approach as an important program design feature that promotes the acquisition of knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary for success in college programs.
Faculty, staff, and students identified the thematic/content-based instructional approach as fundamental in promoting the development of reading, writing, grammar, and critical thinking skills. In ELIP, the content-based instructional approach is greatly emphasized as a key design feature on the ELIP website, program reports, and recruitment brochures. In describing this approach, the ELIP program director notes that the instruction in ELIP is “holistic and thematic” – where each faculty member chooses a theme or content area they are “interested in and they know that they can enthuse students into.” Under this model, academic English language and literacy is taught in direct reference to topics such as history, the arts, literature, gender, and the City, to name a few. Faculty members create the content-based curriculum by selecting
readings, writing assignments, grammar activities, and field trips that are woven together by the chosen theme.
ELIP faculty, staff, and students were enthusiastic in speaking about their experience with the content-based instructional approach. In describing the type of learning that takes place under this approach, one faculty member shared an example of her experience integrating art and grammar: “[we] go to the Met, [we] do grammar exercises based on descriptions of the art. We have fun, but there is always a goal.” This quote illustrates how the field trip component within the ELIP content-based approach incorporates opportunities to learn by doing while at the same time exposes students to key cultural venues in the city. Students in particular spoke highly about this experience. For example, a former ELIP student shared a positive experience with the
history theme when she said:
I had to go to the museums; I loved it because I didn’t know anything about [the City]. I went to Native American Museum, Ellis Island…So I went to the places and then wrote about them. So I could have a conversation about history with someone who went to high school [in the United States].
These student experiences illuminate the sentiment that was present among current and former ELIP students—they were appreciative of having the opportunity to construct knowledge in spaces they would not normally go to. Although museums have long been used for educational purposes, especially by those of higher socio-economic status, many immigrant students do not know about them or do not feel comfortable going to them alone. One ELIP faculty member noted that some students are “even scared to go into the park” and are generally “not aware of what is out there.” Together, these quotes illustrate how a content-based approach—which thematically links reading, writing, and grammar exercises to field trips -- may help strengthen student engagement by fostering enthusiasm around the opportunity to learn both in and out of the classroom. As was noted by the program director, together, these activities are intended to “educate students in a broad sense.”
Faculty in the traditional ESL sequence also identified using theme based instruction to help students acquire reading, writing, grammar, and critical thinking skills. However, the themes they use are not necessarily directly tied to a content area. Rather, each instructor spoke about selecting themes—such as sleep, machismo, grades and student expectations, gender, technology, and obesity, to name a few—and then constructing lesson plans with reading, writing, and grammar assignments around the chosen theme. For example, one faculty member described her use of theme based instruction as follows:
I usually have a theme for a week or two, starting with one reading. That reading may be the basis for the grammar activities for the week. If they are working on gerunds or noun clauses I’ll have them look at the reading and have them work on stuff in class and at home.
While both faculty members who participated in this study shared that they have always used a theme based instructional approach, in speaking with the department chair, it was evident that
not all instructors follow this method. The department chair noted that at the lower levels of traditional ESL and developmental reading, instructors are more likely to be teaching reading, writing, and grammar as decontextualized skills—more akin to the skills and drills approach that is typical of basic skills courses (Grubb, 1999). To address the fact that this approach may not be the most effective for students, the department recently began developing content-based modules that are linked to the type of topics and vocabulary students might encounter in general education courses. The department chair noted that ELIP’s content-based instructional approach served as the model for this initiative—in particular, she said: “I know what ELIP does.... and I’ve always thought it was a great idea… content-based but structured learning.” As such, over the last year modules that include reading, writing and grammar activities were assembled on a variety of themes that included criminology, psychology, physics, theater, and philosophy. ESL faculty members noted given that given that many of the instructors teaching at the lower levels are adjuncts, over the longer-term these modules are intended to provide them with instructional guidance.
The ESL pedagogical literature presents theoretical reasons in support for the use of content-based ESL courses. In particular, drawing on Krashen’s (1985) theory of learning and acquisition and Cummings (1981) two-tiered model of skill acquisition, Kasper (2000) argues that content-based ESL courses offer students with contextualized language curricula that is both meaningful and relevant to the students’ personal and educational goals while at the same time providing them with opportunities to acquire “basic interpersonal language skills” (functional literacy skills) and “cognitive academic language proficiency” (academic literacy skills) (p. 4-5). As such, scholars have highlighted that providing ELLs with content-based courses shows
grammar-based ESL classes (Kibler, Bunch & Endris, 2012). In the same way, the literature on the contextualization of basic academic skills lends further support for the use of a content-based approach. In a recent review of the literature on contextualization, Perin (2011) highlights that contextualization has been used in the teaching of basic skills as a means to engage students, develop content knowledge, and promote the transfer of skills. Perin (2011) concludes that while there is little rigorous research on the topic, the evidence that is available suggests that
contextualization has the potential to improve student outcomes.
Taken together, the findings that both ESL pathways tend to emphasize the same skill sets and use similar instructional approaches (at least at the top levels of traditional ESL) to help students acquire these skills, provides suggestive evidence as to why I find no significant
differences in college level English enrollment and performance. Successful completion of college level English is a requirement for graduation; it is the course where reading, writing, grammar, and critical thinking skills might first be employed and evaluated at the college level. Null quantitative findings suggest that both academic ESL pathways may be providing students with a comparable opportunity to acquire the skills needed for success in college English. The finding that only males who participate in ELIP experience an increase in the likelihood of taking college English after five years, however, may be partly explained by the environment fostered by the ELIP program structure—as will be discussed in the next finding.
Finding 3: Participants in both ELIP and traditional ESL identified features of their