A theory based model for educating ell students at the secondary level
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 14

A Theory-Based Model for Educating ELL Students at the Secondary Level PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 425 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

A Theory-Based Model for Educating ELL Students at the Secondary Level. Craig A. Hughes WABE Conference May 13, 2006. Theoretical Foundation. Thomas & Collier’s “Prism Model” is the key foundation All areas of the Prism need to be addressed. Theoretical Foundation. Language Needs

Download Presentation

A Theory-Based Model for Educating ELL Students at the Secondary Level

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


A theory based model for educating ell students at the secondary level

A Theory-Based Model for Educating ELL Students at the Secondary Level

Craig A. Hughes

WABE Conference

May 13, 2006


Theoretical foundation

Theoretical Foundation

  • Thomas & Collier’s “Prism Model” is the key foundation

    • All areas of the Prism need to be addressed


Theoretical foundation1

Theoretical Foundation

  • Language Needs

    • Native language needs to have status in the classroom (Collier, 1995; Lucas et al., 1990; McLeod, 1996)

    • Advanced (enriched) coursework in native language (Freeman, Freeman & Mercuri, 2002 Lucas et al., 1990;)

    • Content-based English language development (Collier, 1995; Lucas et al., 1990; McLeod, 1996)

    • Assistance beyond basic language development (McLeod, 1996; Hughes, 2000)


Theoretical foundation2

Theoretical Foundation

  • Academic needs

    • Grade-level expectations (Collier, 1995; Freeman, Freeman & Mercuri, 2002; Hughes, 2000; Lucas et al., 1990; McLeod, 1996)

    • Enrichment activities, move beyond basics (Hughes, 2000; Freeman, Freeman & Mercuri, 2002; McLeod)


Theoretical foundation3

Theoretical Foundation

  • Social Needs

    • Adjustments for cultural influences (Collier, 1995; Freeman, Freeman & Mercuri, 2002; Hughes, 2000; Lucas et al., 1990; McLeod, 1996)

    • Inclusion in all aspects of the school, clubs, government, sports (Hughes, 2000; Lucas et al., 1990 McLeod, 1996)

    • Role models in the classroom (Lucas et al., 1990 McLeod, 1996)

    • Family inclusion in the school setting (Collier, 1995; Hughes, 2000; Lucas et al., 1990; McLeod, 1996)


Theoretical foundation4

Theoretical Foundation

  • The role of the school

    • All staff members are involved in the education of linguistically diverse students (Collier, 1995; Hughes, 2000; Lucas et al., 1990; McLeod, 1996)

    • Use of “New Wave” teaching methods (Collier, 1995; Lucas et al., 1990; McLeod, 1996)

    • Implementation of bridge classes (McLeod, 1996)

    • Extended instruction time (McLeod, 1996)


Comparison of elementary schools and secondary school

Staffing is provided as “general educators.”

Staff collaboration can be achieved with planning.

Team teaching can be arranged with little conflict

Staffing is provided along departmental lines.

Staff collaboration, including team teaching, must cross over departments lines.

Comparison of Elementary Schools and Secondary School


Comparison of elementary schools and secondary school1

The limited bilingual materials available are at the elementary level

Bilingual materials are scarce.

Teachers need to spend more time finding and/or creating quality materials

Comparison of Elementary Schools and Secondary School


Comparison of elementary schools and secondary school2

Recent arrivals have similar levels of linguistic and academic development

Instruction level can be more uniform.

Recent arrival have tremendous differences in academic, native language, and English language development

Class placement requires more flexibility.

Comparison of Elementary Schools and Secondary School


Comparison of elementary schools and secondary school3

Research and teacher preparation focused at the elementary level.

Research and teacher preparation focused at the elementary level.

Comparison of Elementary Schools and Secondary School


Comparison of elementary schools and secondary school4

Younger children are still developing stereotypes and prejudices

Social inclusion is more likely to occur naturally.

Prejudices and stereotypes have become well developed.

Limits social inclusion of “outsiders.”

Comparison of Elementary Schools and Secondary School


Ideal program

Ideal Program


Ideal program1

Ideal Program


References

References

  • Collier, V. P. (1995). Promoting academic success for ESL students. Elizabeth, NJ: NJTESOL-BE, Inc.

  • Freeman, Y.S. & Freeman, D.E. with Mercuri, S. (2002). Closing the achievement gap: How to reach limited-formal schooling and long-term English learners. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann

  • Lucas, T., Henze, R. & Donato, R. (1990). Promoting the success of Latino language-minority students: An exploratory study of six high schools. Harvard Educational Review, 60(3), 315-482.

  • McLeod, B. (1996). School reform and student diversity: Exemplary schooling for language minority students. NCBE Resource Collection Series (4). Washington, DC: NCELA


  • Login