English language learners need comprehensible input in order to succeed. Stephen Krashen has defined that according to the formula i + 1, the “i” referring to a student’s current level of language ability and the “+ 1” meaning that a teacher should also include language input slightly beyond that level but not too much or the input will become simply too-rapid or too-complex “noise.” Lev Vygotsky, a Russian psychologist, researched what he called the ZPD or the Zone of Proximal Development, through which a student can receive an extra boost of knowledge and ability through the help of a tutor, teacher or peer in carefully designed learning situations. Jim Cummins has referred to this “zone” as a zone of opportunity for both teacher and learner, through which not only is knowledge transferred but also encouragement and a love of learning. Cummins has also shown that schools must recognize they need to provide comprehensible input for English language learners as they develop their language abilities in two significant ways: 1) conversational basic interpersonal communication skills and 2) cognitive academic language proficiency. Each of these two kinds of ability require years of growth and cannot be achieved through short, intensive programs. These abilities are often addressed in instruction as “language objectives” and “content objectives.” The professional organization TESOL, Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages, centers quality instruction around three important goals: language, content, and culture. Backing up these important principles for the design of quality programs for English language learners are the following four famous legal educational decisions:
Brown V. Board of Education of Topeka, 1954; Segregated schools and programs are illegal.
Oliver Brown, a parent of a child denied access to a school in Topeka, Kansas, complained that the city’s black and white schools were not equal to each and never could be. In an education decision acknowledged as one of the greatest promoting social change in the 20th Century, the Supreme Court held that the segregation of children in public school violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment which holds that no state can deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Lau v. Nichols, 1974; As explained above, school education for ELLs must be comprehensible.
Kinney Kinmon Lau and other Chinese student English language learners were not receiving the understandable instruction they needed to be able to succeed in San Francisco schools. The case against school board president Alan Nichols went to the Supreme Court which decided for Lau, stating that there is no equality of educational merely by providing students with the same facilities, textbooks, teachers, and curriculum because those who do not understand English are certain to find their classroom experiences wholly incomprehensible and in no way meaningful.
Castañeda v. Pickard, 1981; School programs must follow quality, effective instructional practices.
A father complained that a school district in Texas had no meaningful way to assess or change school programs that were inadequately educating English language learners. The court ruled in favor of the father, Roy Castañeda and required the district to change its methods of instruction according to a three-part assessment:
• The program must be “based on sound educational theory.”
• The program must be “implemented effectively with resources for personnel, instructional materials, and space.”
• After a trial period, the program must be proven effective in overcoming language barriers/handicaps.
Plyler v. Doe, 1982; Education is a basic right of all children, documented or undocumented.
Michael McAndrew was volunteering in a school district near Dallas and found out that many children were not allowed to register for school or their parents were required to pay $1,000 per year, something they could not afford. McAndrew found a lawyer and eventually the Supreme Court decided in 1982 in the case Plyler v. Doe that undocumented immigrant children had the right to a free public education. Later the superintendent, Jim Plyler, changed his mind and said he supported the decision of the Supreme Court. Similarly, Article 28 of the international Convention on the Rights of the Child recognizes education as a basic right for all children.
English language learners need comprehensible input in order to succeed. Stephen Krashen has defined that according to the formula i + 1, the “i” referring to a student’s current level of language ability and the “+ 1” meaning that a teacher should also include language input slightly beyond that level but not too much or the input will become simply too-rapid or too-complex “noise.” Lev Vygotsky, a Russian psychologist, researched what he called the ZPD or the Zone of Proximal Development, through which a student can receive an extra boost of knowledge and ability through the help of a tutor, teacher or peer in carefully designed learning situations. Jim Cummins has referred to this “zone” as a zone of opportunity for both teacher and learner, through which not only is knowledge transferred but also encouragement and a love of learning. Cummins has also shown that schools must recognize they need to provide comprehensible input for English language learners as they develop their language abilities in two significant ways: 1) conversational basic interpersonal communication skills and 2) cognitive academic language proficiency. Each of these two kinds of ability require years of growth and cannot be achieved through short, intensive programs. These abilities are often addressed in instruction as “language objectives” and “content objectives.” The professional organization TESOL, Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages, centers quality instruction around three important goals: language, content, and culture. Backing up these important principles for the design of quality programs for English language learners are the following four famous legal educational decisions:
Brown V. Board of Education of Topeka, 1954; Segregated schools and programs are illegal.
Oliver Brown, a parent of a child denied access to a school in Topeka, Kansas, complained that the city’s black and white schools were not equal to each and never could be. In an education decision acknowledged as one of the greatest promoting social change in the 20th Century, the Supreme Court held that the segregation of children in public school violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment which holds that no state can deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Lau v. Nichols, 1974; As explained above, school education for ELLs must be comprehensible.
Kinney Kinmon Lau and other Chinese student English language learners were not receiving the understandable instruction they needed to be able to succeed in San Francisco schools. The case against school board president Alan Nichols went to the Supreme Court which decided for Lau, stating that there is no equality of educational merely by providing students with the same facilities, textbooks, teachers, and curriculum because those who do not understand English are certain to find their classroom experiences wholly incomprehensible and in no way meaningful.
Castañeda v. Pickard, 1981; School programs must follow quality, effective instructional practices.
A father complained that a school district in Texas had no meaningful way to assess or change school programs that were inadequately educating English language learners. The court ruled in favor of the father, Roy Castañeda and required the district to change its methods of instruction according to a three-part assessment:
Plyler v. Doe, 1982; Education is a basic right of all children, documented or undocumented.
Michael McAndrew was volunteering in a school district near Dallas and found out that many children were not allowed to register for school or their parents were required to pay $1,000 per year, something they could not afford. McAndrew found a lawyer and eventually the Supreme Court decided in 1982 in the case Plyler v. Doe that undocumented immigrant children had the right to a free public education. Later the superintendent, Jim Plyler, changed his mind and said he supported the decision of the Supreme Court. Similarly, Article 28 of the international Convention on the Rights of the Child recognizes education as a basic right for all children.