended
teaching of academic content postponed.However, researchhas shou,n that
336
C c,| | i er u ncl Tlt,,tm cts
while studentsw'orkon acquiring
postponingor interruptingacademicdevelopment
In an information-driven
failure
in
the
long-term.
L2
is
likely
lead
to
academic
the
to
society that demandsmore knon ledge processingw,ith each succeedingyear,
E n g l i s hl a n g u a g e
l e a r n e r cs a n n o ta f f o r dt o k r s et i m e ,e s p e c i a l l sy h e n t h e i r E n g l i s h p e e r sa r es t e a d i l ym a k i n go n ey e a r ' sp r o g r e s isn o n ey e a r ' st i m e .
speaking
Cognitive Development
The fourth coniponentof this model, the cognitive dimension, rs a natural,
s u b c o n s c i o Lplrso c e s tsh a to c c u r sd e v e l o p m e n t a llliyo m b i r t ht o t h e e n do f s c h o o l i n g
through interactingwith
and beyond.An infant initially builds thought processes
l o v e do n e si n t h e l a n g u a g eo f t h e h o m e .A l l p a r e n t s( i n c l u d i n gt h o s en o n - f o r m a l l y
scl-rooled)natLrrallystimulate children's Ll cognitive growth through daill'
problemsolvrngin the languagethe parentsknow best.
interactionand lamily-based
Sttrdentsbring 5-6 yearso1-cognitivedevelopmentin their Ll to their llrst day o1school. This is a knowledgebase, an important steppingstone to build on as
c o g n i t i v e d e v e l o p r n e n tc o n t i n u e s .I t i s e x t r e m e l y r m p o r t a n t t h a t c o g n i t i re
dcr,'eloprnent
a child's L1 a1leastthroLrghthc elementaryschool
continuesthror-rgh
years.Extensivercscarchhas demonstrated
that childrenr.r'horeachfull cognitire
d e v c l o p m c n itn t n ' o l a n g u a g e s( g e n e r a l l yr e a c h i n gt h e t h r e s h o l di n t h c i r L l b y
. ognitil'e
around agc I l- l2) enjoy cognitrr,'e
a d v a r n t e r gocvse r m o n o l i n g u a l s C
\
\
a
s
t
h
e
u
n
t
i
l the past
USA
d*ckrpnrenl
n r o s t l yn e g l e c t e db y L 2 e d u c a t o r si n
decade.LangLrage
teachingcurricLrlawere simplifled, stnrctured,and sequenced
cluringthe lc)70s,anclwhen acadcn-ric
contentwas addcdto languagelessonsin thc
I 9 8 0 s , a c a d c r n i c o n t c n t\ \ ' i r sw a t c r c ' dd o w n i n t o c o g n i t i v c l ys i r n p l et a s k s ,o l j c n
u n d e rt l i e l a b e lo l ' b r z , s isck i l l . sT.o o o l t c n n e g l e c t e rdv a st h c c r u c i a lr o l e o f c o g n i t i r r '
developnrentin the Ll. Norv wc know liorn thc gro*'ing researchbasc that
e d u c a t u r sr l u s t a d d r e s sl i n g u i s t i c ,c o g n i t i v e ,a n d a c a d e m r cd e v e l o p m e net q u a l l y
tl-rroughboth flrst and secondlanguagesii- they are to assllrestudents'academic
successrn thc L2. This is especiallynecessary
if E,nglishlanguagelearnersare ever
to reachfull parityin all curricularareaswith L1 Englishspeakers.
Interdependenceo/' the Four Components
A l l o f ' t h e s ct i r u r c o m p o n e n t s - s o c i o c u l t u r a lc,a d e m i cc, o g n i t i v ea, n d l i n g u i s t i c a r e i n t e r d c p e n c l e nI 1t .' o n e i s d c v e l o p e dt o t h e n e g l e c to f ' a n o t h c r ,t h i s m a y b e
detrirlental to a student's overall growth and firture success.The academic,
c o g n i t i v e ,a n d l i n g u i s t i cc o r n p o n e n tm
s u s t b e v i e w e d a s n a t u r a ld e v e l o p m e n t a l
processes.For the child, adolescent,and young adult still attending fbrmal
s c h o o l i n gd, e v e l c l p n r eon1t ' a n yo n e o { ' t h c t h r e ea c a d e m i cc, o g n i t i v ea, n d l i n g u i s t r c
componentsdcpendscritically on the simultaneous
developmentof the other tu'o
through both lirst and secondlanguages.Also, socioculturalprocessesstrongly
inlluencestlldents'riccess
to cognitive,academic,and languagedevelopment
in both
positive and negativeways. It is crucial that educatorsprovrde a socioculturally
supportiveschooienvironment,allowingnaturallanguage,academic,and cognrtive
development
to flourishin both LI andL2.
Predicting SecondLanguageAcademic Successin English
337
THE INSTRUCTIONAL SITUATION FOR THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
LEARNER IN AN ENGLTSH-ONLY PROGRAM
Usingall the cornponents
of the Prismmodel,w'ecan apply this rcscarchknoulcdge
baseto the varying schoolprogramspror,'idcdl'or F.nglishlanguagclcarnersin the
Unrted States.This comparisonwill make clear rvherethe school cxperienceol'
the sourceof
Englishlanguagelearnersis differentfrornthat of Ll Englishspeakers,
gaps.The commonview ol-rnanyeducationpolicy makcrsin irnglishachievement
s p e a k i n gc o u n t r i e ss u c h a s t h c U S A , t h a t s t u d e n t sm u s t I e a r r rI r n g l i s hf r r s t . i s
portrayedin Pi-cure
2.
The English-only perspective:Leern English first!
A common but misguided view of policy nrakers
1---
{. * gnitiv* l} *ve l* pm ent
(l.joternphaiszed)
T h eP r i s mM o d eflo r E n c J l i lseha r n e risn E n c r l i s h - oinnlsvt r u c t i o n
'
tf:,/r,!lrt
,'r :al- j
rr'/n rie F
TlrrrL r:
!i
iIqrr.:
F
r ] hef
I"igure2. Seconcl
longucrge
at'quisition
for sc'hool
From a common-scnscperspective,it would seentobl'toLtsthat the first stcp
ot'that
anyoneshouldtake when enteringa new country is to learn thc langr"rage
*'ho
has
been
country.This ntay indeedbe a wise decisionfbr an adr-rltimmiqrant
fbrnially schooledand who has completeddevelopmcntin t$o of the prtsn't
components-cognitiveand academicdevelopment-andlacksonly one dintenstc'rn
o f t l i e l i n g u i s t i cc o n r p o n e nat ,c q u i s i t i o on 1 ' t h eL 2 , h a v i n ga l r e a d ya c q r - r i r et hde L l t o
child is in a r''crydif ferent
an adult lcvel of proficiency.Flowever,the school-aged
wrthout
interruptionthroughthe
processes
must
continue
situation.Developmental
schoolyearsin orderfor a child to reachthe cognitivematurityof an adult.
Academicdevelopmentmust also continuewithout intermptionfbr full adult
rnasteryof the academiccurriculumto occur.Englishis only one part of the learning
process.When learningEnglishis the first goai, during the periodthat this goal rs
t h ep r i o r i w ,t h e P r i s mm o d e lo f l a n g u a g a
e c q u i s i t i o fno r s c h o o li s r e d u c e dt o m a i n l y
one dimension,developmentof one language(L2) and the othcr half of that
ji8
Collier anclThomas
cornporlentis nrissing-the continuing developmentof L1. This has unhappy
consequences
fbr the studentin threeout of four of the Prismmodel'scomponents.
Firstly,rneaningfulacademicdeveloprnent
is not pror ided fbr in the initial years,
becausethe highestpriorily is learningEnglish rather than academiccontent.In
succeedingyears, academicdevelopmentis often not at grade level, because
studentsstudyingentirelyir-rthe L2 havemissedat leastfwo yearsof academicrvork
ii'hrle acquiringa basic knowledgeof the L2. Secondly,cognitivedevelopmentis
not ernphasized
in the L2 and is not providedfor in the Ll at school.Sfudentsenter
s c h o o lh a v i n g c o r n p l e t e ds i x y e a r so f c o g n i t i v ed e v e l o p m e nttn t h e i r L I . T h e s e
studcntsmust continueto dev'elopcognitivelyat the samerate as do other mother
tongue English-speaking
studentsin their first language.Sn,itchinga student's
languageof instructionto all-EnglishcausL-s
a cognitive slowdor.r,n
fbr English
langr"rage
lcarncrsthat can last lbr severalyears.During this period, the English
mother tongue speakerscontinue1o devclop cognttivelyat normal rates but the
I r n g l i s hl a n g u a g e
l e a r n e r lsa l l b c h i n di n c o g n i t i v ed e v e l o p n r e n
a tn d m a y n e v e rc a t c h
Lrp to their continually advancingmother tongue English peers. Thirdly, ln an
F n g l i s h - o n l ye n v i r o n m e n ts, o c i o c u l t u r aplr o c e s s em
s a y b e l a r g e l yi g n o r e do r l e s s
u'ell prur idcci liir, and thus, as studentsf'ee
I that they arc not in a suppor-tive
c n r i r o n n r e n tI ,c s sl e a r n i n gt a k e sp l a c e .
In contrast,liorn kindergarten
on, mothcrtongue-English
arc instructed
speakers
in all their school sub.icctsthror-rghtheir Ll, the languragein rvhich they arc
cognitil'ely developedappropriate
to their age.Even thosewho chooseto participate
in a bilingualclassdo not fall bchindin otherschoolsubjectsw'hilelearninganother
languagedLrringthe schoolyears.Thus, fbr most E,nglishmothertonguespeakers,
a l l l t t u r d i t t - t c n s i o t rt sl ' t h eP r i s r nu r o d c la r e i n p l a c ci n L 1 , i n c l u d i n gs c h o o l i n si t r u
s o c i o c r " r l t u r a sl lLy r p p o r l r vecn v i r o n n r e nat n d c o n t i n u o u sc o g n i t i v c a n d l i n g u i s t i c
d e re l o p m c n itn L -I .
Social
and
Cuftural
Processes
in Ll
llr
CognitiveDevelopmentin L1
T h eP r i s mM o d e l f o N
r a t i v e - E n g l si sl the a k e r s
aotryrrlft '3.'LIL:. \'rlJ nrd P
!l|er ,! VVatrre F T hotrrns
Figttrc 3 Longuageucqui.sition.fbr
school
Predicting SecondLanguageAcademic Succ.ess
in English
339
H O W A C A D E M I C P R O G R E S SI S M E A S U R E D F O R B O T H M O T H E R
TONGUE AND SECOND LANGUAGE SPEAKERS OF ENGLISH
T y p i c a lm o t h e rt o n g u es p e a k e rosf E n g l i s hi n t h e U S A m a k e l 0 m o n t h s ' p r o g r e si n
s
schoolachievementfor each 1O-monthschoolyear. This performancedef-rnes
the
5Othpercentileor normal curve equivalenl(NCE-an equal-interval
percentile)on
standardizednorm-referencedtests and the averagescore on criterion-referenced
testsas the studentsprogressfrom gradeto grade.Likewise,on a stateor school
distnct performanceassessment,
the standardsdevelopedfor each grade level are
also basedon typical performanceof groupsof mothertongueEnglishspeakerson
these tests. These tests measurecontinuouslinguistic,cognitive, and academic
growtlt in English,and the testschangeweekly,monthly,and yearly to rcflect that
grou,th.It is on theseschool testsadministeredin E,nglishthat English language
learnersare unrealistrcally
expectedto be able to demonstratcmiraculousgrowth.
Policy makersassumethat non-E,nglish-proficient
studentsshouldsornehou'be able
to leap from the lst percentileor NCII to the 50th (as comparedto rnothertonguc
speakers
of English)in one to two years.During this pcnod,nrothertonguespeakers
c o n t i n u et o m a k e 1 0 m o n t } r sp' r o g r e s so v e r a p e r i o do f 1 0 m o n t h s .Y e t . i f E n g l i s h
learneisare being taught only in English,a languagethey do not yet understand,
they needat leasttwo to thrceyearsto reacha high enoughlevel ol'proficiencyin
L2 to attemptto keep up with the pace of the mother tongue-llnglishspeakerin
school.For example,studentsin one group who are not yet proficientin Irnglish
rnight study English rntensively,and by the end of the.irfirst two years,make an
enormousleap lrom the lst to the 20th NCII when the studcntsllrst take a
To
standardizcd
test in E,nglishreading,Irnglish languagear1s,and nrathcmatics.
or
s c o r ea t t h e l e v c l o 1 ' t h et y p i c a lm o t h e rt o n g u e - E n g l i sshp e a k e (r 5 0 t h p e r c e n t i l e
NCE) in all schoolsub.jects,
theselrnglishlanguagclearncrsmust then continuetr.r
makc ntore than onc year's progressin one ycar and do so lor sevcralcottsecutive
y e a r st o c l o s et h e i n i t i a lg a po f 2 5 - 3 0N C E s .F i g u r e4 v i s u a l l yi l l u s t r a t etsh r sp o i n t .
For E,nghshlanguagelearners,progressat the typical rate of rnothertongucEnglishspeakers
meansonly maintainingthe rnitrallargegap, not closingit, as the
mothertongue-English
speakerscontinueto make additionalprogressin all Prism
componentswith each passingyear. If [rnglish langr-rage
lcarnersmake less than
(e.g.,
typical mother tongue-E,nglish
English languagelearners
speakerprogress
r n i g h tm a k e 6 m o n t h s ' p r o g r e sisn o n e l 0 - m o n t hs c h o o ly e a r w h i l e t y p i c a lm o t h e r
tonguespeakersmake 10 months'progress),the initial largeachievementgap will
widen even further.
an initial
To illustratefufther,if a groupof Englishlanguagelearnersexpenences
3-year gap in achievementassessedin English (math, science,social sfudies,
languagearts, reading,writing), they must make an averageof about I % years'
in 6 yearsyears(for a total of9 years'progress
progressin the next 6 consecutive
a 30-NCE gain, from the 20th to the 50th NCE) to reach the same long-term
performance
levelthat a typicalmothertongue-English
speakerreachesby making I
in 6
year'sprogressin I year for eachof the 6 years(for a total of 6 years'progress
years-a zero-NCEgain, stayingat the 50th NCE,).This is a diftlcult task indeed,
even for an English languagelearnerwho has receivedexcellentformal schooiing
before enteringUSA schoolsand whose achievementis on qrade level for his,4rer
3.+0
Collier and Thomas
(50thpercentile
Typicalnative-English
speakers
or NCE)
gainduringeachschoolyear
makeoneyearof achievement
( ' 1 0m o n t h sg a i ni n a 1 0 m o n t hs c h o oyl e a r )
F o r e a ch ve a r o f sch ool
Grade,
must
Englishlearners
gainmorethanone
typically
y e a r ' sa c h i e v e m e(net . 9 . 1, 5
monthsgain)eachof several
consecutive
schoolyearsto ever
closetheirtypical25 NCE
gapwithEnglish
achievement
speakers
whentestedin English(L2)
e 1997,WayneP.'l'homas
Copvright
liigure I Att inportunt understancling
ase *'hcn testedin his/hcr rnothertongue.Still more dauntingis the task-of the
English lcarner whose schooling has been intemrpted by social or economlc
upheavalor rvarf-are.Learning Irnglish while keeping up with mother tongLre
speakers'progressin otherschoolsub.jects
and while makingup the materiallost to
interruptedor non-existentschoolingin the student'scountry o1-origin is a truly
lbrrni dabIe r.rncle'r1ak
i ng.
I t i s l b r t h e s cr e a s o n st h a t p c e r - e q u i v a l e n
g tr a d e - l e v ebl i l i n g u a ls c h o o l i n gi s
essentialto thescstudents'long-termacademicsuccess.
While the sfudentis making
the gainsneeciedwith eachsucceeding
year to closethe gap in perfonnanceon the
t e s t s i n E n g l i s h ,t h a t b i l i n g u a l s t u d e n ti s n o t f a l l i n g b e h i n d i n c o g n i t r v ea n d
acadenticdevelopment.Once the bilingual srudents'averageachievementreaches
the 5Othpercentileor NCE,(the averageachievement
levelof mothertongue-English
s p e a k e r so)n s c h o o tl e s t si n E n g l i s i rt,h e c o g n t t i v ea n da c a d e m i w
c o r k i n L 1 h a sk e p t
thesestudentson gradelevel and they sustaingrade-levelperformancein English
even as the acadernicwork getsincreasinglycomplexwith eachsucceeding
year in
r r i d d l ea n dh i g h s c h o o l .
Furthermore,L I languagedevelopmentat school is deeply interrelatedwith
cognitrvedeveiopment.
Childrenwho stop cognitivedevelopmentin L1 befbrethey
have reachedthe final Piagetianstage of formal operations(some'nvhere
around
p L r b e r wr)t l n t h c r i s k o l ' s u l 1 ' e r i n g
n e g a t i v ec o n s e q u e n c eass m e a s u r e db y s c h o o l
PredictingSecondLanguageAcademicSuccessin English
3,11
tests.Many studiesindicatethat if studentsdo not reacha certainthresholdin therr
developing
L1. they may experiencecognitivedifficultiesin the L2. Furtherrnore,
cognitivelyand linguisticallyin L l at leastthroughoutthe elementaryschoolyears
provrdesa knowledgebasethat transfersfrom L\ to L2. When schoolingts provided
arethe vehiclefor strongoognitiveand acadenlic
in both L1 and L2, both languages
development.Linguistically,deep structurein L1 transfersto L2. Literacy skrlls
languageand L2 is
transferfrom Ll to L2 evcn when Ll is a non-Roman-alphabet
(
O
v a n d o ,C l o l l i e r&
,
L
2
t
o
i
n
L
l
t
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
E n g l i s h .C o g n i t i v ep r o c e s s edse v e l o p e d
C o m b s2, 0 0 3) .
Thr"rs,
the sirnplisticnotion that all we needto do is to teachlrnglish language
learnersthe I',nglishlanguagedoes not addressthc needsof the schotll-agechild.
we are literally slo*'ing
Fufthennore.rvltcn n,e teach only the English langr-rage.
clou'na child's cognitivcand academicgrorvth(as well as ignoringthe sociocultural
ydlattcing
a s p e c to
s l -l c a r n i n g )a, n d t h a t c h i l d m a y n e v c rc a t c hu p t o t h c c o n s t a n t l a
speaker.
nrothertongr.re-Frnglish
P R E D I C T I O N SO N P R O G R A M E F F E C T I V E N E S SU S I N G T H E P R I S M
MODEL
I n o u r s c r i c so f ' l o n g i t u d i n arl e s e a r c hs t u r d i c(sT h o n r a s& C o l l i c r , 1 9 9 7 , 2 0 0 1 )
c o n d u c t c df i o r n 1 9 8 5t o t h c p r e s c n it n 2 3 s c h o o lc l i s t r i c tisn l 5 s t a t c so f ' t h c L J r l i t c c l
S t a t c sw, e h a v ec o l l e c t e dd a t ao n f i n g l i s hl a n g u a g cl c a r n c r s ' a c a d c t t tl itcc h i c r ' c t t l c t l l
i i c r o s s- q r a d eKs - 1 2 . W i t h e a c hs t L r d yl ,v c h a v c a d d c dk r o u r L t n c i c r s t a n c loi nl -gw h a t
acrosstirnc and rvhich school prosrillll atltl stttclcttt
happensto thcse str-rdcnts
backgroundvariablcshave thc most influenceon their academicsttcccss.We have
1brI;nglishlearnersallci
examtncdthe wide varietyol'USA schoolserviccsprovidec'l
of schoolprogralnsthat distingttishotte
havc becn able to identify characteristics
proqram lrorn anothcr.Figure 5 providcsan overvieu'of tla-1orproqranlnltldcls
developedfbr E,nglrshlanguagelearnersin the USA and therr drstinguishing
ol-thePrisnlrnodel.
basedon the components
charactenstics
The major types of programsfor English languagelearnersin the USA arc
illustratedon a contrnuumfiom left to nght, from those programsrvith the least
amounto1'supportfbr the eight Prisrndimensionsto thoseprogramsrvith the most
For exanrplc,in thc fnr lcfi colr.rrlltr
completcsupportfor all of the Prismdin-rcnsions.
is the programdevelopedin responseto Proposition227 ol-Calilbrnia.as described
in the referendumpassedby votersin 1998.This programhas to datedetnonstrateci
the leastamountof successin closingthe achievementgap, with the achievement
speakers
gap betrveen English language learners and mother tongue-E,nelish
years
of its
flrst
three
during
the
widening
remainrngconstantor even slightly
js
lvro-v,a)'enrichntcnldtrtt/ longtrttga
In the far right column
irnplenrentatron.
etlucation(alsocalledbilingtal immersion),the programwith the broadestcoverage
, ' e w i l l e x a n t i t r et h c
o f t h e P r i s m d i m e n s i o n sI.n t h e r e m a i n d e ro f t h i s c h a p t e r u
featuresof each program for its adherenceto the four componentsof the Prism
model in both Ll and L2. Finally, we will use large-scaledata-basedresearch
overtime in schoolsystems
findingsto compareEnglishlanguagelearners'progress
d
as measure
u'hereeachof the different programfypes has beenr.l'ellrmplernented,
by fidelity to the definitionof the programmodel. In other n'ords,r,lewiil answer
-)+ l
Collier and Thomas
REMEDIAL
IiNRICfIMI]NT
As ivell im
\lhilc ia thclc
nrogrrmt b
rtudcnlrrccciyc:
nented
f,,SLTaught TBEi rvith
Through
Traditionol
Content
Tcaching
As well irrr
TBEr with
Currcnt
Teaching
rer'lted
Trvo-way
DI.,/DBEIT
.lwg SrOuP!
trughl in thcir
ttvo hngsrgrr
Cognitive
E n rp h a s i s
A c a d e n ri c
l.ntphasis
(in all school
suDJects.)
L i n g u i sI i c
E n rp h a s i s
l,l=primsn'
hnguage,
L 2 = E ng l i s h
{)nlv Social
linglish
onlyin L?)
Only Socirl
Un g l i s h
lonly in L?)
Acsdcmic
English
(onlyin L2)
I)evclops
Psrtial
Ll + L,2
A c a d c n ri c
Prollciency
I)eYclops
f'u ll
LI+L2
r \ c a d e n ri c
[)roficicncr
S o ci o c u l t u r a l
5l r0ng
cl+c2
Enrphasis
Cl=lst culturc
C2=?ndculturc
Proglum Length
S h 0r t - t c r m
2-l years
Short-(crm
2-3years
lntcrmcdi8tc
l-4 vcars
S r nI l l - t 0 modcrste
(special
c u n r c u l u m)
Sln all-t{ts
[.,rasl
rn ooc ra Ic
(specral
cxpcnsivc:
Nntive Lnnguagc
Acadrnric
Supporl
l)rposurr to
t ) n g l i s hS p e a k e r s
llxtrt
lnstructi0rrtl
('ost
cuniculum)
S{andard
marnSlrfnnl
curflculunt
Perccnl of
Achicvrnrcnl (l
{.1n rcsca rched
Wirh NalivrE n g l i s h S p e a k e r s o t g a pc l o s u r c
El-Lssrncc
('losed by End of
Srhooling
( b n s e do n d ! t r a n a l Y t i cr c s c o r c l l )
'I'il[:
None
More than 50o1,
lorgitudinrlly
l{)07o of
gap fully
closcd b)
closed b.rentl of
endof
school
s c h o o l- a v c r i r g c s c o r c S a \ c ta g L
al 0r above
s c o r c sa b o v e
5Oth natronal
5 O r hn x r i o n a l
p c r c c ni{l e
perccnti lc
l(lt)ol' ot
gap fully
linalrvcrage
scoresil
I I'" national
pcrcc'nlrle
-mar is llilth
s t a n c l sl o r t r t t n . s i t t o n a lb i l t n g u u l c d u t u t i t n t
I r n a la v c r a g c
scoresal
22ndnatronal
pcrccntrlc
- n r a xr s J 2 n d
linalaveragc
scotesal
? 4 ( hn r t r o n a l
p c r c c n tlic
iinalaveragc
5COr9S
al
l2nd nitional
Percentrle ' l
( b u t 9 0 -I 0 U t - .
a t 4 5 ' hp e r c c n t i l c
t{ DI.-/DBIr stands lbr duul
languitgc.i tlevelopntentul hilinguctt ttluL'.1tt)tl
C o p y r i g hat O2 0 0 3 ,W a y n eP . ' f h o m a &
s V i r g i n i ap . C o l l i e r
F igure -j.SummurvoJ'charac'teristics
uncJe/fectiveness
oJ'common
U.S.program.s
Jbr English
learner.s
the questionof how well studentsdo in school rn their L2 dependingupon the
particularschool programin w'hichthey are placed when they first arrive in the
schoolsystemwith no Englishproliciency.This will illustratethe predictrvepower
of the Prisrnmodel by demonstratrng
a directrelationshipbetweeneachprogram's
coverageof the Prisrndimensionsand the degreeof'educattonaleffectiveness
fbr
that program.
PredictingSecondLanguageAcademic Success
in English
311
One YearIntensive English Only
Propositton227, approvedby Califbrnia voters through a referendumin 1998,
specifiesthat studentsnot proficient in English should be placed in a one-year
programto learnintensiveE,nglish.
This plan segregates
the str.rdents
in a classroonr
separate
from the L,nglishmainstreamand doesnot addresshou, the studentsare to
be givcn accessto the restof the curriculum-math, science.and socialstudres.The
strongestprinciplcstatedin the ref'erendum
is that studentsare not to be instructcd
u s i n g t h e i r L l - o n l y E n g l i s h i n s t r u c t i o ni s a l l o w e d .F o l l o w i n g p a s s a g eo f t h e
referendum,few schools rn California chose to deny studentsaccessto the
curriculum, but many f'elt obligated to follow the principal purpose of the
ref'erendumto eliminate bilingual instructron.Only in schools u'here parents
requestedwaivershavc studentsbeengiven continuinginstructionthroughboth Ll
and L2. Some schools chose to continue or develop two-rvay dual langua_ue
programsas anotheralternativeto the refercndum,a prograntsupportedby F.nglishspeakingparentswho chooselbr their childrento participatein thc brlingualclasses.
As a result of the ref'erendum,
only approximatelyl5oh o1-L.nglishlearnersin
Clalifo.rnia
continueto be taughtthror,rgh
both Ll and L2.
The programmandatedin Proposition227 providesthe lcast support lbr thc
e i g h t d i m e n s i t t n so f ' t h e I ) n s m m o c l e la s r e p r c s o r t e ci nl t h c I r n r r l i s h - o n l P
v risnr
prcsentedin Figure2. Soctocultural
supportis not addresscdin this progrant-the
teachcrsarc expcctedto tcach only in Bnglishand respondto thc studcntsonly in
f : n e l i s h .I n t h e s e i n t e n s i v el r n g l i s h c l a s s e sa, b i c u l t u r a lc u r r i c u l u n rt h a t u , o u l d
a d d r c s ss o m e o 1 ' t h e e m o t i o n a l / a f - f e c t isvicd e o l ' l e a n r i r r g i s n o t c n c ( ) L l r a { r e d .
Cognitivedevelopmentis not addressedin the languageof the ref-erendum.
Since
studentsare to be taughtexclusivclyin Englishin a segregated
contextrvhcrethev
d o n o t h a v ea c c e s st o r n o t h e rt o n g L l ef ' . n g l i s h - s p c a k ipnege r st,h c r c i s l i t t l e s t i r n u l u s
lbr cognitivedcr,'clopnrent
which bestoccursin intcractions
with santc-aged
peersln
the L2 or through age-appropriate
prclblcm-solving
tasks done in Ll. Sincc the
s t u d e n t sa r e d e n i e d u s e o 1 ' t h e i r L I i n s c h o o l . l i t t l e c o q n i t i l ' ed e v e l o p n t e nits
stintulatedin this onc-yearprogram.Even academicdevelopntcntis ignored,*ith
heavy emphasison English developmentrather than teaching English through
nreaninglulacadenriccontent. Finally, the referendumclearly dictatesthat all
instructionwill be in English, so studentsin this program are denied accessto
academic,cognitive,and linguisticdevelopmentthroughtheir ntothertongue.This
e l i m i n a t ehsa l l ' o ft h e P n s md i m e n s i o n s - a l lf o u r d i m e n s i o ndse v e l o p e tdh r o u g hL 1 .
The Prtsrnmodel predictsthat bilingual learnersreceivingaccelerated
learning
throughtheir t*'o languages
developsocioculturally,
linguistically,coqniti'u,ely,
and
academicallythrough each language-eight dimensions in all. ln contrast.
Proposition227 supportssfudentsin only one dimension,i.e. acquiringthe English
languageand only fbr one year. This is extremelyminimal support.Our analyses
(seeFigure6) as well as otherresearchers'studies
havelbund that Englishlearners
in this programhave not made any progresstowardsclosingthe achievement
gap
and the gap has widenedin the secondaryyears.Thus.this proeranthas resultedin
the lowest achievementfor Engiish learnersof any programin the USA (Parrish,
et al. 2002;Thompsonct al., 2002).
a l l
J++
Collier ctnclThomcts
( R e s u l t sa g g r e g a t e df r o m a s e r i e s o f a l o n g i t u d i n a sl t u d i e s o f w e l l - i m p l e m e n t e c ,
n r a t u r ep r o g r a m s i n f i v e s c h o o l d t s t r i c t si n C a l i f o r n i af r o m 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 0
P r o q r a m 1 : T w o - w a y d e v e l o p m e n t a lb i l i n g u a le d u c a t i o n( B E ) , i n c l u d i n gC o n t e n t E S !
P r o g r a m 2 : O n e - w a y d e v e l o p m e n t a lB E , i n c l u d r n gE S L t a u g h t t h r o u g h a c a d e m r c
contenl
P r o g r a m 3 . T r a n s i t i o n aB
l E , i n c l u d i n gE S L t a u g h t t h r o u g h a c a d e m i c c o n t e n t
P r o g r a m 4 : T r a n s r t j o n aB
l E , i n c l u d i n gE S L , b o t h t a u g h t t r a d i t i o n a l l y
P r o g r a m 5 . E S L t a u g h t t h r o u g h a c a d e m i c c o n t e n t u s i n g c u r r e n ta p p r o a c h e s w t t h n o
L1 use
P r o g r a m 6 : E S L p u l l o u t- t a u g h t t r a d i t r o n a l l y
P r o g r a m 7 P r o p o s l i o n 2 2 7 r n C a l i f o r n t a( s e q u e n t i a l2 - y e a r c o h o r t s ,s p r i n g ' 19 9 8 spring2000)
Programs:
60
BE
D.\clopm.nr!l
iDCIrdios (iontcn( €SL
s0
Irevelol)n'cntrl BF
bcluding ( onr.nt rSl-
-l - I-rarrsrtronal BI
ioclud'ng ( ootenl ESL
I
.l - 'I rrusitional
borh lrrghl
l.'
1il
2o
lt)
5
BE+I:slrrrditionelh'
F.Sl. r!ught rhrough
uc2drrri. cootcnt (Do LII
6-!SlI'ullout - (no t,l)
lrught (r.rlirion.ll\
MidrllcSchool(;iin$
r!nge:-l to +4 N(ll:V
Littlc / no grp closure
Ibr most progrsrns
lligh Sch0ol(;rins
nnge: -J to +2 N(fl:s/yr
(iap tnersrsc
lor most comnlon
7 ' Pr0t,2:7 io ('A
Spr ing I 99E'3prln8
by grud!t
?0tl{}
(;RADI)
( opyrighr Crl(X)l, Wulnc I' Ilronlrs & Virginiu l) L'ollicr
J " i c u r e 6 I : t t g l i . s hl a t t t ' r t . ' t ' . t ' l , , n g - t e t ' n
Kt- 1 2 c t c h i e v e m e ni ln n r t r n t u /c u r v e e q u i v c t l e n t s( N C E . s l
ott .\ldttdurdi:ctl ta.slsin Iinglish reLtding ('ompured across seven progt"um model.\
ESL Pullout or ESL Tuught as a Subjectat SecondaryLevel
This nrostconrnonly encoLlntered
prograrntbr f:nglish lcarnersin the USA places
thcsestudentsrn a mainstreamclassin the elementaryschool,w,lthan ESL resource
t e a c h epr u l l i n gt h e E n g l i s hl e a r n c r o
s u t o f t h e i rc l a s s r o o mtso f c r c u so n I r S L l e s s o n s
f b r g e n e r a l l yo n e o r t w o h o u r sp e r d a y . A t r n i d d l ea n d h i g h s c l i o o ll e v e l ,L : n g l i s h
learnersare assigncdto ESL as one of'their sltbjectsfbr onc or two classesper day,
and the ESL teacheris nrainlyresponsiblefbr teachingthe stmctureof the English
l a n g u a g e .E x a r n i n i n gt h e P r i s m m o d e l d i m e n s i o n st,h i s m o d e l a g a i n p r o v i d e s
minirnal sLrpportfbr students.While with the ESL teacher,there is little time for
lbcus cltt cogltitivc devclopment.Academic subjectsare not taught by the ESL
teacher,and no sllppon fbr developmentof academicskills throughstudents'first
languageis provided.Programlength is minimal, generallyone to two years.As
rvith Proposition22J, one Prism dimensionis being developedduring the ESL
sttpport time----theEnglish language.A second Prism dimension,sociocultural
sllpport,lnay be addressed
whilc studentsare with the ItSL teacherbut that is for a
tninimal atnctttnt
of tirne.Our researchfindingsacrossnumerousschooldistnctsrn
the USA indrcatethat the averageachievement
levelsof high schoolgraduates
\.vho
* ' e r e i n i t i a l l y ' p l a c eidn E S L p u l l o u tp r o g r a m si s t h e l l t h p e r c e n t i l (e2 4 t hN C E ) , n o t
hlgh enough achievementto continue in higher education,and this is the program
n'ith the largestnumberof high schooldropouts(Thomas& Collier, lggT). Little or
no long-termgap closureis associated
with ESL pullout.
PredictingSecondLanguageAcademicSucce,ss
in English
345
ESL Tuught through Academic Content, also called ShelteredInstruction
Taking E,SL instruction one step fuither by adding academic content to the
responsrbilities
of the E,SL teacher,or an ESL teacherteaming vn'itha content
teacher, adds t\\,o significant Prism components-academic and cognitire
derelopmentin L2. All the rnstructionis stiil in Englishin this program,and thus
f b u r P r i s m d i r n e n s i o n sa r e m i s s i n g ( s o c i o c u l t u r a ll,i n g u i s t i c . c o g n i t i v e , a n d
academic devclopmentthrough the first lar-rguage).
At lcast during English
instruction,studentsare accelerating
their growth throughlessonsthat teachEn-elish
through mcaningfulacademiccontent,and the ESL classesarc more cogr-ritivcly
complex,an imporlantdimensionthat is rnissingfrorn E,SLpr-rllout
and Proposition
227 support servrces.[n ESL content classcs,as in E,SL pullout. sociocultural
support is provided: The teachersunderstandthe SLA process,and aspectsof
bicultural curricular learnrngrnay be incorporatedinto these ESL classes.ESL
contentclassesare usuallyprovided for at leastone more year than ESL pullout
supportso thatboth the Prismdrrnensions
supportedby the E,SLcontentteachcrare
extendedand the studcnts'achievements
are accelerated
for one more year belbre
move
into
mainstream
for
full
day.
E,nglishlanguagelearners
students
the
the
school
necdaicelerationto achicvegap closure.While mothertonguc-E,nglish
speakcrsare
rl'ho
progress
year,
learners,
rnakingl0 rnonths'
with eachschool
Englishlanguage
initiallyper{brmlou' on curriculartestsin [:.nglish,
must makemclrcthan l0 months'
p r o g r e s Isb r m a n vy e a r si n a r o w , t oe v e n t u a l l cy a t c hu p t o t h c c o n s t a n t l a
ydvancinr:
nrothertongue-Englishspeakerson grade level. We have ftrund in our rescarch
studrcsthat L,nglishlanguagelearncrsr,vhorcccivcda quality ESL contcntprogranr
gap, graduatinghigh schoolin the 22nd natronal
can closehalf of the achievement
(
T
h
o
m
a
s
(
3
4
1
h
half'ol-the
perccntile
NCfr)
. ddressing
& C o l l i e r .1 9 9 7 , 2 0 0 2 ) A
P r i s m m o d e l d i m e n s i o n sr a r s e ss t u d e n t s 'a c h i e v e m e nlte v ' e l ss i g n i f i c a n t l l ' h. u t
and theseLrSLgraduatcs
rcpresents
only half o1-tliew'ayto grade-levelachievement,
acrossthe uSA.
remainin the bottomouartilcof studentachievement
Transitional B iling ual Education
Transitionalbilingual educationis, like ESL pullout, a commonly encountered
programin the USA for the stateswith very large numbersof E,nglishlanguage
Amclngthe r arious
learnersof one languagebackgroundsuch as Spanishspeakers.
types of bilingual prograrns,transitionalbilingual schoolingis the prograntmost
has
oftensupportedby statefunding,when statelegislatronfor bilingualinstn-rction
m
o
d
e
l
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
dt o
i
s
r
e
m
c
d
i
a
l
p
r
o
r
,
'
i
d
e
d
.
a
T h r s t y p c o f b i l i n g u a ls c h o o l i n g
been
movestudentsinto all-Englishinstructionas soonas possiblervith only tu,o to three
yearsof someinstructional
supportthroughstudents'L1 cornbinedwith a portion01'
the numberof
time in ESL contentinstruction.This programsignificantlyincreases
within the short durationol the prograrn.Academic,
Prism dimensionsaddressed
cognitive,and linguisticdevelopmentare providedthrough both Ll and L2 in a
supportiveenvironment,with all of the eight drmensionsaddressed
socroculturally
rvhenthe classesarewell implemented.
However, transitionalbilingual classesare typrcally self-contained.separate
peers
and often percervedby mothertongueE,nglish-speaking
from the rnarnstream,
as remedial,meant for studentswho have "problems."The sameis true of separate
ESL classes.The lor.r'social statusof studentsin the Drosramcan lead to subtlebut
l.+6
Co/lier and Thomus
This in turn affects
powerfulinfluenceson Englishlanguagelearners'achievement.
of thrs
the socioculturalprocessesrn learning, lessening the eff-ectiveness
warm,
caring
and
teachers are
conrponr'nt.F-r'en when bilingual,/bicultural
studentsbecomeincreasinglyaw'areot'
supportit,eemotionallyand cross-culturally,
their lorv social status within the whole school community. Another Prism
dimensionthat rnay be reducedin lesseffectivetransitionalbilingualclassesis the
amolrntand ry'peof L1 support.We havef-oundthat the classesthat providefbr very
linle L1, shifiinginto mostly L2 instructionwithin the f-irsttwo years,leadto lou'er
a c a d e m i ac c h i e v e r n e innt L 2 .
This raisesan additionalf'actorthat must be taken into accountin the Pnsrn
t l'the
n r o d e lT
. he nurnbeo
r f P r i s md i m e n s i o ncso v e r e db y a p r o g r a mi s o n e a s p c c o
Sct
model,but lengtho1'theprogramalso stronglyintluencesstudentachievement.
the Prisrndimensionsmust be implementedfor a sufficienttime to havea sLrstained
ef t e c t o n s t u d e n ta c h i e v e m e n E
t . v e n w h e n a l l e i g h t d i m e n s i o n so l - t h e m o d e l a r e
in transitionalbilingualclasscs,alter threeyearso1'slrpport,
studentshave
addrcssccl
(similar
to the achier.'ement
only closedhalf' of the achievementgap in their L2
levcls o1'studentsattendingESL content).They may bc on gradelevel in their L I
but not yet on grade level in their L2. In our latestresearch(Thomas& Collrer,
1002),rve fbund that once studentsleavetheir specialsupportprogramand mole
gap, bLrtat
into the mainstream,
they no longer continueto closethe achier,'ement
thcir bcst,rlakc onc veirr'sprogressin eachremainingyearof'school.Thus,stucients
in the best irnplemented
transitionalbilingual programsby the end o1'high school
* ' c r c a b l e 1 o r c a c ht h c 3 2 n d p e r c e n t i l e( 4 0 t h N C L . )i n t h c i r I ' - n g l i s ha c h i e e
r ment,
h i g h e rt h a n t i S L c o n t e n tb u t s t i l l n o t a t t h e t y p i c a l5 O t hp c r c e n t i l cp c ' r f ' o r m a n o
ce
f
nrothertongue-f:nglish
speaters(Thornas& Collier, 1991,2002).
One-wuyund T'wo-wuyDual Lunguage Educution
T o a v o i d t h c n e g a t i v es o c i a lp e r c e p t r o nosf t r a n s i t i o n abl i l i n g u a le d u c a t r o nU, S A
schoolsthat have worked on enrichingthc'rrbilingual programsarc incrcasingly
using the term dual lunguugeecluc'ution
to rel-erto an enrichmentmodel of bilingual
schooling.While theseprogramswere the leastcommonrnodela decadeago, they
are rapidly increasingin numberas educatorsdiscoverthe pori'erof theseprograms
to raiseacademicachievementfor all studentswho chooseto enroll.Dual language
educationis the curricularmainstream,
taughtthroughtwo languages.
Str"rdents
are
educatedtogether throughout the day in cognitively challenging,grade-level
academiccontentin interactive,discovery-learning
classes.
Alternatingbetweenthe
two languagestakes place not by translationbut by subjector thematicunit or
tnstructionaltime, so that afier several years students become academically
proficientin both languages
of instruction,ableto do academicu,ork on gradelelel
in eitherlanguage.In this model,Englishlearnerscan closethe gap fully in their L2,
reachinghigh attainmentat or abovethe 5Othpercentile(grade-levelachrevement)
in both Ll and L2 by rniddleschoolyearsand graduatingabovegradelevel by the
end of high school(seeFigure6, Thomas& Collier, 1991,2002).
One-v'ayref-ersto one languagegroup being schooledthrough trvo languages,
while tw'o-\t'et'refersto two languagegroups being schooledthrough their trio
languages.Two-way classesinclude mother tongue-Englishspeakerswho have
chosento be schooledbilingually,and their achievement
is alsotypicallyat or above
g r a d e l e v e l w h e n e n r o l l e di n t h e s ec l a s s e s( L i n d h o l m - L e a r y , 2 0 0 1T; h o m a s &
PredictingSecondLanguageAcademic Success
in Engli.sh
a ta
-)+ /
Collier,2002).Thus,all of the eight Prism dimensionsare fully coveredin the dual
languageprogram,fbr both Englishlearnersand mothertongue-English
In
speakers.
two-way bilingual classes,the English learnersare not segregatedin a remedial
program, but instead they are respectedand valued as peer teacherswhen the
instructionis in therr home language,and they are given supportby their peerstcr
acquirefull academicproficiencyin E,nglish,their L2, acrossthe curriculum.The
dual language teachers support both groups socioculturally through a
bilingual,&icuituralcurriculum and provide a context fbr studentsto develop
cognitively,linguisttcally,and academically
throughboth languages,
for at leastsix
yearsduring the elementaryschoolyears(GradesPK-5). Increasingly,the middle
schoolsand high schoolsthat serve thesestudentsare developingcourseworkto
continuethe academicchalleneein both lansuases.
CONCLUSIONS
We liaveexanrinedseveralma.jortypesof programsfbr Englishlearnersin termsof
the numberof Prism model componentsand dimensionsaddressed,
their degreeof
coverageof the f-actors
includcdin the Prism modcl dimensions.and the lengthottime that each program operates.As a result, we predicteda ranking fbr each
program,from lowestto highestin tennsof thc amountclI'achier''crncrrt
gap closurc
producedby each.
We also conductcdresearchin schooldistrictsaroundthe countryfiorn l99l to
2002.follorvingthe longitudinalprogressof L,nglishlemnersin eachprogramtype.
Beforecomparingprograms,we were carefulto ascertainthat each schooldistrict
had fully and faithfullyimplernented
the programsto the greatestextentpossibleso
that implementation
lactorswould be controlled,yielding a nlore vzrlidcompansorl
of programeff-ects.
In addition,our programdescriptions
specifredinitial conditions
of student achtevement,descnbed specific program f-eaturesand strategies,and
linked these program descriptionsto measuredachievemcntand gap closure
outconresfor each prograrn.Finally, we evaluatedcach program type over a
sulhciently long period of time to allow typically small program effect sizcs,
rangingfrom 0 to .25 (0-5 NCEs) per year, to accumulateto levels detectableb-v
nleasures
of practicaland statrstical
signilicance.
The resultsof our programcomparisonso\er time indicatethat the long-ternr
achievementof English learnersin each programis indeeddirectly relatedto the
Prismmodel dimensionsaddressed,
the degreeof coverageof thesedimensions,
and
the durationof the programin years.We interpretthis as evidencethat the Prism
rnodelhasconstructvalidity,as well as predictivevalidiry.Clearly,the Prrsmmodel
can be used as a template for programmatic design, so that programs fully
addressingthe Prism componentsand dimensions,and that are sustainedlong
enough,can be expectedto producefull achievementgap closure.
As the next step in the refinement of the Prism model, u'e intend to further
developthe Prismmodelto allow multipleregression-based
predictrons
of long-term
achievementof English iearners,basedon weightsdeterminedby observations
of
program characteristics
in school classrooms.In this way, we will continue to
inr.'estrgate
the potential for each program fype to produce some degree of gap
closure,and we r.vill further improve the basis for our program recommendations
basedon the Prismcomponents
and dimensions.
Co/lier and Thomas
318
REFERENCES
C o l i i e r . V P . ( 1 9 9 5 a ) . . l c q u i r i n gu . s e c ' o n dl u n g u u g e/ b r . s c h o o l .W a s h i n g t o n ,D [ ] : N a t i o n a lC l c a r i n g h o L r s e
e c c l u i s i t i o n I. L : i l e c t r o n ivce r s i o n :h t t p / / w v n w . n c e l a . g * u . c d u . ] .
1 b r [ n g l i s h l . a n g u a - eA
seconcllunguoge
C'ollier, \'. P. (l995bl Promoting ucutlemic.!u.'ce.!.r
/or ESL ,sluclant.tL'nclt'rslundin,g
u c q u t s i t i o nf b r s c h o o l . W o o d s i d e ,N Y : B a s t o sE d u c a t i o n a lP u b l i c a t i o n s ,
, ltd
C o l l i e r . V P ( 1 9 9 5 c ) . S e c o n d l a n g u a g ea c q u i s i t i o nl b r s c h o o l : A c a d e m i c , c o g n i t i " ' e .s o c i o c u l t u r a l a
lingLristicprocesses.ln J. It. AIatis ct al. ([ds.), Georgetov'n Univer.tit-t'Round Tubla on Lunguuga.s
u n d L i n g u i . t t i c ' .1s9 9 5( p p . 3 l l 3 2 7 ) . W a s h i n g t o n ,D C : G e o r g e t o w n L J n i v e r s i t yI ) r e s s .
Cunrrrins, J. (1000). Lunguuge, power uncl pedagog,, Bilingual chiltlren in the c'ro.ssfireClevedon.
l J n g l a n d :M u l t i l i n g u a l M a t t e r s .
l : l l i s , R . ( 1 9 9 1 ) T h t , . s t t t t l . t ' .o: /c r - ' o nldu n g u u g cu c q u i . s i t i o nO. x l b r d : ( ) x f b r d I J n i r . ' e r s i tIl' r c s s
l - a r s c n - l " r e e m a nD, . , & L o n g , M . t t . ( 1 9 9 1 ) . , , 1 ni n t r o d u c t i o n t c t s e t ' o n dl u n g u u g e u c q u i . s i l t o nr t s c u r t ' l t .
Ncu'York: L.orrgrnan.
l - i r r d h o l r r - l - e a 1, 1K . ( 2 0 0 1 ) D u u l l u n g u u g ca d u c ' c t t i o nC.l e v e d o n ,t i n g l a n d :M u l t i l i n g u a l M a t l e f s .
O r a n d o , C . J . , C o l l i e r ' . V . P . , & C o n i b s . M . C . ( 2 0 0 3 ) . B i l i n g u u l u n d | i . S l ,t l u s . s r o o n t . sT a c t c h t t t gi n
m u l t i t u l t u r t t l ( o n t e x t . \( J " ' c d . ) . N e r v Y o r k : M c G r a w - t t i l l .
s l tltt'
P r r r r i s h ,l ' . t 3 . , i - i n c l u a n t i .R . , M e r i c k e l , A . , Q u i c k , l ' 1 , E . , L a i r d . J . , & I : s r a , I ' } ( 2 0 0 2 ) . l i / / c c ' r . o
)27 on tha education ol Iingli.sh leurnar.s.K- 12. I'ttur 2 rt'7torl Pttlrr
implcntcntution ttf l'rr.tpr.t.sition
A l t o . L A : A n r c r i c a n I r r s t i t L r t cI si r r I i . c s c a r c h .
S'ashingtotr.
lunguuge ntinrtrii .studant.t.
l honras.W. P., & Collicr, V. P. ( l()9J). ,\t'hool ef/ectit,ene.s.;.fbr
I)C: National (ilearinghouse tirr tinglish I-anguage Acquisition. ll'.lectronic verslon:
h t t p "u r r u . r r c c l a . g r i ' u . cId. u
'l'honras.
\\'. P.. & Collicr, V P (2002). ,1 nutionul .studyt.tf.;chool clfcttivanes.s.forlunguusa minorit.\'
. \ t u ( l ( n t . \ 'l o t r . q - t a r nut L u t l a n i c u t h i t : v c m c n t . S a n t a C l r u z , ( ' A : C e n t e r l i r r f l c s c a r c h o n [ ] d L t c a t i o n .
[)ircrsitr
ancl Irxcellcnce, tlrriversit], of' ('alilirrnia-Santa ('rr:2. [-.lectronic \ursiur):
h t l p r i r r* r i . c r c d cu. c s c . c d ul .
'I
h o r r r p s o r rI ,\ 1 .S . . I ) i C ' c r b o .K . I r . , M a l r o u c y ' K
, . , & M a c S r ' r ' a nJ,. ( 2 0 0 2 , J a n u a r y ' )l.: l x i t oe n C a l i l b r n i a l A
r a l i c l i t v c r i t i q u e o 1 ' l a n g u a g e p r o g r a r n e v a l u a t i o n sa n d a n a l y s i s o f - t r n g l i s h l e a r n e r t e s t s c o r c s .
fiom
lidutution
I'olic.1' tlnuly.sil .lrchit,e.s, l0(l ).
26
l:ebruar-v 2006
I{etricvcd
h tt pi'iri r.r",r'.
cp aa.asu.cclu/cp aa,/v I 0 n 7.
W o n g - l r i l l n r o r el -. . ( l i ) t ) l ) . S e c o n d - l a n g u a gl cca r n i n gi n c h i l c l r c nA: n r o d c lo 1 ' l a n g u a glce a r n i n gi n s o c r u l
c o n t c \ l . l n t : . l l i a l y s t o k1 l r c l . 1L,t t n t n u g t ' p r o c c . s s i ni g
n h i l i n g u u lc h i l r l r c n( p p - 1 9 6 9 ) . ( ' a n r b r i t l g c :
( i r n r b r i d t : .Iei n i r " er s i t r I ) r c s s .