Professional Literature
Hong-Nam, K., & Leavell, A. (2006, February 14). Language learning strategy use of ESL students in an intensive English learning context. ScienceDirect.
The study, Language learning strategy use of ESL students in an intensive English learning context, investigated the language learning strategy use of fifty-five ESL students representing different world languages and nationalities enrolled in a college Intensive English Program (IEP). The IEP is a special pre-admissions college that focuses on creating, building, and expanding the language learning of ESL students. The institute allows the students to build basic communication skills and increase their academic English for the classroom. The study focused on the relationship between language learning strategies and second language proficiency. Furthermore, the study paid particular attention to strategy differences between nationality and gender.
The study revealed that proficient language learners employed more strategies in language learning than less proficient language learners, and a greater strategy use accompanied perceptions of higher proficiency. In other words, if a student believed he had a decent proficiency, he would use many learning strategies. Females showed more use of social learning strategies, more frequent use of formal rule-based practice strategies, and conversational or input strategies. Males showed more use of metacognitive and compensation strategies. The study also showed that cultural background has been linked to use and choice of language strategies. For example, Hispanic students elect more social and interactive strategies while Asian students may chose memorization strategies. However, this is certainly not true of every Hispanic and Asian student.
The results showed that the least preferred language learning strategies were the affective and memory strategies. The most preferred learning strategies were the following: metacognitive (mostly used by beginning and intermediate ESL students), social, compensation (communication strategies used by learners to compensate for limitations in their language, most used strategy), and cognitive.
The author of this work wished to show the relationship between language acquisition and language learning strategies of ESL students in a university IEP because there are not many published pieces of literature that focus on the language learning strategies of students studying English in a IEP course at the university level.
The intended audience of this particular study are ESL educators and perhaps even foreign language teachers who are curious to know what kind of learning strategies students find more helpful in the classroom.
This study helped me to realize that there is a difference in language learning strategies between all gender and nationality. Different strategies work for different kinds of people. This study focused university level students, but this information is still applicable for my unit plan. The study showed that beginning and intermediate ESL students at the university level preferred metacognitive and compensation strategies while memory strategies were one of the least preferred methods. However, beginning ESL students who are not at the university level may prefer to utilize memory strategies. The point is that all ESL students come into the classroom with ranging language proficiency and different learning strategies. Perhaps the goal is to introduce to the students different learning strategies such as affective, memory, metacognitive, social, compensation, and cognitive strategies so that maximum learning may occur.
Brown, C. (2004, February). Content based ESL curriculum and academic language proficiency. The Internet TESL Journal. Retrieved from http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Brown-CBEC.html
The article, Content Based ESL Curriculum and Academic Language Proficiency, talks about how the academic success of an ESL depends on his proficiency in the academic language. There are two kinds of English proficiencies that ESL must and will learn. The first proficiency is called Basic Interpersonal Conversational Skills (BICS). This is the kind of English used to carry conversations in the social settings. It is context embedded, and contextual cues are available to both speaker and listener. As a result, it is cognitively undemanding, and research shows that ESL students can pick up BICS English in two to three years. The second proficiency is Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP). This English is context-reduced as it is found in content areas such as math, science and social studies. Because it is decontextualized, ESL students often struggle to read with complete understanding and to write about what they read. CALP English demands a high level of cognitive thinking from ESL students. ESL students must work anywhere from five to ten years in order to arrive at their grade level CALP English.
The article goes on to say that an ESL student can improve his proficiency in CALP English by being introduced to integrated subject matter and language development through Content Based ESL Curriculum (CBEC). The benefits of CBEC are many. First, ESL students will learn age-appropriate material that those students in the mainstream are learning. This will allow the ESL students to catch up on the information that the mainstream students have already learned, and they will feel as if they are challenged with high-standard curriculum. Second, ESL students will read authentic texts. This will help the information to be more meaningful to the students. Third, language learning becomes more purposeful. They will learn the language, not about the language. Lastly, the ESL students will learn technical vocabulary which they are lacking. This kind of knowledge is crucial to academic success, and because the content area is being integrated the vocabulary is used and will be become useful for the future. It is enduring.
One challenge to the CBEC is that ESL teachers often feel as if they are not “qualified” to teach the integrated content. The ESL teacher is responsible for teaching the content area correctly; however, mainstream teachers are responsible for ESL students’ content learning in statewide assessments. The ESL teacher should integrate content area that she feels comfortable teaching. By devoting some time and effort into research, she should be able to come up with a lesson plan that successfully and correctly integrated content area. On the other hand, ESL teachers should not become preoccupied with the integrated content area and ignore teaching the related language skills. It is not CBEC without the missing language components.
The purpose of this author’s work was to inform ESL educators and stress the necessity and importance of Content Based ESL Curriculum and how to implement it in the ESL classroom.
The intended audience of this particular article are ESL educators looking for effective content material for the ESL classroom and how to use it.
My ideas for the unit plan were solidified when I read this article. Without even knowing it, I incorporated CBEC into my unit plan. My unit will touch upon nutrition which is reflected in health classes at the mainstream level, but my unit incorporates CBEC as suggested by this article. My students will read authentic texts as well as stories intended for ESL students. I did this because many of my students are at different CALP English proficiency levels. I also will have my students practice their academic English in the form of classroom discussions, table conversations, and a final oral speech at the end of the unit. I plan on assigning written work that is purposeful and meaningful in context. My unit incorporates real-life problem solving situations (in the restaurant, regarding one’s personal health, etc.) Thus, higher order and critical thinking will be reinforced. Lastly, I have integrated scaffolding into my unit plan. I know my students enjoy hands-on activities and visual demonstrations; I plan on using these two strategies a lot in my unit.
The study, Language learning strategy use of ESL students in an intensive English learning context, investigated the language learning strategy use of fifty-five ESL students representing different world languages and nationalities enrolled in a college Intensive English Program (IEP). The IEP is a special pre-admissions college that focuses on creating, building, and expanding the language learning of ESL students. The institute allows the students to build basic communication skills and increase their academic English for the classroom. The study focused on the relationship between language learning strategies and second language proficiency. Furthermore, the study paid particular attention to strategy differences between nationality and gender.
The study revealed that proficient language learners employed more strategies in language learning than less proficient language learners, and a greater strategy use accompanied perceptions of higher proficiency. In other words, if a student believed he had a decent proficiency, he would use many learning strategies. Females showed more use of social learning strategies, more frequent use of formal rule-based practice strategies, and conversational or input strategies. Males showed more use of metacognitive and compensation strategies. The study also showed that cultural background has been linked to use and choice of language strategies. For example, Hispanic students elect more social and interactive strategies while Asian students may chose memorization strategies. However, this is certainly not true of every Hispanic and Asian student.
The results showed that the least preferred language learning strategies were the affective and memory strategies. The most preferred learning strategies were the following: metacognitive (mostly used by beginning and intermediate ESL students), social, compensation (communication strategies used by learners to compensate for limitations in their language, most used strategy), and cognitive.
The author of this work wished to show the relationship between language acquisition and language learning strategies of ESL students in a university IEP because there are not many published pieces of literature that focus on the language learning strategies of students studying English in a IEP course at the university level.
The intended audience of this particular study are ESL educators and perhaps even foreign language teachers who are curious to know what kind of learning strategies students find more helpful in the classroom.
This study helped me to realize that there is a difference in language learning strategies between all gender and nationality. Different strategies work for different kinds of people. This study focused university level students, but this information is still applicable for my unit plan. The study showed that beginning and intermediate ESL students at the university level preferred metacognitive and compensation strategies while memory strategies were one of the least preferred methods. However, beginning ESL students who are not at the university level may prefer to utilize memory strategies. The point is that all ESL students come into the classroom with ranging language proficiency and different learning strategies. Perhaps the goal is to introduce to the students different learning strategies such as affective, memory, metacognitive, social, compensation, and cognitive strategies so that maximum learning may occur.
Brown, C. (2004, February). Content based ESL curriculum and academic language proficiency. The Internet TESL Journal. Retrieved from http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Brown-CBEC.html
The article, Content Based ESL Curriculum and Academic Language Proficiency, talks about how the academic success of an ESL depends on his proficiency in the academic language. There are two kinds of English proficiencies that ESL must and will learn. The first proficiency is called Basic Interpersonal Conversational Skills (BICS). This is the kind of English used to carry conversations in the social settings. It is context embedded, and contextual cues are available to both speaker and listener. As a result, it is cognitively undemanding, and research shows that ESL students can pick up BICS English in two to three years. The second proficiency is Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP). This English is context-reduced as it is found in content areas such as math, science and social studies. Because it is decontextualized, ESL students often struggle to read with complete understanding and to write about what they read. CALP English demands a high level of cognitive thinking from ESL students. ESL students must work anywhere from five to ten years in order to arrive at their grade level CALP English.
The article goes on to say that an ESL student can improve his proficiency in CALP English by being introduced to integrated subject matter and language development through Content Based ESL Curriculum (CBEC). The benefits of CBEC are many. First, ESL students will learn age-appropriate material that those students in the mainstream are learning. This will allow the ESL students to catch up on the information that the mainstream students have already learned, and they will feel as if they are challenged with high-standard curriculum. Second, ESL students will read authentic texts. This will help the information to be more meaningful to the students. Third, language learning becomes more purposeful. They will learn the language, not about the language. Lastly, the ESL students will learn technical vocabulary which they are lacking. This kind of knowledge is crucial to academic success, and because the content area is being integrated the vocabulary is used and will be become useful for the future. It is enduring.
One challenge to the CBEC is that ESL teachers often feel as if they are not “qualified” to teach the integrated content. The ESL teacher is responsible for teaching the content area correctly; however, mainstream teachers are responsible for ESL students’ content learning in statewide assessments. The ESL teacher should integrate content area that she feels comfortable teaching. By devoting some time and effort into research, she should be able to come up with a lesson plan that successfully and correctly integrated content area. On the other hand, ESL teachers should not become preoccupied with the integrated content area and ignore teaching the related language skills. It is not CBEC without the missing language components.
The purpose of this author’s work was to inform ESL educators and stress the necessity and importance of Content Based ESL Curriculum and how to implement it in the ESL classroom.
The intended audience of this particular article are ESL educators looking for effective content material for the ESL classroom and how to use it.
My ideas for the unit plan were solidified when I read this article. Without even knowing it, I incorporated CBEC into my unit plan. My unit will touch upon nutrition which is reflected in health classes at the mainstream level, but my unit incorporates CBEC as suggested by this article. My students will read authentic texts as well as stories intended for ESL students. I did this because many of my students are at different CALP English proficiency levels. I also will have my students practice their academic English in the form of classroom discussions, table conversations, and a final oral speech at the end of the unit. I plan on assigning written work that is purposeful and meaningful in context. My unit incorporates real-life problem solving situations (in the restaurant, regarding one’s personal health, etc.) Thus, higher order and critical thinking will be reinforced. Lastly, I have integrated scaffolding into my unit plan. I know my students enjoy hands-on activities and visual demonstrations; I plan on using these two strategies a lot in my unit.