SIMILAR AND CONTRASTING FACTORS AFFECTING ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF NEWLY ARRIVED
AND SECOND GENERATION FILIPINO AND MEXICAN HIGH SCHOOL
ENGLISH LEARNERS
A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of
California State University, Stanislaus
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
of Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership
By Marcel Maly
CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL
SIMILAR AND CONTRASTING FACTORS AFFECTING ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF NEWLY ARRIVED
AND SECOND GENERATION FILIPINO AND MEXICAN HIGH SCHOOL
ENGLISH LEARNERS
by Marcel Maly
Dr. Dennis Sayers
Professor of Advanced Studies in Education
Dr. John Borba
Professor of School Administration
Dr. Kay Vang
Principal, Fresno Unified School District
Date
Date
Date Signed Certification of Approval Page is
© 2014 Marcel Maly
iv DEDICATION
I dedicate this dissertation in loving memory of my parents Irena Malá and Štefan Malý.
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deepest gratitude and appreciation to Dr. Dennis Sayers for his ongoing support as my dissertation chair. Your assistance has made my dream come true. Thank you very much for everything you have done for me.
To the rest of my dissertation committee, Dr. John Borba and Dr. Kay Vang, thank you for your assistance in helping me complete my dissertation. I appreciate the time each of you took to review my dissertation and provide constructive feedback.
vi TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Dedication ... iv Acknowledgements ... v List of Tables ... x Abstract ... xii CHAPTER I. Introduction ... 1
Statement of the Problem ... 6
Research Questions ... 10
Purpose of the Study ... 12
Definition of Terms... 13
Limitations ... 28
Significance of the Study ... 29
Summary ... 32
II. Review of Research and Literature ... 35
Second Language Acquisition ... 35
Teacher Quality Equity, Programmatic Equity and ... Achievement Equity... 38
Teacher Quality Equity ... 39
Professional Preparation of Teachers of ... English Language Learners... 41
English Language Learners Under the ... Federal Law ... 42
Programmatic Equity ... 45
Social Justice Curriculum ... 46
Achievement Equity ... 48
Student Centered and School Centered Factors Affecting ... Academic Performance of Newly Arrived and ... Second Generation English Language Learners ... 51
Student Centered Factors ... 52
English Language Proficiency ... 52
Mother’s Education and Years in the United States ... 54
vii
Behavioral Engagement ... 58
School Problems and Violence ... 60
Relational Engagement ... 61
Cognitive Engagement and ... Academic Self-Efficacy ... 62
Gender ... 63
Academic Performance Pathways... 64
Family ... 65
Emotional Well-Being ... 67
Health Status ... 67
Parental Involvement ... 69
Ethnicity in Relation to Parental Involvement ... 71
School Centered Factors ... 73
Level of School Racial Segregation .. 75
A Theory of Human Motivation ... 79
Segmented Assimilation of Families of ... English Language Learners and its Determinants ... 81
Assimilation Pathways ... 83
Human Capital ... 84
Effects of Undocumented Immigrant Status on ... Academic Performance of English Language Learners .. 87
Summary ... 90
III. Methodology ... 93
Sample... 95
Urban High School Profile... 99
Instrumentation ... 101
First Qualitative Component ... 102
Second Qualitative Component ... 104
Third Qualitative Component ... 105
Quantitative Component ... 106
Procedures ... 108
First Qualitative Procedure ... 108
Second Qualitative Procedure ... 112
Third Qualitative Procedure ... 113
Quantitative Procedures ... 114
Data Analysis ... 115
Methodological Limitations ... 116
viii
IV. Data Analysis ... 120
Quantitative Findings ... 122
Qualitative Findings ... 127
El Shadowing and Observation Tool ... 127
Equity Audits ... 131
Teacher Quality Equity ... 131
Programmatic Equity ... 134
Achievement Equity ... 135
Student-centered and School-centered ... Qualitative Findings ... 137
Coding Process... 138
Frequency of Applied Codes ... 140
Rank Order of Code Co-occurrence Findings ... 148
Lack of English Skills ... 149
Preparedness to Teach ELLs ... 151
Lack of Academic Support for ELLs ... 153
Value Placed on Education ... 156
Academic Experiences in the United States ... 157
Obstacles to Learning English ... 158
Importance of Learning English ... 160
Summary ... 162
V. Discussion, Implications and Recommendations ... 168
Purpose of the Study ... 168
Research Questions ... 168
Discussion of Findings ... 169
Discussion of Quantitative Findings ... 169
Discussion of Qualitative Findings ... 172
El Shadowing and Observation Tool ... 172
Equity Audits ... 184
Student-centered and School-centered Factors ... 186
Implications... 188
The First Qualitative Component... 188
The Second Qualitative Component ... 189
The third Qualitative Component ... 190
Recommendations for Future Research ... 192
Summary ... 194
ix Appendices
A. EL Shadowing and Observation Tool ... 211
B. Target Student Questionnaire ... 212
C. Target Student Survey... 213
D. Target Student Interview Questions... 226
E. Follow up Target Student Interview Questions ... 227
F. Focus Group Target Student Interview Questions ... 228
G. Target Teacher Questionnaire ... 229
H. Target Teacher Survey ... 230
I. Target Teacher Interview Protocol ... 231
J. Follow up Target Teacher Interview Protocol ... 232
K. Second Follow up Target Teacher Interview Protocol ... 233
L. Parent Informed Consent in English ... 234
M. Parent Informed Consent in Spanish... 235
N. Parent Informed Consent in Tagalog ... 236
O. Student Informed Consent in English ... 237
P. Student Informed Consent in Spanish... 238
Q. Student Informed Consent in Tagalog ... 239
x
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
1. Percent of CELDT Levels for English Learners ... 9
2. UHS’ Academic Performance Index (API) for 2012 ... 10
3. Target English Language Learners’ CSTs in ELA for 2011-2012 ... 99
4. Target English-Only Students’ CSTs in ELA for 2011-2012 ... 100
5. Descriptors of the Participating Target Teachers... 111
6. Filipino ELLs and English-only Students’ CSTs in ELA ... 124
7. Mexican ELLs and English-only Students’ CSTs in ELA ... 125
8. Filipino and Mexican ELLs’ CSTs in ELA ... 126
9. Filipino and Mexican ELLs and English-only Students’ CSTs in ELA ... 127
10. EL Shadowing: Percentage of 5-Minute Intervals Observed ... 129
11. Example of Tenured Teacher Schedule at UHS ... 134
12. Example of Mobile Teacher Schedule at UHS ... 134
13. Percentage of Filipino and Mexican ELLs in Special Education at UHS ... 135
14. Percentage of Filipino and Mexican ELLs in AP Classes at UHS ... 136
15. Filipino and Mexican ELLs and English-only Students’ API for 2013 ... 137
16. Rank Order of Code Applications: First and Second Generation Filipino ELLs ... 144
17. Rank Order of Code Applications: First and Second Generation Filipino and Mexican ELLs ... 145
18. Rank Order of Code Applications: First and Second Generation Mexican ELLs ... 146
xi
19. Rank Order of Code Applications: Teachers and First and Second
Generation Filipino and Mexican ELLs ... 148 20. Rank Order of Code Co-occurrences ... 149
xii ABSTRACT
This sequential explanatory mixed-methods design study researched (a) first and second generation participating target Filipino and Mexican English language learners’ (ELLs), daily behavioral engagement, with special emphasis on their oral and written English language use in daily academic settings that promote English language acquisition and literacy skills, (b) teacher quality equity, programmatic equity, and achievement equity, in regards to ELLs having equal access to academic and support services as their English-only counterparts, and (c) role of student-centered and school-student-centered factors in predicting the academic performance of first and second generation participating target Filipino and Mexican ELLs. The
conceptual framework of the study drew from research related to (a) second
language acquisition, and utilized the EL Shadowing and Observation Tool to gather data in regards to the first and second generation Filipino and Mexican ELLs’
academic classroom experience, (b) research of McKenzie & Skrla (2011) and Skrla, McKenzie & Scheurich (2009) on equity and social justice in schools, and (c) theoretical regression model for predicting the academic achievement of ELLs developed by Suárez-Orozco, Suárez-Orozco and Todorova (2008). Findings of this study revealed that participating ELLs (a) had minimal linguistic opportunities in daily academic settings, (b) had inequitable access to highly qualified experienced teachers and academic programs, and (c) their academic performance was being influenced by mixture of similar student-centered and school-centered factors.
1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
Demographic changes in the United States pose new educational challenges in the nation’s schools. Children of immigrant families who are not proficient in English are being classified as English Language Learners (ELLs). The most unsettling
debates related to first generation ELLs are associated with English-language learning and undocumented immigration (Suárez-Orozco, Suárez-Orozco & Todorova, p. 6). The first generation of ELLs share many challenges related to English language learning with the second generation of ELLs. Although second generation ELLs, who form the majority of ELLs in the nation’s schools, were born in the United States, their English language skills have many times not been developed yet for a variety of reasons. Cummins (2001) suggested that it takes an average of five to ten years of systematic high quality training to develop cognitive academic English language skills.
Scholastic challenges that ELLs have to overcome on a daily basis are equally shared by their content area teachers. Many educators are frustrated by their own inability to teach the academic content in a manner appropriate for ELLs. The passing of Proposition 227 in June 1998 limited bilingual education in California, eradicating the use of primary language as an instructional tool. The initiative was intended to significantly alter the ways in which the California’s ELLs are taught. Proposition 227 requires that ELLs be taught “overwhelmingly in English” through
2 sheltered/structured English immersion (SEI) programs during a temporary transition period not normally intended to exceed one year, and then transferred to mainstream English-language classrooms. However, although the intentions of Proposition 227 were to give ELLs increased opportunities to learn English, the implementation of Proposition 227 produced mixed results.
In addition, the major shifts in American school politics over the past several years aim to increase the overall academic performance of students while thinning the academic GAP among an assortment of student ethnicities. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) mandates schools that receive Title I funding improve students’ academic performance. Under the NCLB, public schools must satisfy Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics. In addition, NCLB mandates that by 2014 all students achieve proficiency in ELA and mathematics. Public schools that do not manage to meet mandated AYP in the same content area subject for two consecutive years for any numerically significant subgroup are forced to participate in mandatory Program Improvement (PI).
Moreover, the penalty for falling short is loss of federal funding for schools serving low-income children. Hence, in California, the largest numerical subgroup under the NCLB is ELLs. However, although NCLB places additional pressure on ELLs, this numerically significant subgroup is largely unable to meet what NCLB Acts mandates, because ELLs’ educational needs have mostly been inadequately addressed by educational institutions. Schools have a responsibility to educate all children regardless of their cultural, ethnic, national, or linguistic background and to
3 provide them with the necessary tools to reach their full potential (Sosa, 2008).
Hence, it is essential that schools provide ELLs with the same educational opportunities as their mainstreamed counterparts.
Furthermore, assessing the academic progress of ELLs seems to be a difficult task. Previous research has suggested that the mandatory high-stakes testing is unfair to ELLs (Coltrane, 2002). Many times ELLs are being subjected to high-stakes testing at the time when their academic English language skills are still largely undeveloped, resulting in lower test scores. In addition, culturally biased mandatory high-stakes testing further diminishes ELLs’ academic performance due to their unfamiliarity with the mainstream American culture. Hence, a meaningful assessment of ELLs seems to be unattainable due to ELLs’ limited English language proficiency. Therefore, these test results cannot be relied on to deliver an accurate assessment of ELLs’ academic skills, and have a harmful effect on ELLs and their teachers (Wright, 2002).
According to the California Department of Education (CDE), all K-12 students whose home language is not English are mandated to take an annual
California English Language Development Test (CELDT). In addition, students who have been previously identified as ELLs and who have not been reclassified as Fluent English Proficient (RFEP) are also required to take CELDT once a year. Local
educational agencies (LEAs) are required to administer CELDT to their ELLs within thirty days of enrollment at school. The requirement to test ELLs once a year is mandated by Federal law (Title III of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
4 [ESEA]) and state law (Education Code [EC] sections 313 and 60810 through
60812). Results of this annual test assist schools and individual educators in
identifying ELLs in need of help with their listening, speaking, reading and writing English language skills. The CELDT results are reported as five performance levels, hence, level one = beginning, level two = early intermediate, level three =
intermediate, level four = early advanced, level five = advanced. Individual student
test results and pertaining information are sent to the school district. Districts are required by law to notify parents of test results within thirty calendar days from receiving the test results. However, if a student has been enrolled in a language instruction program after the beginning of the school year, then the parents have to be informed within fourteen calendar days. The CELDT data provides districts and individual schools with valuable information regarding the status of the individual student’s progress in English language acquisition and overall academic progress. The CELDT data help California Department of Education (CDE) monitor the accountability of individual school districts.
Likewise, the additional measurement of academic achievement in California is the Public Schools Accountability Act (PSAA) of 1999 that established the
Academic Performance Index (API), a summary of a school’s academic performance and progress on statewide assessments. The primary objective of PSAA is to assist schools with academic improvement and to quantify the academic achievement of all students. The API summarizes a state’s individual school performance and growth on a variety of academic measures. The API is a valuable tool that individual schools or
5 districts can utilize for comparison with similar schools or districts.
Conversely, the academic complexity of issues in America’s public school system is heightened by underlying “non-academic” variables such as poverty, race, ethnicity, discrimination, issues related to immigration status, and the understanding and respect of different cultures which have a direct impact on ELLs’ educational attainment. Chih and Harris (2008) argued that poverty has minimized educational opportunities for the poor, marked by unequal educational opportunities and an overall decrease in accessing higher education. Hence, predicting academic achievement of ELLs seems to be a national priority in addressing the educational challenges America’s schools are obligated to face today. Consequently, whether this new generation of Americans bolsters the homeland or deepens its social problems hinge on the shared and economic trajectories of this immigrant populace (Portes & Rumbaut, 2001, p. xvii).
Researchers who study second language acquisition and ELLs largely agree that the first and second generation ELLs share many similar challenges that prevent them from reaching their full academic potential. Coincidently, the multiple negative environmental stresses such as families with single parents as well as living in poverty reflect on the educational achievement and growth of both generations of ELLs. “Thus multiple family disadvantages experienced by ethnic and language minority children, and the associated accumulation of lower levels of skills, knowledge, and behavioral controls, from birth to age five, are central to the lower school readiness of these children” (Chih & Harris, 2008, p. 126).
6 Suárez-Orozco, Suárez-Orozco and Todorova (2008) developed a theoretical regression model for predicting academic achievement for upper elementary, middle school, and high school ELLs from both a student-centered perspective and a school-centered perspective. Authors suggested that the student-school-centered perspective
embraces English proficiency (predisposed by mother’s education and years in the United States); behavioral engagement (influenced by school problems and violence, relational engagement, cognitive engagement, gender); and family structure (referring to whether the family has two parents, one parent or another other caregiver, whether father was present and working). The school-centered perspective embodies for example the percentage of students at or above proficient on the state English-language exam, school attendance rates, school poverty rates, and level of racial integration in schools. In essence, this conceptual data-based theoretical regression model can serve as a theoretical basis for the comparison between the first and second generation factors influencing the academic performance of ELLs, since both
generations of ELLs have to face a multitude of the same challenges related to their academic success in the United States. Consequently, schools need to look at the ELLs’ educational needs through the lens of psychological anthropology, cultural psychology, and cultural health psychology, when predicting their academic attainment.
Statement of the Problem
The Urban High School (UHS - pseudonym given to the school where this study took place to protect its confidentiality) selected for this study is one of the
7 many low-income, racially and linguistically diverse public schools within the Bay Area of California, designated as a Title I school. Analysis and review of the data presented by the California Department of Education for the 2012-2013 year indicates that the total enrollment at UHS was 1,850 students. Six hundred forty-one Hispanic students represented 34.64% of the school’s enrollment, 616 African American students embodied 33.29% of the total school population; 334 Filipino students formed 18.05% of the school’s student body; and 159 White students denoted 8.59% of the entire school student enrollment. In addition, smaller ethnic and linguistic subgroups also supplemented the cultural diversity of this high school’s students. Hence, 31 Pacific Islanders represented 1.67% of pupil conscription; 29 students claimed two or more races, embodying 1.56% of school population; 23 students were of Asian ancestry, representing 1.24% of school's enrollment and twenty-three Native Americans denoting 1.24% of UHS students. Finally, five students who did not report their ethnic background represented 0.02% of the entire student body.
Consequently, 170 students were identified as ELLs at this school, denoting 9.18% of entire school enrollment. A multitude of the languages spoken at this high school consisted of 126 students who identified Spanish as their home language, representing 74.12% of total ELL population at school, followed by 31 Filipino students, embodying 18.24% of the school’s ELLs. Other languages spoken at UHS were Mandarin 1.18%; Hindi 1.18%; Tongan 1.18%; Tamil 0.59%; Punjabi 0.59%; Samoan 0.59%; Thai 0.59%; Arabic 0.59%; French 0.59%, and Portuguese 0.59% of the student body.
8 Annual CELDT results in the last five years presented in Table 1 indicate that the majority of ELLs at this high school fall under the category “Intermediate.” This trend seems to be a district-wide problem, indicating that there is a great need to address the educational needs of ELLs with the overall goal of increasing their academic achievement as measured by CELDT, and move them to the next “Early Advanced” level. In accordance with NCLB, this school is legally bounded to increase students’ academic performance, including the academic performance of ELLs who form a large portion of school’s student body. In addition, current school’s Program Improvement (PI) status and the sanctions accompanying it underline the need to address all aspects of ELLs’ educational needs and to scrutinize their daily academic endeavor.
In addition, the UHS API report for 2012 in Table 2 shows that the school’s ELLs did not meet the growth target for 2011-12. The huge GAP in API scores between ELLs and rest of the school’s ethnic subgroups further indicates that UHS needs to monitor all aspects of ELLs’ education, and closely examine their English language acquisition and performance in all core curriculum subjects. Although UHS provides teachers with training on the effective teaching of ELLs, the training is optional; therefore, not all faculty members are getting trained. Hence, the school needs to implement school-wide mandatory training for all teachers in effective instructional strategies and best practices to improve ELLs’ second language acquisition that focuses on acquiring academic English. In addition, UHS needs to implement a system that can predict the academic achievement of ELLs, taking into
9 consideration a variety of school-centered and student-centered predictors of
academic achievement. Table 1
Percent of CELDT Levels for English Learners at Urban High School
Early Early
Beginning intermediate Intermediate advanced Advanced (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) 2008-09 10 24 45 18 2 2009-10 13 24 48 14 0 2010-11 10 20 54 16 1 2011-12 9 20 41 27 2 2012-13 11 22 39 25 2
10 Table 2
2012 API Base Score (Scale 200 to 1,000) at Urban High School
Numerically
Significant 2012-13 Met
Target 2012 Growth 2013 Growth
Groups Base Target Target Target
Schoolwide 663 7 670 Yes
African American 591 10 601 Yes
Filipino ELLs 791 5 796 Yes
Mexican ELLs 638 8 646 No
White 748 5 753 Yes
English learners 599 10 609 No
Research Questions
The participants in this research study were two subgroups of Filipino and Mexican ELLs, and one group of certificated participating target teachers whose classrooms were observed. The Filipino ELL subgroup consisted of two first generation participating target Filipino ELLs, one male and one female, and two second generation participating target Filipino ELLs, one male and one female. Likewise, the Mexican ELL subgroup consisted of two first generation participating target Mexican ELLs, one male and one female, and two second generation
participating target Mexican ELLs, one male and one female. This study was a mixed-method design comprising qualitative and quantitative components.
11 The qualitative component was based on EL Shadowing and Observation Tool developed and used by Los Angeles Unified School District several years ago (see Appendix A); participating target ELLs Likert-type attitude scale attitude
questionnaires (see Appendix B), participating target ELLs surveys (see Appendix C), interviews with individual participating target ELLs (see Appendix D), follow-up interviews with individual participating target ELLs (see Appendix E), focus group interviews with participating target ELLs (see Appendix F), target teacher Likert-type attitude scale attitude questionnaires (see Appendix G), target teacher surveys (see Appendix H), individual target teacher interviews (see Appendix I), follow-up interview with individual target teachers (see Appendix J), and, finally, second follow-up interviews with participating target teachers (see Appendix K).
The EL Shadowing and Observation Tool is a momentary time-sampling method used to track students in the classroom environment without revealing student’s identity either to the teacher where the student will be observed, or to the student who will be observed. The student is observed for about three hours a day and the teacher observer records every five minutes everything what the observed student is doing at that specific moment of time. The El Shadowing and Observation Tool was partially based on the works of Pauline Gibbons, co-authored with Jim Cummins,
Scaffolding Language, Scaffolding Learning (2002), adapted by Joan Wink in 2008,
author of Critical Pedagogy (2011), and utilized by Dr. Kay Vang and Dr. Dennis Sayers, while overseeing the implementation of this method at a variety of California schools. All EL Shadowing observations and interviews with participating
12 individual target ELLs and participating individual target teachers were conducted by this researcher.
The teacher observer was provided with professional development on specific ELL strategies, including strategies to increase opportunities for students to use oral language in promoting academic language. More specifically, this study investigated the following research questions based on the results of previously mentioned criteria delineated at the beginning of this chapter:
1. In what ways are Filipino and Mexican ELLs behaviorally engaged in a representative classroom environment?
2. What are the teacher quality equity, programmatic equity, and achievement equity differences between target ELLs and English-only students?
3. What roles do student-centered and school-centered factors play in predicting the academic performance of first and second generation Filipino and
Mexican ELLs?
The theoretical foundation of this study was the explanatory data-based conjectural model framework that focused on the research topic through the lens of linguistic anthropology and socio-cultural psychology.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to gain more information about a variety of factors affecting the academic performance of first generation and second generation ELLs at UHS. The student body where 12 different languages are spoken, a large percentage of students scoring at the Intermediate level on the CELDT, and ELLs’
13 API Growth Score for 2011-12, the lowest in comparison with other ethnicities
warranted the need for scrutinizing the factors affecting the academic performance of ELLs at UHS. To capture the school experience of ELLs and to document the level of their productive oral and listening engagement in classrooms, as well as their overall academic commitment, a method termed EL Shadowing and Observation Tool was adopted, as discussed previously in this chapter. The high school where the study took place utilized EL Shadowing to observe four tenth grade students and four eleventh grade students, designated as ELLs performing at the CELDT intermediate level. The EL Shadowing and Observation Tool is a direct observation, time-sampling method, structured into four language domains, hence, listening, speaking, reading, and writing (see Appendix A).
To capture the personal experiences of ELLs related to factors affecting their academic performance, this researcher conducted structured interviews with each individual participating target ELL in this study and follow-up participating target ELLs focus group interviews. Finally, in order to gain meticulous information regarding what factors affect the academic performance of ELLs, this researcher conducted structured interviews with individual participating target teachers whose ELLs were observed in the target teachers’ classrooms, complementing the
qualitative component of this study.
Definition of Terms
Academic Performance Index (API) – The cornerstone of California’s Public
14 of schools on a variety of academic measures.
Accommodations – Tools and procedures that provide equal access to instruction and assessment for students with disabilities. Students with disabilities (those covered under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act) must be provided the appropriate accommodations necessary to participate in the state and district assessments as required for reading and math under No Child Left Behind (NCLB).
Accountability - The notion that people (e.g., students or teachers) or an organization (e.g., a school, school district, or state department of education) should be held responsible for improving student achievement and should be rewarded or sanctioned for their success or lack of success.
Achievement Test - A test to measure a student’s knowledge and skills. Active Cognitive Engagement (ACE) - Cognitive engagement in academic work has been defined by Marks (2000) as “A psychological process involving the attention, interest, investment, and effort students expend in the work of learning” (pp. 154-155). Newmann et al. (1992) defined cognitive engagement in academic work as “The student’s psychological investment in and effort directed toward learning, understanding, or mastering the knowledge, skills, or crafts that academic work is intended to promote” (p.12). Both of these definitions involve psychological investment and effort. The Newmann et al. definition is the more specific one stating that the construct involves engagement for the purpose of mastering knowledge, skills, or crafts; whereas, Marks’ definition does not address the issue of purpose for
15 engagement.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) - An individual state’s measure of yearly progress toward achieving state academic standards. Adequate Yearly Progress is the minimum level of improvement that states, school districts, and schools must achieve each year, according to federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation. This progress is determined by a collection of performance measures that a state, its school districts, and significant subpopulations of students within its schools are supposed to meet if the state receives Title I federal funding. In California, the measures include (1) specified percentages of students scoring “proficient” or “advanced” on California Standards Tests in English/language arts and mathematics; (2) participation of a least 95 percent of students on those tests; (3) specified API scores or gains; and (4) for high schools, a specified graduation rate or improvement in the rate.
Advanced Placement (AP) - A series of voluntary exams based on college-level courses taken in high school. High school students who do well on one or more of these exams have the opportunity to earn credit, advanced placement, or both for college.
Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) – Language skills needed to interact in social situations, for example, when speaking to a friend on the
telephone. BICS refers primarily to context-bound, face-to-face everyday social communication. This term is credited to Cummins’ research related to language acquisition and learning.
16 Benchmarks - A detailed description of a specific level of student
achievement expected of students at particular ages, grades, or developmental levels; academic goals set for each grade level.
Bilingual Crosscultural, Language, and Academic Development (BCLAD) – A teacher authorization that provides ELLs with instruction for English Language Development (ELD), instruction for Primary Language Development (PLD),
Specially Designed Academic Instruction Delivered in English (SDAIE), and Content Instruction Delivered in the Primary Language (CIDPL).
Bilingual Education - An in-school program for students whose first language is not English or who have limited English skills. Bilingual education provides English language development plus subject area instruction in the student’s native language. The goal is for the child to gain knowledge and be literate in two
languages.
California Achievement Test (CAT) - A standardized test that helps to assess a student’s progress. The test includes various language arts and mathematics areas. The CAT has been in existence since the 1950s and is given in most grade schools across the US. The test is called a norm-referenced test. This means the child is compared against other children. Instead of a regular grade, he receives a percentage-based score. For example, if the child gets a 90 percent, that means he scored higher than 90 percent of all children who took the test.
California Basic Education Skills Test (CBEST) - This test measures basic educational skills and must be passed before a person can become a teacher or
17 administrator in California.
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CCTC) – An independent agency created in 1970 by the Ryan Act and is the oldest of the autonomous state standards boards in the nation. The mission of the CCTC is to facilitate the
credentialing of California's teachers. The commission issues and renews teaching credentials as well as substitute teacher credentials.
California Academic Content Standards - The official definitions from the state Board of Education of what children need to know and learn at a particular grade level.
California Department of Education (CDE) - An agency within the
government of California that oversees public education. Its headquarters are located in Sacramento. The department oversees funding and testing and holds local
educational agencies accountable for student achievement. Its stated mission is to provide leadership, assistance, oversight, and resources (via teaching and teaching material) so that every Californian has access to a good education.
California English Language Development Test (CELDT) - A test for students whose primary language is not English (as reported by their parents). The test is administered 30 days after initial enrollment and then annually until it is determined that the student has mastered English. At that point, the student is classified as Fluent English Proficient (FEP).
California Education Code (Ed Code) - A collection of all the laws directly related to California K-12 public schools. Ed Code sections are created or changed by
18 the governor and legislature when they make laws.
California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) - A state exam that California public high school students, beginning with the class of 2006, must pass in order to graduate. Its purpose is to test whether students have mastered the academic skills necessary to succeed in the adult world. It is a pass-fail exam divided into two
sections: English/language arts (reading and writing) and mathematics. Sophomores, juniors, and seniors can take the test. Once students pass a section of the test, they do not have to take that section again.
California Standards Test (CST) - Tests in English/language arts,
mathematics, science, history/social science, and other topics comprising items that were developed specifically to assess students’ performance on California’s academic content standards. The CST is part of the STAR testing program. Students at different grade levels take different tests, depending on the courses they are taking.
California Teachers of English Learners (CTEL) – A certificate that allows the holder to provide specialized instruction to English language learners (ELLs).
Charter Schools - Publicly funded schools that are exempt from many state laws and regulations. They are run by groups of teachers, parents, and/or foundations.
Certificate/Credential - A state-issued license certifying that the teacher has completed the necessary basic training courses and passed the teacher exam.
Common Underlying Proficiency (CUP) - Theory proposed by Cummins (2000) that knowledge of a concept in a primary language promotes the transfer of that knowledge into a second language (Freeman & Freeman 2004). Beyond
19 promoting knowledge transfer, Freeman and Freeman argue that there is an
interdependence between knowledge in a first language and learning a second language. The CUP is a cognitive approach to L2 acquisition, supports the idea that being bilingual is a cognitive advantage, and that knowledge in a primary language provides a foundation for learning a second language (Díaz-Rico & Weed 2010).
Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) - refers to the highly abstract, decontextualized communication that takes place in the classroom. Hence, it is a language-related term which refers to formal academic learning.
Criterion Referenced Test - A test that measures how well a student has learned a specific body of knowledge and skills. The goal is typically to have every student attain a passing mark, not to compare students to each other.
Cross-Cultural Language and Academic Development (CLAD) - An
authorization to provide specialized instruction to individuals for whom English is a second language. Specifically, it authorizes instruction for 1) English Language Development (ELD) in preschool, K-12 and adults (restrictions apply to holders of Children's Center Permits, Child Development Permits, and Designated Subjects Teaching Credentials) and 2) Specially Designed Academic Instruction Delivered in English (SDAIE) in the subjects and grade levels authorized by the prerequisite credential or permit.
Curriculum - The courses of study offered by a school or district. California has developed a set of standards that are intended to guide curriculum and
20 local school board.
Differentiated Instruction - “Individualized” or “customized” instruction. The curriculum offers several different learning experiences within one lesson to meet students’ varied needs or learning styles. For example, different teaching methods for students with learning disabilities.
Dropout - A grade seven through twelve student who left school prior to completing the school year and had not returned by Information Day (a day in October when students throughout the state are counted and enrollment is determined). This does not include students who receive a General Education Development (GED) or California High School Proficiency Examination (CHSPE) certificate, transfer to another high school or to a college, move out of the United States, are suspended or sick that day, or enrolled late.
EL Shadowing and Observation Tool (ELSOT) – A tool for examining specific areas of an ELL’s school experience and gaining insight into the student’s perspective about school. Shadowing involves the selection of a student (often at random) and following him/her from 2-3 hours, noting the types of listening one-way (lecture) or two-way (dialogue) - as well as academic speaking opportunities, at every five-minute interval. The purpose of student shadowing is to gather information about the daily life of an ELL student in order to participate in a larger conversation on improving the educational experiences for this group of students.
English as a Second Language (ESL) - Classes or support programs for students whose native language is not English.
21 English Language Learner (ELL) - A student who is not proficient enough in the English language to succeed in the school’s regular instructional programs and who qualifies for extra help (Formerly referred to as Limited English
Proficient/LEP).
English Language Advisory Committee (ELAC) - A group that consists of parents and school staff who work together to address the academic needs of students still learning English. Variations include “English Language Advisory Council,” and “English Language Learner Advisory Committee/Council.”
English Language Development (ELD) - Instruction designed to teach English learners to understand, speak, read and write English and acquire the linguistic
competencies that English speakers already possess when they enter school and continue developing throughout life.
Fluent English Proficient (FEP) - A designation that means a student is no longer considered as part of the school’s English learner population. It refers to students who have learned English.
Formative Assessment - Any form of assessment used by an educator to evaluate students’ knowledge and understanding of particular content and then to adjust instructional practices accordingly toward improving student achievement in that area.
Free/Reduced-Price Meals - A federal program that provides food for students from low-income families.
22 Highly Qualified Teacher - According to No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), a teacher who has obtained full state teacher certification or has passed the state teacher licensing examination and holds a license to teach in the state, holds a minimum of a bachelor’s degree, and has demonstrated subject area competence in each of the academic subjects in which the teacher teaches.
Immersion Education - A program that teaches children to speak, read, and write in a second language by surrounding them with conversation and instruction in that language. Note that English immersion may differ from other immersion
programs.
Inclusion - The practice of placing students with disabilities in regular classrooms, also known as mainstreaming.
Individual Education Program (IEP) - A written plan that is created for a student with learning disabilities by the student's teachers, parents or guardians, the school administrator, and other interested parties. The plan is tailored to the student's specific needs and abilities, and outlines goals for the student to reach. The IEP should be reviewed at least once a year.
Language Arts - Another term for English curriculum. The focus is on reading, speaking, listening, and writing skills.
Mainstreaming - The practice of placing students with disabilities in regular classrooms, also known as inclusion.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) - The reauthorization of various federal programs that strive to improve academic performance in elementary and
23 secondary schools by increasing accountability and academic standards in all states.
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) is the current version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) - the principal federal law affecting public education from kindergarten through high school in the United States. The ESEA was originally passed in 1965. NCLB is important legislation for students with learning disabilities (LD), because it ensures that they reach high levels of academic standards, just like other children in America's public schools today.
Norm-referenced assessment - An assessment in which an individual or group’s performance is compared with a larger group. Usually the larger group is representative of a cross-section of all US students.
Parent Teacher Association (PTA) - A national organization of parents, teachers, and other interested persons that has chapters in schools. They rely entirely on voluntary participation and offer assistance to schools in many different areas.
Primary Language (PL) - A student’s first language or the language spoken at home.
Proficiency - Mastery or ability to do something at grade level. California students receive scores on the California Standards Tests (CST) that range from “far below basic” to “advanced.” The state goal is for all students to score at “proficient” or “advanced.”
Program Improvement (PI) - A multistep plan to improve the performance of students in schools that did not make adequate yearly progress under No Child Left Behind (NCLB) for two years in a row. Only schools that receive federal Title I funds
24 may be entered Program Improvement. The steps in PI can include a revised school plan, professional development, tutoring for some students, transfer to another school with free transportation and at the end of five years, significant restructuring.
Proposition 227 - A Proposition 227 that eliminated bilingual education in California, eradicating the use of primary language as an instructional tool. May be employed at a grade levels if parents petition. The initiative was intended to
significantly alter the ways in which the California's ELLs are taught. Proposition 227 requires that ELLs be taught “overwhelmingly in English” through
sheltered/structured English immersion (SEI) programs during “a temporary
transition period not normally intended to exceed one year,” and then transferred to mainstream English-language classrooms. The intentions of proposition 227 were to give ELLs increased opportunities to learn English.
Public Schools Accountability Act (PSAA) – A comprehensive system in California to hold students, schools, and districts accountable for improving student performance. The PSAA was passed in California in 1999 as the first step in
developing a comprehensive system to hold students, schools, and districts accountable for improving student performance. The program now includes a
Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) system, testing at the elementary levels, known as the California Achievement Test (CAT), and a high school exit exam (CAHSEE), both aligned with academic content standards, plus an Academic Performance Index (API) for measuring progress. These comprehensive
25 the 2001 federal law known as No child Left Behind (NCLB) and are the components the state uses for measuring Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).
Reclassified Fluent English Proficient (RFEP) - A process whereby an English Learner is reclassified as a Fluent English Proficient (RFEP) student after meeting various linguistic and academic criteria set by the state and district. Students in grades 7-12 must meet the CELDT and four of the five other criteria. Parent signatures are required in order for a student to be reclassified. When the form is signed and returned to the district office, students’ coding will be changed from LEP to RFEP.
Scholastic Achievement Test (SAT) – The SAT is the most widely used standardized test for college admissions. The exam is created and administered by College Board. It covers three subject areas: critical reading, mathematics and writing. Students have 3 hours and 45 minutes to complete the exam. Each section is worth 800 points, so the highest possible score is 2400. The exam is offered seven times a year: January, March, May, June, October, November and December. The SAT is designed to measure critical thinking and problem solving skills that are essential for success in college.
Structured English Immersion (SEI) - A technique for rapidly teaching English to English language learners (ELLs). The term was coined by Keith Baker and Adriana de Kanter in a 1983 recommendation to schools to make use of Canada’s successful French immersion programs. More recently, SEI has been defined as a methodology in which ELLs learn English through structured and sequential lessons. Specially developed for ELLs, these lessons are based, to a large degree, on the
26 mainstream curricula. (Haver, Johanna J., Structured English Immersion, Corwin Press, 2002)
Socioeconomic Status (SES) - An economic and sociologically combined total measure of a person's work experience and of an individual's or family’s economic and social position in relation to others, based on income, education and occupation.
Specially Designed Academic Instruction Delivered in English (SDAIE) - An approach to teaching academic courses to English Learner students, in English. It is designed for non-native speakers of English and focuses on increasing the
comprehensibility of the academic courses typically provided to Fluent English Proficient (FEP) and English-only students.
School Accountability Report Card (SARC) - California public schools annually provide information about themselves to the community allowing the public to evaluate and compare schools for student achievement, environment, resources and demographics.
School Improvement Program (SIP) - A state-funded program for elementary, intermediate, and secondary schools to improve instruction, services, school
environment and organization at school sites according to plans developed by School Site Councils.
Single-Subject Credential - A credential that is required to teach middle or high school in California. It authorizes a teacher to teach in a single subject area such as English or a foreign language.
27 Socioeconomically Disadvantaged - Students whose parents do not have a high school diploma or who participate in the federally funded free/reduced price meal program because of low family income.
Special Education - Instruction provided for students with educational or physical disabilities, tailored to each student’s needs and learning style.
Standardized Test - A test that is in the same format for all who take it. It often relies on multiple-choice questions and the testing conditions - including instructions, time limits, and scoring rubrics—are the same for all students, though sometimes accommodations on time limits and instructions are made for disabled students.
Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program – The STAR Program that evaluates how well schools and students are performing. Students take tests in mathematics, reading, writing, science, and history. Teachers and parents can use test results to improve student learning. The STAR Program includes four tests: the California Standards Tests, the California Modified Assessment, the California Alternate Performance Assessment, and the Standards-based Tests in Spanish.
Title I - A federal program that provides funds to improve the academic achievement for educationally disadvantaged students who score below the 50th percentile on standardized tests, including the children of migrant workers.
Tracking - A common instructional practice of organizing students in groups based on their academic skills. Tracking allows a teacher to provide the same level of instruction to the entire group.
28 Williams v. California - A lawsuit filed in 2000 that argued that the state has a constitutional duty to ensure basic educational equality and contended that California has failed in that duty by not providing thousands of students in public schools with “bare minimum necessities,” defined as textbooks, trained teachers, and safe, clean, uncrowded facilities. The lawsuit further argued that low-income students and students of color are the most likely to bear the burden of inadequate resources.
Limitations
One of the limitations of this study was the small sample of target students who were shadowed to complete the task at hand. Eight target ELLs were observed to complete the qualitative component of this study. Four of the observed target ELLs were Filipinos and four were Mexican ELLs. The Filipino ELL subgroup consisted of two first generation Filipino target ELLs, one male and one female; two second generation Filipino target ELLs, one male and one female. Likewise, the Mexican ELL subgroup consisted of two first generation Mexican target ELLs, one male and one female; two second generation Mexican target ELLs, one male and one female. This small sample impacted the scope to which the outcomes of the study can be generalized to a larger school population. Taking into consideration that the UHS student body consists of largely Filipino and Mexican ELL subgroups, the
generalization of this study could be augmented by enlarging the size of the sample with additional Filipino and Mexican ELLs. Moreover, the EL Shadowing and
Observation Tool involved the use of a five-minute interval time-sampling method
29 Two other limitations of this study were the amount of teacher observers and the time limitation allocated to this study. The effectiveness of the EL Shadowing
Observations could be further improved by increasing the number of teacher
observers participating in this study. Furthermore, one of the two planned shadowing observations took place during the fall semester, and the other one during the spring semester, with a six week break between the individual events. Consequently, the study could be further improved by scheduling two additional observations during the spring semester. Finally, the study could be also enhanced by including all UHS teachers in the study, and by sharing the data gathered during the student shadowing with all the district’s schools. Moreover, this study could also benefit from amplifying the endeavor by adding a second year of school and district-wide EL Shadowing and
Observation, significantly increasing the applicability and generalizability of the
results of the study for the larger audience.
Significance of the Study
The ever-increasing immigration to the United States results in monumental demographic changes in the nation’s educational institutions which warranted the need for researching factors affecting academic performance of newly-arrived and second generation high school ELLs. New arrivals and numerous second generation ELLs have to face many academic challenges that hinder their ability to understand the content of the lesson. Scholastic challenges that ELLs have to overcome on a daily basis are equally shared by their content-area teachers. Many educators are frustrated by their own inability to teach the academic content in a manner
30 appropriate for ELLs. Therefore, ELLs are constantly being deprived of full access to the mainstream curriculum due to linguistically narrowing down the curriculum. Consequently, ELLs generally achieve lower scores on mandatory high-stakes tests administered in English only, due to a long-term deprivation of the full access to the mainstream curriculum. This situation merited an investigation of academic
classroom engagement and the role of English language and literacy skills in predicting the academic performance of ELLs. The multitude of “non-academic” variables and factors that have an additional impact on ELLs’ educational attainment needed also to be researched because they also play a significant role in the overall academic achievement of ELLs. Hence, poverty, race, ethnicity, discrimination, issues related to immigration status, social justice and equity within the educational environment, as well as understanding and respecting different cultures at school, are all factors that influence the academic performance of ELLs. Consequently, the improved predictability of the academic success of ELLs can result in a higher educational accomplishment on their part, resulting in better academic, social and economic incorporation into the mainstream American society.
Hence, the findings of this study also supplemented information regarding the daily academic experiences of ELLs at school and brought to the foreground a
multitude of “non-academic” variables and related factors that also have an impact on academic performance. The emphasis of the EL Shadowing and Observation Tool was on the academic engagement of ELLs in classroom settings. In contrast, the qualitative data gathered from the individual and focus group interviews with
31 participating ELLs focused primarily on the “outside-the-classroom” experiences of new arrivals and second generation ELLs, in relation to having an additional impact on their academic performance. Moreover, the qualitative data collected from participating target teachers brought to the foreground a variety of additional
academic challenges that ELLs have to face on a daily basis. The information gained from this study is equally valuable for new arrivals and second generation ELLs and could also be applied to increase the learning accomplishments of native English speakers. The data suggested that EL Shadowing and Observation can be a treasured academic tool for enhancing the attentiveness of teacher scholastic methods,
embracing new strategies for increasing ELLs’ involvement in communicative and interactive activities.
This study also reviewed scholarly literature pertaining to the research topic at hand, and updated literature in the arena of factors affecting academic performance of newly-arrived and second generation ELLs. Therefore, additional academic
enlightenment gathered from the reviewed scholastic literature also contributed to the quality of ELLs’ education by increasing the knowledge regarding the predictors that affect their academic performance. Subsequently, the findings of this study have practical applicability that can be utilized and applied at any school with a high density of ELLs, in order to help schools meaningfully predict their academic performance, and to better address their educational needs.
32 Summary
Chapter I discoursed the necessity to scrutinize ELLs’ daily academic engagement and interaction in classroom settings using the EL Shadowing and
Observation Tool, and debated a multitude of “non-academic” factors that also
influence scholastic attainment of newly-arrived and second generation high school ELLs. This awareness could help educational institutions improve their teachers’ instructional pedagogy and methodology, and better address the academic needs of newly-arrived and second generation ELLs. Additionally, the knowledge of the mentioned factors could also enhance the predictability of the academic performance of ELLs. Consequently, gained knowledge could help dramatically increase the probability of ELLs and English-only students’ didactic achievement; hence, it could expedite the nation’s efforts to close the achievement GAP between ELLs and an assortment of other groups of students who require additional resources in order to experience academic success.
Chapter II reviewed the literature related to: (a) second language acquisition, (b) teacher quality equity, programmatic equity and achievement equity in regards to ELLs having equal access to academic and a variety of support services as their English-only counterparts, (c) student-centered and school centered factors affecting the academic performance of newly arrived and second generation ELLs, (d)
segmented assimilation of families of ELLs and its determinants, and (e) effects of undocumented immigrant status on the academic performance of ELLs.
33 Chapter III examined and explained the research methods and procedures employed in this study. This study was a mixed-method design comprising qualitative and quantitative components. The qualitative components were based on EL
Shadowing - observing and analyzing ELLs’ daily behavioral engagement at school,
with special emphasis on their oral and written academic English language use in daily academic settings that promote English language acquisition and literacy skills. The EL Shadowing results complemented the qualitative component of this study, providing additional qualitative data about ELLs’ instructional classroom
experiences. The observation of the participating target ELLs were followed by participating target ELLs and participating target teachers Likert-scale type attitude questionnaires, surveys, interviews with individual participating target ELLs and individual participating target teachers whose classrooms were observed, and by focus group interviews with participating target ELLs and additional follow up interviews with individual participating target teachers. All EL Shadowing observations and interviews with participating target ELLs and participating individual target teachers were conducted by this researcher. The quantitative component of this study consisted of comparing and analyzing California Standards Test (CST) composite scores in ELA between a focus group consisting of eight participating target Filipino and Mexican ELLs, and a comparison group comprised of eight participating target English-only students.
Chapter IV analyzed and discussed the findings of the procedures detailed in chapter III, in relation to the research questions. This study also involved a
34 triangulation of qualitative and quantitative data that were gathered from eight
participating target ELLs and ten participating target teachers within a six-week period.
Chapter V stated the findings, implications, and recommendations for further studies. The importance of academic English and a variety of student-centered and school-centered factors that affect the academic performance of ELLs were already well established in the research literature. Additional predictors and influences in relation to ELLs’ scholastic performance were also included in this study.
35 CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RESEARCH AND LITERATURE
This conceptual data-based theoretical framework draws on five bodies of literature: (a) second language acquisition, (b) teacher quality equity, programmatic equity and achievement equity in regards to ELLs having equal access to academic and a variety of support services as their English-only counterparts, (c) student-centered and school-student-centered factors affecting the academic performance of newly arrived and second generation ELLs, (d) segmented assimilation of families of ELLs and its determinants, and (e) effects of undocumented immigrant status on academic performance of ELLs.
The conceptual framework first examines research related to second language acquisition, while the second section of the conceptual framework addresses research related to teacher quality equity, programmatic equity and achievement equity in regards to ELLs having equal access to academic and a variety of support services as their English-only counterparts. The third part of the conceptual framework draws on the research of Suárez-Orozco, Suárez-Orozco and Todorova (2008) and their
theoretical regression model for predicting academic achievement for newly-arrived immigrant students, and on the research of Portes and Rumbaut (2001) in regards to factors affecting the academic performance of the second generation of ELLs. In addition, the third part of the conceptual framework will review research related to student-centered and school centered factors affecting the academic performance of
36 newly arrived and second generation ELLs. Furthermore, the forth section of the conceptual framework focuses on the segmented assimilation of families of ELLs into the mainstream American society and its determinants. Finally, the fifth section of the conceptual framework concentrates on the effects of undocumented status on the academic performance of ELLs.
Second Language Acquisition
According to Krashen (1987), there are two distinct way to develop
competence in a second language. Students can either acquire language or they can
learn it. Krashen suggested that the language acquisition is a process where children
acquire the language subconsciously, without being aware of the fact that they are acquiring the language. Grammatical structures are not explicitly taught or
emphasized; rather the learners develop a “feel” for the language correctness.
Generally, second language learners who are acquiring the language are aware of the fact that they are using the language for communication, without being aware of the rules of the language they are acquiring. Hence, Krashen claimed that children are acquiring a second language in a similar way as they were acquiring their first language. Consequently, Krashen suggested that language acquisition requires meaningful interaction or natural communication in the target language, in which the learners are focused not in the form of their language, but in the communicative act (p. 10). On the other hand, language learning is a process where learners are explicitly taught grammatical structures of the language and all its rules. Krashen affirmed that “Error correction has little or no effect on subconscious acquisition,
37 but is thought to be useful for conscious learning” (Krashen, 1987, p. 11).
The Natural Order Hypothesis suggests that the acquisition of grammatical structures follows a predictable natural order (Dulay & Burt, 1974, 1975; Fathman, 1975; Makino, 1980). Hence, some grammatical structures are acquired early and others later. However, Krashen rejected grammatical sequencing when the language acquisition is an objective. Krashen argued that the language acquisition precedes utterances in a second language and is credited for language fluency. Monitor serves as a grammar editor or a “corrector” of what has been said. According to Krashen “The Monitor hypothesis implies that formal rules, or conscious learning, play only a limited role in second language performance” (Krashen, 1987, p. 16). Hence, the
Monitor hypothesis explains the relationship between language acquisition and
language learning.
The Input Hypothesis attempts to explain how the learners acquire second language. According to this hypothesis, the learner progresses from one stage to another along the natural order. Krashen affirmed that if the learner is at stage
i where i represents current competence, after being exposed to a comprehensible input in a second language, than the learner should progress to the next stage, thus, i + 1 where 1 represents the next level. In addition, according to Input hypothesis,
speaking fluency cannot be taught directly because it emerges over time on its own. Consequently, the Input hypothesis is concerned only about language acquisition, not the language learning. Krashen proposes that “If the Monitor hypothesis is correct, that acquisition is central and learning is more peripheral, then the goal of our
38 pedagogy should be to encourage acquisition” (Krashen, 1987, p. 20).
According to the Affective Filter Hypothesis, many affective variables play a role in a second language acquisition process. Krashen argued that the most important affective variables in relation to second language acquisition are motivation,
self-confidence and anxiety. Hence, learners with high motivation and self-self-confidence and
a low-level of anxiety are much better equipped to be successful in acquiring second language. Pedagogical implications of the Affective Filter Hypothesis are to provide students with a comprehensible input in a positive, encouraging, low-affective filter environment that fosters second language acquisition.
Cummins (2001) distinguished between social and academic language
acquisition. According to Cummins, basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS) are needed in social situations, such as daily informal conversation on any given topic, for example, informal conversations that take place during the school’s lunch break and so on. Hence, social interactions are usually context embedded and are not very demanding cognitively. Therefore, immigrant students usually develop BICS in about 2 years after arrival in the U.S. In contrast to BICS, cognitive academic
language proficiency (CALP) refers to formal academic learning, including listening,
speaking, reading and writing. In addition, academic language tasks are generally context reduced and include skills such as comparing, classifying, synthesizing,
evaluating, and inferring. Cummins claimed that it takes about five to ten years for ELLs to acquire CALP that is crucial for understanding academic nuances of cognitively demanding core curriculum school subjects. This claim has been well
